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