Michele Pasin / Quotes

Open access vs publication access

So we made it: the greatest bastions of traditional scientific publishing are clearly signaling support for open access. Can we pop the champagne already?

This announcement obviously has positive aspects: for example, lives can be saved in poor countries where doctors may have access to the most up-to-date scientific information – information that was previously behind a paywall, unaffordable for most of the Global South. Papers published under open access also tend to achieve more visibility, and that can benefit the research in countries like Brazil, where I live.

The overall picture, however, is more complex than it seems at first sight. In both cases, Nature and Science adopt a specific model of open access: the so-called "gold model", where publication in journals is usually subject to a fee paid by authors of approved manuscripts (the article processing charge, or APC). In this model, access to articles is thus open to readers and users, but access to the publication space is closed, in a sense, being only available to the authors who can afford the fee. In the case of Nature Communications, the APC is $5000, certainly among the highest in any journal (in 2010, the largest recorded APC was US $ 3900 – according to the abstract of this article… which I cannot read, as it is behind a paywall).

This amounts to two months of the net salary of a professor in state universities in Brazil (those in private universities would have to work even longer, as their pay is generally lower). Who is up for spending 15%+ of their annual income to publish a single article? Nature reported that it will waive the fee for researchers from a list of countries (which does not include Brazil, China, India, Pakistan and Libya, among others), and for researchers from elsewhere on a "case by case" basis – but they did not provide any further objective information about this policy.

  • See more at: http://blog.okfn.org/2014/10/26/nature-branded-journal-goes-open-access-only-can-we-celebrate-already/#sthash.7beE8lZm.dpuf

Saved 28 October 2014 / blog.okfn.org ↗

#open-access #access #researchers #model #users

Building confidence in open access

The second often discussed issue is that of building confidence in Open Access. Apart from a few successful OA journals, such as those maintained by PLoS or…

Core : Three Access Levels To Underpin Open Access #open-access #policy #access #debate

Impact factors hold back open access

These developments go hand in hand with the rise of open access (OA) publishing. Though primarily motivated by the research and societal benefits that will…

Sick Of Impact Factors | Reciprocal Space #open-access #access #publishing #open-access-publishing

Subscription journals are a vestigial organ

The system of pay-to-subscribe journals that spent so many centuries helping the scholarly landscape coordinate and collaborate is now obsolete; a vestigial…

Demystifying Networks #open-access #access

Academic social networks

More than 4.5 million researchers have signed up for ResearchGate, and another 10,000 arrive every day, says Madisch. That is a pittance compared with…

Online Collaboration: Scientists And The Social Network : Nature News & Comment #researchers #users

Open access will facilitate text mining and semantic enrichment

The huge amount of content openly available online offers a lot of opportunities for semantic enrichment realised through text mining, crowdsourcing, etc…

Core : Three Access Levels To Underpin Open Access #semantic-enrichment #users #mining #open-access #issues #technology

Object-driven and event-driven exploration

We argue that collection access through events can remedy these bottlenecks as events provide the context that can link a variety of objects together…

Historical Event-based Access To Museum Collections #users #objects #thesaurus #collection #access #search