From: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:59:25 +0000
Isn't this becoming a debate about whether research institutions
should take responsibility for publishing the research done by their
staff? This is a big shift since, historically, institutions have
largely left responsibility for publishing to their research staff.
If we accept that institutions need to take over this responsibility
from individual staff, then we need to ask the question: will
institutions be any good at discharging this responsibility?
Are there examples today of research institutions taking
responsibility for their publishing? Well, yes. I should declare an
interest because I work for one. OECD, like most international
organizations (UN, World Bank, IMF et al), has always taken
responsibility for publishing its research and data, as do many
government departments. I'm sure there will be more in other areas.
How well do institutions like the one I work for discharge this
responsibility? Do they invest and allocate sufficient resources to
create the services needed by readers? Does it work well from the
point of view of readers both specialist and lay?
There has been a lot of research and modeling on OA which has pushed
the debate in the direction of organizational responsibility, so I
wonder if an examination of some real-life case studies of
institutions that do take responsibility for publishing might now be
timely. What are the costs? What do the authors in these institutions
feel about the institution having publishing responsibility? Do
readers find it easy to discover and understand the research coming
from these institutions? Do the institutions believe they get value
for the money they spend on publishing? How do small institutions cope
- does scale matter?
Any volunteers?
Toby Green
Head of Publishing
OECD
-----Original Message-----
From: Sally Morris <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:35:28 +0100
Subject: RE: The Finch Report: UCL's David Price Responds
Those university presses, learned societies etc that have succeeded seem to
attract much the same opprobrium as other publishers...
Sally Morris
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:43:45 -0500
It would also have been a more sensible option if universities had supported
their own publishing infrastructure more in the first place and not allowed
commercial publishers to establish such a dominant position in STM journal
publishing. In the immediate postwar years that was still a live option.
Administrative myopia helped create the conditions that Kevin deplores.
Sandy Thatcher
> From: Kevin Smith <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 05:11:35 +0000
>
> So what is the current scenario? Major research university gives away
> it intellectual property, to publishers, has to buy it back at very
> high cost, then cuts faculty for lack of funding. What is ridiculous
> is that anyone could seriously maintain that OA is not a more sensible
> option.
>
> Kevin L. Smith, J.D.
> Director of Scholarly Communication
> Duke University
> Perkins Library
> Durham, NC 27708
|
