Re: University of Marlyland's Open Access Deliberations

[Phil Davis <pmd8@cornell.edu>]

Okerson, Ann wrote:

> [MOD NOTE:  Surely one of the less compelling reasons for
> having authors publish in OA journals is that academic
> libraries, at least in the western world, would save money on
> subscription prices?  Even if such a thing were known to be
> true?  Is it time that we base our arguments on something other
> than the dated rhetoric of the "journals pricing crisis?"]

Perfectly stated. There is very little evidence backing up the
claims that Open Access publishing would save research
institutions like U. Maryland any money. In fact the data suggest
just the opposite. Ditto for the claim of sustainability

I'm not opposed to mandates based on moral claims. I view
healthcare as a moral right and something that should not be
reduced entirely to the discourse of economics. But many of the
mandates for open access are based on economic claims -- claims
that are either baseless or contradicted by evidence.

I flesh out this argument in today's post on the Scholarly
Kitchen:

http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/04/28/umaryland-faculty-vote-no-oa/

***