The Inevitable Success of Transitional Green Open Access

Amsciforum 2015-05-27


"I will respond to Mike [M.E.] paragraph by paragraph. Here are my first observations: I think it is subscription journal publishing that is parasitic on the work of researchers, peer-reviewers and their institutions, as well as on the money of the tax-payers who fund the research -- not the other way round. Green Open Access mandates are the remedy, not the malady. Gold Open Access is premature until Green OA has been mandated and provided universally, so that it can first make subscriptions cancellable (as publishers anticipate -- and that's the real motivation for their Green OA embargoes). The reason pre-Green Gold OA is premature is that while access-blocking journal subscriptions still prevail the contents of those journals are accessible only to subscribing institutions, so those subscriptions cannot be cancelled until and unless there is an alternative means of access. Immediate-Deposit Green OA mandates provide that alternative means of access (and they do so even if the deposited papers are under a publisher OA embargo, thanks to the institutional repositories' copy-request Button, which can provide 'Almost-OA' individually with one click from the requestor and one click from the author). Until subscriptions are cancelled, Gold OA fees have to be paid over and above all existing subscription fees. Hence they are double payments, unaffordable alongside subscriptions. Pre-Green Gold OA fees are also arbitrarily over-priced: Post-Green, all that will need to be paid for is the editorial management of peer review (picking referees, adjudicating reports and revisions). The rest (archiving, access-provision) will be provided by the worldwide network of Green OA repositories ..."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » Amsciforum
Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) »


Date tagged:

05/27/2015, 20:26

Date published:

05/27/2015, 03:38