tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post3264786451760378977..comments2024-03-17T08:30:21.129+00:00Comments on Open and Shut?: Open Access: Emerald’s Green starts to fade?Richard Poynderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05433823131339077354noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-9130694945614528102013-06-21T13:39:26.260+00:002013-06-21T13:39:26.260+00:00Fools Gold From Emerald (2nd of 2)
Plans by unive...<b>Fools Gold From Emerald</b> (2nd of 2)<br /><br />Plans by universities and research funders to pay the costs of Gold OA pre-emptively today are premature. <br /><br />Funds are short; 80% of journals (including virtually all the top journals) are still subscription-based, tying up the potential funds to pay for Gold OA. Hence, for institutions, paying pre-emptively for Gold OA today means double-paying -- subscriptions for their incoming articles plus APCs for their outgoing articles-- and in the case of "hybrid Gold," when both sums are paid to the very same journal, it also means double-dipping by publishers.<br /><br />Even apart from double-paying and double-dipping, the asking APC price per article for Gold OA today (whether "pure" or "hybrid") is still inflated; and there is concern that paying to publish may also inflate acceptance rates as well as lower quality standards to maximize revenue in the case of "pure Gold" OA. <br /><br />What is needed now is for all universities and funders worldwide to mandate OA self-archiving (of authors' final peer-reviewed drafts, immediately upon acceptance for publication) ("Green OA"). <br /><br />That will provide immediate OA; and if and when universal Green OA goes on to make subscriptions unsustainable (because users are satisfied with just the Green OA versions) that will in turn induce journals to cut costs (phasing out the print edition and online edition, offloading access-provision and archiving onto the worldwide network of Green OA Institutional Repositories), downsize to just providing the service of peer review, and convert to the Gold OA cost-recovery model; meanwhile, the subscription cancellations will have released the funds to pay this residual service cost.<br /><br />The natural way to charge for the service of peer review then will be on a "no-fault basis," with the author's institution or funder paying for each round of refereeing, regardless of outcome (acceptance, revision/re-refereeing, or rejection). This will minimize cost while protecting against inflated acceptance rates and decline in quality standards.<br /><br />This is the difference between today's pre-emptive pre-Green double-paid, double-dipped over-priced pre-Green "Fools Gold" and tomorrow's affordable, sustainable, post-Green Fair Gold.<br /><br />Harnad, S. (2010) <a href="http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july10/harnad/07harnad.html" rel="nofollow">No-Fault Peer Review Charges: The Price of Selectivity Need Not Be Access Denied or Delayed</a>. <em>D-Lib Magazine</em> 16 (7/8). <br /><br />Houghton, J. & Swan, A. (2013) <a href="http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january13/houghton/01houghton.html" rel="nofollow">Planting the Green Seeds for a Golden Harvest: Comments and Clarifications on "Going for Gold"</a>. <em>D-Lib Magazine </em>19 (1/2)Stevan Harnadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14374474060972737847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-11201639153464449982013-06-21T13:37:01.140+00:002013-06-21T13:37:01.140+00:00Fools Gold From Emerald (1st of 2)
Rebecca Marsh,...<b>Fools Gold From Emerald</b> (1st of 2)<br /><br /><strong>Rebecca Marsh</strong>, Director of External Relations and Services, Emerald Group Publishing Limited & <strong>Tony Roche</strong>, Publishing Director of <strong>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</strong> have posted their <a href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/2013-June/001915.html" rel="nofollow">defence of the Emerald policy</a> changes reported by Richard Poynder: "<a href="http://poynder.blogspot.ca/2013/06/open-access-emeralds-green-starts-to.html" rel="nofollow">Open Access: Emerald's Green Starts to Fade</a>".<br /><br />First, a paraphrase of what Marsh & Roche wrote: <br /><br />(1) All Emerald authors may do immediate, unembargoed Open Access self-archiving if they <em>wish</em>, but (2) not if they <em>must</em>. If they must self-archive, they must wait 24 months or ask individually for permission.