Re: Just who is on the defensive?

[Stevan Harnad <harnad@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Anthony Watkinson wrote:

> Professor Harnad writes:
>>But I hope you will in turn excuse the research community for 
>>being more concerned with *access* .
>
> Those of us who are in touch with the research community on a 
> daily basis find that their concerns are with how the OA model 
> can work and not primarily about access (as indeed the surveys 
> have shown).

The *research community's* concerns are primarily about the OA 
funding model and not about access? What survey is this, and what 
questions were (and were not) being asked, of whom?

Publishers may be primarily concerned with funding models; 
librarians might; even some university administrators (concerned 
with the library's serials budget) might. But researchers?

> The evidence is not yet available but surely plans for funding 
> an OA universe should at least be worked on, as for example 
> Wellcome have done. It is not just a matter of speculation but 
> rather for publishers a matter of forethought.

By all means. But it's a different agenda, that exercise in 
forethought. OA's immediate agenda is to reach 100% OA (already 
long overdue) as soon as possible -- and that can and will be 
done by mandating self-archiving.

     http://www.ec-petition.eu/
     http://www.eprints.org/signup/fulllist.php

Stevan Harnad
American Scientist Open Access Forum
http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html