From: Fiona Bradley <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 08:37:13 +0000
Having worked with and for NGOs for a number of years until last year, the
range of publications and mission of NGOs is too broad to generalize, but
in the main those that publish are aiming at policymakers and
practitioners. They make their reports available freely because this serves
their mission – you’d be lucky to find a NGO who classified doing this as
‘open access’ – it’s just core business. How do people find out about these
reports? Launches, UN system meetings, local NGO networks, conferences,
email lists and by putting the reports on the desk of policymakers. For
those publications that are based on indicators, there is a deep field of
literature in political science looking at the influence of certain types
of publications like the Freedom House reports, which can influence
government behaviour, despite not being in a repository or marketed.
Reputation is key.
Some think tanks and NGOs do have partnerships with publishers for more
traditional scholarly outputs, the Overseas Development Institute has a
journal, for example. A prominent Oxfam-affiliated author released his
latest book with OUP open access alongside traditional purchase options and
it’s been enormously successful - https://global.oup.com/
academic/product/how-change-happens-9780198785392?cc=gb&lang=en&. But in
the main, reports are based on up to date practice and experience.
Would it provide added benefit to make these reports more findable to a
scholarly audience? Certainly, but being a librarian who has worked in the
development field (and published several such reports myself), I think it’s
important to be mindful to understand the priorities of NGOs, their
resources, and efforts already ongoing. There are a number of initiatives
seeking to strengthen links between NGO research and practice, and
decision-making (“evidence informed policymaking”) that organisations like
INASP and ODI have been leading amongst many others <
https://www.odi.org/our-work/programmes/research-and-policy-development> of
which strategies to support access would be a component. I’ve also been in
discussions with UN consultants in the recent past who are concerned with
these issues.
To Toby’s point, I’d be interested in discussing initiatives that are in
development and where there’d be opportunities for libraries to provide
advice to the field on this.
Kind regards,
Fiona
--
Fiona Bradley AALIA
Deputy Executive Director
Research Libraries UK
Office: 020 7862 8463 Mobile: +44 7432 768 566
www.rluk.ac.uk <http://www.rluk.ac.uk/>
RLUK Twitter feed: @RL_UK
Registered Office: Senate House Library, Senate House, Malet Street, London
WC1E 7HU
Registered Company no: 2733294
Registered Charity no: 1026543
On 25/7/17, 3:15 am, "LibLicense-L Discussion Forum on behalf of
LIBLICENSE" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]>
wrote:
From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 23:24:33 -0400
In media industries in general, including publishing and including
scholarly publishing as well, marketing is typically half of all
expenditures in one form or another. Putting metadata into a discovery
service is a good thing, but it is not a very big thing.
More people would know about the Oxfam publications (which, BTW, I had
never heard of until I saw this post, and I read about scholarly
communications all day long) if they had a price on them and were
actively marketed. Open access is not an innovation; it is a
capitulation. If the products were worthy of grasping even a small
amount of the attention of the potential readership, a paywall is no
barrier at all. Many things become open access (this is particularly
true of monographs) because there is no end-user demand for them. And
so I ask the obvious question: If these publications are so good, why
won't anyone pay for them?
I would love to put together a marketing plan for the Oxfam
publications. They would not be open, but more people would know about
them and read them. Marketing is everything in media.
Joe Esposito
|