<br /><br />The sensible Emerald author will self-archive immediately, and ignore clause (2) completely. It is empty, unverifiable, unenforceable, pseudo-legal FUD that has been added as a perverse effect of the <a href="http://www.google.ca/#output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=harnad+finch+folly&oq=harnad+finch+folly&gs_l=hp.3...2883.5878.0.6372.18.18.0.0.0.0.169.1777.13j5.18.0...0.0...1c.1.17.psy-ab.bMKSMmcpmzo&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.48293060,d.dmg&fp=b516a1fd1cf6ebe7&biw=1137&bih=688" rel="nofollow">folly of the UK Finch Committee</a> recommendations. <br /><br />The Emerald policy tweak is obviously to cash in on the money that the UK has decided to squander on pre-emptive "Fools Gold" OA, as well as to try to fend off universal Green OA as long as is humanly possible.<br /><br />Below I reproduce the Emerald representatives' posting's text, cutting out the empty verbiage, to make the double-talk clearly visible and comprehensible. <br /><br /><strong>Emerald:</strong><br /><em>"...Emerald has had a Green Open Access [OA] policy for over a decade. [All Emerald] authors who personally wish to self-archive the pre- or post-print version of their article on their own website or in a repository... can do this immediately upon official publication of their paper. This principle continues to underpin our Green OA policy and remains unchanged....<br /> <br />"...[Emerald] has provided an alternative route to OA for researchers who are mandated to make their papers Open Access immediately, or after a specified period. We also set the Article Processing Charge (APC) at a relatively low level to assist authors... <br /> <br />"Emerald has... requested that authors wait 24 months before depositing their post-prints if a mandate is in place. Where a mandate exists for deposit immediately on publication or with a shorter mandate but no APC fund is provided, we invite all authors to contact us..."</em>Stevan Harnadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14374474060972737847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-44658169133241023982013-06-21T08:39:43.703+00:002013-06-21T08:39:43.703+00:00See also here and here.See also <a href="http://openaccess.commons.gc.cuny.edu/2013/06/20/emerald-not-so-sparkling-green/" rel="nofollow">here</a> and <a href="http://info-research.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/emerald-embargo-on-open-access.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Richard Poynderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05433823131339077354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-89184201134639091252013-06-20T09:39:52.963+00:002013-06-20T09:39:52.963+00:00Further background on Emerald can be found here.Further background on Emerald can be found <a href="http://www.infotoday.com/it/nov02/poynder.htm" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-28095714125282950702013-06-17T23:34:18.717+00:002013-06-17T23:34:18.717+00:00As regards the potential for 'double dipping&#...<i>As regards the potential for 'double dipping', we do not consider this a likely scenario for Emerald due to the low number of papers published using an APC...</i><br /><br />So, you can offer a service that is inherently unethical, as long as nobody uses it. (facepalm)Kindeliserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13441421016631566491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-31269294032350156432013-06-17T13:26:04.550+00:002013-06-17T13:26:04.550+00:00The scandal here is that when RCUK first published...The scandal here is that when RCUK first published <a href="http://www.openscholarship.org/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-03/rcuk_proposed_policy_on_access_to_research_outputs.pdf" rel="nofollow">their draft open-access policy</a> in March 2012, it was exemplary. Its front page summarised its key points as follows:<br /><br /><i><br />* Specifically stating that Open Access includes unrestricted use of manual and automated text and data mining tools; and unrestricted reuse of content with <br />proper attribution.<br />* Requiring publication in journals that meet Research Council ‘standards’ for Open Access.<br />* <b>No support for publisher embargoes of longer than six months</b> from the date of publication (12 months for research funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)).<br /></i><br /><br />Subsequent revisions of this policy have removed all three of these policies: Green-OA papers may now be encumbered by commercial clauses, RCUK has said it will not enforce its journal standards, and the maximum six-month embargo for STM publication has quadrupled to 24 months.<br /><br />How the hell did this happen?<br /><br />The irony here is that the House of Lords select committee criticised RCUK for "lack of consultation" when in fact it had circulated this initial policy for comments; and <i>then</i> RCUK threw out all its progressive promises without consuktation -- except, evidently, with the publishers to whom it so cravenly capitulated.<br /><br />Where was the consultation on the 24-month embargoes now being exploited by "publishers" like Emerald? There was none: suddenly, from out of the blue, the Publishers Association's "decision tree" appeared bearing the legend "endorsed by BIS and RCUK". On whose mandate? BIS and RCUK both exist to spend taxpayers' money: when did taxpayers give their consent to quadrupling embargoes?<br /><br />The whole thing makes me want to weep. By this stage in the proceedings, we <i>expect</i> barrier-based publishers to act against the interests of every other party. What we don't expect it for our elected representatives to collude.<br />Mike Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06039663158335543317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-66583808991635107142013-06-17T13:09:23.770+00:002013-06-17T13:09:23.770+00:00Publisher Double-Dealing on OA
Both the perverse ...<b>Publisher Double-Dealing on OA</b><br /><br />Both the perverse effects of the <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#q=finch+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=active&hl=en&tbm=blg&tbas=0&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=kga_UeyPLqLn0wHN3YDYCw&ved=0CBsQpwUoAA&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47883778,d.dmQ&fp=e842c107f9c204e7&biw=1050&bih=658" rel="nofollow">UK's Finch/RCUK policy</a> and their antidote are as simple to describe and understand as they were to predict:<br /><br /><strong>The Perverse Effects of the Finch/RCUK Policy:</strong> Besides being eager to cash in on the double-paid (subscription fees + Gold OA fees), double-dipped over-priced hybrid Gold bonanza that Finch/RCUK has foolishly dangled before their eyes, publishers like Emerald are also trying to hedge their bets and clinch the deal by adopting or extending Green OA embargoes to try to force authors to pick and pay for the hybrid Gold option instead of picking cost-free Green.<br /><br /><strong>The Antidote to the Perverse Effects of the Finch/RCUK Policy:</strong> To remedy this, both funders and institutions need merely (1) distinguish deposit-date from the date that access to the deposit is made OA, (2) mandate immediate-deposit, and (3) implement the repository's facilitated <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#q=button+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=active&hl=en&tbm=blg&tbas=0&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=OQC_UeHwKOy40QGahIGwAw&ved=0CBsQpwUoAA&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47883778,d.dmQ&fp=e842c107f9c204e7&biw=1261&bih=790" rel="nofollow">eprint request Button</a> to tide over user needs during any OA embargo.<br /><br />All funders and institutions can and should adopt the immediate-deposit mandate immediately. Together with the Button it moots embargoes (and once widely adopted, will ensure emargoes' inevitable and deserved demise).<br /><br />And as an insurance policy (and a fitting one, to counterbalance publishers' insurance policy of prolonging Green embargoes to try to force authors to pay for hybrid Gold) funders and institutions should (4) designate date-stamped immediate-deposit as the sole mechanism for submitting published papers for annual performance review (e.g., the <a href="http://roarmap.eprints.org/56/" rel="nofollow">Liège policy</a>) or for national research assessment (as <a href="http://roarmap.eprints.org/834/" title="http://roarmap.eprints.org/834/" rel="nofollow">HEFCE has proposed for REF</a>).<br /><br />As to the page that Emerald has borrowed from <a href="http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/961-Some-Quaint-Elsevier-Tergiversation-on-Rights-Retention.html" rel="nofollow">Elsevier</a>, consisting of pseudo-legal <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#q=elsevier+double-talk+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&lr=&c2coff=1&safe=active&hl=en&tbm=blg&tbas=0&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=6v2-UbGZJLaz4AOb04C4Dw&ved=0CBsQpwUoAA&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47883778,d.dmg&fp=e842c107f9c204e7&biw=1261&bih=790" rel="nofollow">double-talk</a> implying that <br /><br />"<i>you may deposit immediately if you needn't, but not if you must</i>"<br /><br />That is pure <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt" rel="nofollow">FUD</a> and can and should be completely ignored. (Any author foolish enough to be taken in by such double-talk deserves all the needless usage and impact losses they will get!)Stevan Harnadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14374474060972737847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7961882.post-57711507264640863282013-06-17T12:39:54.219+00:002013-06-17T12:39:54.219+00:00Some further information on Emerald is available h...Some further information on Emerald is available <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1813/2572" rel="nofollow">here</a> and <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/1813/2574" rel="nofollow">here</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com