Fwd: The access problem -- small, medium, or large?

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

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Jim Stemper <stemp003 -- umn.edu>
> Date: May 14, 2010
> To: "liblicense-l -- lists.yale.edu"
> Subject: The access problem -- small, medium, or large?
>
>> On Mon, 10 May 2010 19:42:28 EDT, Joseph Esposito
>> <espositoj@gmail.com>wrote:
>> "Harnad is hoping to replace the small problem of access with the
>> large problem of fiscal recklessness."
>
> The Research Information Network's 2009 study
>     "Overcoming  Barriers:  Access to Research Information Content"
>     http://www.rin.ac.uk/our-work/using-and-accessing-information-resources/overcoming-barriers-access-research-information
> goes to some  lengths to show that the access problem is not "small."
> Some excerpts:
> Of the 800 respondents, over 40% said that they were
> unable readily to access licensed content at least weekly; and
> two-thirds at least monthly.  The key reasons for failing to
> secure access were perceived to be [...] that the library had not
> purchased a licence for the content, because of budgetary
> constraints (56%).  Around 59 per cent of respondents thought
> that non-availability of content does have some impact on their
> research, while 18 per cent say the impact is 'significant'
> either in terms of timing and/or comprehensiveness and/or other
> quality impact.

And let's not forget the Open Access Impact Advantage: If journal 
affordability constraints are a *direct* indicator of the fact 
that the access problem is not small but large, the fact that in 
every field OA enhances both citation and download impact are 
*indirect* indicators of that same fact (apart from being a 
benefit in its own right):

Hitchcock, S. "The effect of open access and downloads ('hits') 
on citation impact: a bibliography of studies" 
http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.htm