Re: May issue of the SPARC Open Access Newsletter

[Joseph Esposito <espositoj@gmail.com>]

I agree with the entirety of Professor Harnad's comment except 
for this:

The institutions can and will pay for that, per paper refereed, 
out of a fraction of their annual windfall 
subscription-cancellation savings.

Of course, we shall see when it happens, but I ask the members of 
this list to look around them.  Universities are high-cost 
organizations. That is not to say that the costs are not worth 
it.  But the windfall? Doubtful.

But I say I agree with most of what Professor Harnad says. 
Libraries will cancel subscriptions (some already are).  And 
universities will (mostly) mandate deposits into repositories. 
So the vision promulgated here seems to me to be directionally 
correct.  It's simply an expensive solution to a small problem.

Joe Esposito

On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Stevan Harnad <amsciforum@gmail.com> wrote:

> First things first. Once Green OA self-archiving mandates are 
> adopted universally by institutions and funders, the planet 
> will have Green OA (to the refereed final drafts of articles 
> accepted for publication), at long last, to the enormous 
> benefit of research, researchers, their institutions, and the 
> public that funds the research, in terms of research uptake, 
> usage, applications, impact and progress.
>
> As long as subscriptions continue to pay for publication (the 
> print edition, the online edition, distribution, archiving, and 
> peer-review/copy-editing), there is no need for any further 
> change.
>
> If and when universal Green OA should eventually make 
> institutional subscriptions no longer sustainable (because 
> users are satisfied with the Green OA version, so their 
> institutions cancel their subscriptions), then publishers will 
> cancel the print edition and online edition, offload the 
> distribution and archiving to the global network of Green OA 
> institutional repositories, and charge only for the 
> peer-review/copy-editing costs. The institutions can and will 
> pay for that, per paper refereed, out of a fraction of their 
> annual windfall subscription-cancellation savings.
>
> But we are nowhere near that yet. Most of today's Gold OA fees 
> are not only much higher than they would be if users were all 
> satisfied with the Green OA version, but the money to pay for 
> them is still mostly tied up in journal subscriptions.
>
> That's why all this pre-emptive speculation is irrelevant. The 
> only thing missing today is OA itself, and universal Green OA 
> mandates will provide it. After that, publishing will adapt as 
> a matter of natural course.
>
> Stevan Harnad