Hjoseph Ticer09


Published on

Open Access Presentation at Tilburg University 2009

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 1,400 OA Repositories Mashup of Repositories with Google earth, showing location and OS software type used
  • 1,300 OA Repositories Mashup of Repositories with Google earth, showing location and OS software type used
  • 1,300 OA Repositories Mashup of Repositories with Google earth, showing location and OS software type used
  • Hjoseph Ticer09

    1. 1. Is Open Access the “New Normal”? Heather Joseph Executive Director, SPARC August 3, 2009 Ticer Digital Library Program
    2. 2. Open Access <ul><li>“ By open access, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software or use them for any other lawful purpose…” </li></ul><ul><li>- The Budapest Open Access Initiative </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    3. 3. Why Open Access <ul><li>Technology lets us bring information to broader audience at little cost, and use in new ways. </li></ul><ul><li>Research is cumulative - only through use of findings is the value of research investment maximized. </li></ul><ul><li>But, research articles are still only available to fraction of the community of potential users, and what is available often has usage limitations </li></ul><ul><li>Call for new framework designed to allow research results to be more easily accessed and used </li></ul>
    4. 4. Why Open Access <ul><li>Expedite, expand and strengthen our collective ability to leverage our investment in research </li></ul><ul><li>Improve access and use of results of research to stimulate discovery and innovation. </li></ul><ul><li>Accelerate the pace of research - create rich resource for scientists to use in new and innovative ways </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure permanently accessible archive </li></ul><ul><li>Contribute to the public good </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    5. 5. The Numbers www.arl.org/sparc
    6. 6. Metrics www.arl.org/sparc
    7. 7. Functionality www.arl.org/sparc
    8. 8. Functionality www.arl.org/sparc
    9. 9. Metrics www.arl.org/sparc
    10. 10. Environment www.arl.org/sparc
    11. 11. Environment www.arl.org/sparc
    12. 12. Community www.arl.org/sparc
    13. 13. Opportunities/Challenges <ul><li>Volume of publishing venues impressive, but even more important: </li></ul><ul><li>New publication forms that depend on OA access are emerging </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunities to develop additional measures of quality and impact are evolving with them </li></ul><ul><li>New research communities are developing with OA at their core </li></ul><ul><li>New global coalitions are forming </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    14. 14. Open Access Repositories www.arl.org/sparc FEDERATION … exist alongside traditional publishing
    15. 15. Global Network www.arl.org/sparc FEDERATION … exist alongside traditional publishing
    16. 16. www.arlorg/sparc FEDERATION … exist alongside traditional publishing
    17. 17. Use… <ul><li>Need pic of 450,000 per day </li></ul>ALLIANCE FOR TAXPAYER ACCESS
    18. 18. NIH PA Policy Compliance ALLIANCE FOR TAXPAYER ACCESS
    19. 19. Opportunities/Challenges <ul><li>Again, volume is impressive, but key new developments include: </li></ul><ul><li>Movement away from silos (“repository pollution”) towards networks (global). </li></ul><ul><li>Proof of concept of deep demand when content is high quality </li></ul><ul><li>Emphasis on services that serve core mission of scholarly and research community </li></ul><ul><li>Community beginning to organize </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    20. 20. NIH PA Policy Compliance ALLIANCE FOR TAXPAYER ACCESS
    21. 21. NIH public access policy <ul><li>Effective April 7, 2008: </li></ul><ul><li>SEC. 217. “The Director of the National Institutes of Health shall require that all investigators funded by the NIH submit or have submitted for them to the National Library of Medicine's PubMed Central an electronic version of their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication: Provided, That the NIH shall implement the public access policy in a manner consistent with copyright law. ” </li></ul><ul><li>- U.S. Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    22. 22. NIH PA Policy Compliance ALLIANCE FOR TAXPAYER ACCESS
    23. 23. <ul><ul><li>Policies focus on public research funders – “taxpayer access to taxpayer funded research.” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Employ embargo periods of 6-12 months rather than immediate access – “public access vs. “open access.” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Current focus is towards deposit mandates; not encouraging open access publishing. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Guidance offered on permissions/rights retention, rather than serving as centerpiece of policy. </li></ul></ul>Common elements www.arl.org/sparc
