Tuesday, March 08, 2005

Open access to academic publications

I'm reminded by the IEEE's The Institute of the House of Commons Science and Technology - Tenth Report from March last year, a 114 page analysis of academic publishing.

"10 Conclusion

211. Provision of STM journals in the UK is unsatisfactory. This is due to a combination of publishers' pricing policy and the inadequacy of library budgets to meet the demands placed upon them by a system supporting an ever increasing volume of research. Despite evidence that they are adding value to the scientific process, publishers are not as transparent as they could be about their publication costs. The practice of some of the larger commercial publishers of "bundling" content together to be sold as one product is having a negative impact on smaller publishers and on the ability of libraries to purchase the journals required by their communities. On the purchasing side, HEFCE has not proved itself to be ready to respond to the problem of insufficient library budgets. We have concluded that change on all sides is necessary as a matter of urgency. The digitisation of the market place, with all its attendant benefits and possibilities, presents the ideal opportunity for the UK to make that change.

212. We have recommended that the UK Government fund the establishment of an inter-linked network of institutional repositories on which all research articles originating in the UK should be deposited and can be read for free. SHERPA has already carried out some valuable work in this area and needs to be funded to enable it to play a central role in the future. In order to ensure that the repositories are well-populated, we have recommended that Research Councils mandate their funded researchers to deposit copies of all their articles in this way. Universities and other research institutions will need to build up their capacity to manage the copyright that might in future be retained by authors as a result of this system. We conclude that these are the essential first steps in the direction of a more fundamental change to the way in which researchers publish their findings.

213. Rigorous quality assurance of the research that is disseminated is key to the integrity of science publishing, research and academia. It is vital that steps be taken to protect and enshrine the process of rigorous and independent peer review whatever the mode of dissemination or the publishing model used."

"Conclusions and recommendations

1. It is discouraging that the Government does not yet appear to have given much consideration to balancing the needs of the research community, the taxpayer and the commercial sectors for which it has responsibility. (Paragraph 22)...

5. The British Library's Document Supply Service is an efficient and cost-effective method of providing access to articles in scientific journals. The decline in demand for Document Supply notwithstanding, we are persuaded that the service provides a valuable alternative route for users who would not otherwise have access to the journals that they needed. We recommend that the Government takes steps to protect the service. (Paragraph 31)...

7. We congratulate the Medical Research Council on its support of the principle that primary research data should be made available to the scientific community for subsequent research...

8. All researchers, regardless of the nature of their institution, should be granted access to the scientific journals they need to carry out their work effectively. (Paragraph 35)...

10. Teaching is a crucial university function. Universities should be permitted, within reason, to derive maximum value from the digital journals to which they subscribe by using them for legitimate teaching purposes...

11. It is not for either publishers or academics to decide who should, and who should not, be allowed to read scientific journal articles. We are encouraged by the growing interest in research findings shown by the public. It is in society's interest that public understanding of science should increase. Increased public access to research findings should be encouraged by publishers, academics and Government alike. (Paragraph 40)

12. We are not convinced that journal articles are consistently available to members of the public through public libraries. (Paragraph 42)

13. Digitisation should facilitate, not restrict access. We recommend that the next national site licence negotiated by the Joint Information Systems Committee explicitly provides for all library users without an Athens password to access the digital journals stocked by their library. (Paragraph 44)"

...and so it goes on with lots of hard hitting and sensible recommendations.

One year on, where are we? The government "welcomed" the report and rejected it out of hand. No action. No further forward.

No comments: