[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Homer Simpson at the NIH
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Homer Simpson at the NIH
- From: "Rick Anderson" <rickand@unr.edu>
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:37:18 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> Maybe, but don't the overall costs of scholarly communication > rise anyway each year - that's certainly the feeling most > librarians have! I'm not sure that any thoughtful librarians feel that way at all. The cost of buying access to a particular scholarly journal certainly increases every year (as does the cost of buying almost anything). But if you think in terms of scholarly communication generally, I think most of us would acknowledge that costs have fallen dramatically over the past ten years or so. The advent of the Web has made it possible for us to provide far more content at a far lower per-article cost than was ever true before. We communicate much more with each other and with publishers, and do so much more easily and cheaply than we ever did before. Access itself is distributed far more efficiently and cheaply than we could have predicted in the 1980s. > Alternatively, and less flippantly, it's entirely possible that > if we can create a new, functioning market then at least we may > get better value for money. Sure. But it's also possible that what we'll end up creating is a new, dysfunctional market in which we get less value for money. That's not to say that we shouldn't try -- only that we should be careful not to confuse fond hopes (or best intentions) with certain outcomes. What concerns me more than the possibility of trading an imperfect market for a worse one is the possibility of creating a situation in which everyone in the world (including millions of people who don't want it) is given access to scientific content for free, but pays for it in loss of research. This will be the inevitable result of granting agencies redirecting funds from research support to publication support. In that case, the scholarly-information market itself may be perfectly functional, and its functionality may even be enhanced -- but the world may be a much worse place. Rick Anderson Dir. of Resource Acquisition University of Nevada, Reno Libraries rickand@unr.edu
- Prev by Date: RE: Homer Simpson at the NIH
- Next by Date: Re: Homer Simpson at the NIH
- Previous by thread: RE: Homer Simpson at the NIH
- Next by thread: Re: Homer Simpson at the NIH
- Index(es):