The Fruits of Finch/RCUK Profligacy (and Publishing Lobby Success) - Open Access Archivangelism

Amsciforum 2014-09-28

Summary:

" ... Seventy-three (73) OA articles, at about £1,000 a shot via Gold -- vs. fifty (50) at no cost via Green! That RCUK £62,862 could have funded 4 doctoral research students or 2 postdoctoral researchers. Instead, it is paying publishers even more than they are already being paid for subscriptions (and for hybrid Gold publishers it's even double-paying them). For 73 articles! And 73 articles that could have been provided for free via Green -- if instead of dangling scarce money in front of authors RCUK had simply insisted on immediate deposit, irrespective of embargo length. One can only hope that the spot-on and timely new HEFCE policy of requiring immediate deposit, now, in order to be eligible for REF2020, will stanch this gratuitous, obdurate Finch/RCUK profligacy. And that the EU's similar policy will help reinforce it. Meanwhile there's nothing stopping institutions from being more sensible, by requiring immediate deposit and using the RCUK windfall to better purpose (till it is sensibly redirected to research)."

Link:

http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1130-The-Fruits-of-FinchRCUK-Profligacy-and-Publishing-Lobby-Success.html

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » pontika.nancy@gmail.com's bookmarks
Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » Amsciforum
Eric Bakovic's Hub » Open Access Archivangelism
Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » abernard102@gmail.com

Tags:

oa.green oa.prices oa.fees oa.hybrid oa.gold oa.mandates oa.funders oa.uk oa.ref oa.hefce oa.rcuk oa.comment self-archiving mandates oa.new ru.sparc oa.repositories oa.policies oa.journals

Date tagged:

09/28/2014, 12:10

Date published:

09/28/2014, 07:27