Public should not have to bear costs of open access to research

tagteam101's bookmarks 2017-06-21


"Public bodies considering ­issues of open access, such as the Australian Research Council, have before them the difficult task of formulating a policy that protects the public interest, in ­relation to the publication of STEM and other areas of ­research that are now often highly profitable, while protecting that public interest in areas of humanities and ­social science book publishing, which are usually much less ­profitable.

The public can’t expect businesses to act as philanthropists but it can expect not to have to act as a philanthropist either where private corporate interests are concerned.

Many have argued that this unfortunate scenario of the public subsidising private business is what has ensued as a result of Britain’s 'user pays' formal open-access policy, following on from the Finch report.

In other words, the challenge for policymakers in relation to open access is to simultaneously guard against some companies in some areas profiting unduly from public investment in ­research while not reducing the capacity and willingness of other companies in other areas to continue to contribute to public ­investment in research."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » lterrat's bookmarks
Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » Graham Steel's bookmarks

Tags: oa.arc oa.australia oa.costs oa.economics_of oa.business_models

Date tagged:

06/21/2017, 09:32

Date published:

06/21/2017, 13:13