RE: Maximising the Return on UK's Public Investment in Research

["David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>]

I can contribute the experience Stevan asks for--and at both economic ends
of the spectrum.

Previously, I was associated as Biology Librarian with one of the richest
of all universities, with the library treated fairly generously by
comparative standards.

Over the period 1990-2001, I found it necessary to cancel about one-third
of our journals (considering unique titles only, not duplicates made
almost obsolete by e-journals. ) Lacking schools of medicine, agriculture,
or natural resources, almost no material in these subjects could be
purchased.

Our excellent very fast document delivery service, provided same-day or
next-day delivery of several thousand articles a year. Good as it was, it
was not instantaneous. I estimated at the time that the use of the
journals requested would have increased about five-fold if owned.

If this was the state of one of the research libraries in one of the very
best research universities, the situation surely would not have been
better elsewhere. Open Access to research journals material would have
permitted considerable staff saving, greater user satisfaction, and
undoubtedly more efficient user work. This must have been true almost
everywhere else.

I now teach at a small university, where the Library Science program is
one of the only two doctoral programs, and consequently relatively well
provided for.  The other subjects are not. In order to give a realistic
course in science reference work, it is necessary to teach the subject at
a cooperative university in the nearest urban center. The undergraduates
at my institution cannot possibly receive a good training in the library
side of research. The faculty travel to major university libraries
periodically, in spite of the inconvenience.  Such was the best practical
way to access material in 1805 or even 1905; it is not in 2005.

Current Contents was wonderful in 1965; much better can be expected 
forty years later.

Some of the benefits of OA can be specified in monetary terms, but many of
its advantages can be quantified only indirectly. It is artifical to
measure the value in terms of a single country. It will help wealthy
countries with thriving research activity, and small countries without.  
The benefits of OA are for all authors and all readers in rich and poor
educational instiututions, and also those without such affiliation. It
will help research in private enterprises as well as public institutions.
It will improve the service being offered by all libraries. It will
benefit the general public. Properly organized, it should also benefit the
publishers. Stevan is right that it is important to do it rapidly. It
should be done right now as best we can, but it so important that it
should also be done so it can be readily improved later.

Even not considering monetary values, education, research, libraries, and
OA are of obvious benefit to all. There was a time when many people were
illiterate, though now we regard literacy as a basic right.  It will be
similarly for OA.

Dr. David Goodman
dgoodman@liu.edu