    25. 25. OA Central to Higher Education <ul><li>“ The broad dissemination of the results of scholarly inquiry and discourse is essential for higher education to fulfill its long-standing commitment to the advancement and conveyance of knowledge. Indeed, it is mission critical .” </li></ul><ul><li>-- 25 U.S. University Provosts, in an Open Letter to the Higher Education Community </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    27. 27. www.arl.org/sparc “ In an historic vote, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences moved to make the articles that its members public in scholarly journals freely available to anyone…..”
    28. 28. Common elements <ul><li>Policies underscore the institution’s desire for wide dissemination of its research and scholarship </li></ul><ul><li>Require faculty members to grant the institution a non-exclusive license to make available articles they produce while on faculty, and to exercise the copyrights in those articles (generally prohibit non-commercial uses). </li></ul><ul><li>Policies usually establish that the institution may post articles in its digital repository (any have provisions for embargos). </li></ul><ul><li>Policies offering “opt-out clauses” increasing. </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    29. 29. Opportunities/Challenges <ul><li>Policies that underpin/overarch scholarly and research arena are developing in concert. </li></ul><ul><li>Top-down mandates (funders, governments) are reinforced by bottom-up policies (faculty votes). </li></ul><ul><li>Combination strongly supports community recognition of OA as unprecedented opportunity. </li></ul><ul><li>Competition emerging – OA as a competitive advantage. </li></ul><ul><li>No longer “alternative” publishing model </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    30. 30. Opposition <ul><li>Strong Intellectual Property Enforcement: Any perceived threat against strong IP enforcement is a threat against all IP enforcement. </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Copyright, copyright, copyright </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Content creators must be justly compensated </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Erosion of IP enforcement will lead to collapse of system (publishing and peer review) </li></ul></ul></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    31. 31. Opposition <ul><li>Unfair Competition – successful repositories (campus, institutional, consortial, national) – create resources that directly compete with private sector </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Value added services, links, data mining, publishing services </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Repetitive archives/services </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Cost Questions </li></ul></ul></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    32. 32. Opposition <ul><li>Academic Freedom is threatened – particularly with campus-based policies, OA mandates threaten to curtail faculty members’ choice of publishing outlet – unfairly limiting academic freedom. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>OA funds add another threat by supporting one business model over another </li></ul></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    33. 33. NIH PA Policy Compliance ALLIANCE FOR TAXPAYER ACCESS
    34. 34. Opportunities/Challenges <ul><li>Large “meta-arguments” reflective of scope and nature of potential (and progress) of OA </li></ul><ul><li>Tried-and-true arguments that have been successful against other threats, but are not specific to OA. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Applying these to specific details of OA are where they break down (and where libraries are expert) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>For each argument (respecting IP Rights, fueling Competition, strengthening Academic Freedom), the case can be made that OA helps, rather than hurts, the situation. </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    35. 35. Is Open Access the “New Normal”? <ul><li>There has been a visible shift in the scholarly communication landscape around Open Access. </li></ul><ul><li>OA publishing and archiving venues have become established, and policies supporting OA have begun to move from the proposal stage to implementation. </li></ul><ul><li>As these venues and policies have taken root, an evolution in the ongoing dialogue taken place. We have moved from “why OA?” to “how OA?” and even, more recently, to “how better OA?” </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    36. 36. Is Open Access the “New Normal”? <ul><li>This evolution signals the uptake of of OA by a much larger community than just its original proponents, and bodes well for its long-term strength. </li></ul><ul><li>Significant challenges remain, but the outlook is strong. </li></ul><ul><li>Open Access looks to continue to play a central role in the “new normal” for scholarly communications. </li></ul>www.arl.org/sparc
    37. 37. Growing Support www.arl.org/sparc
    38. 38. Thank you <ul><li>Heather Dalterio Joseph heather @arl.org (202) 296-2296 http://www.arl.org/sparc http://www.taxpayeraccess.org </li></ul>