120s
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
558
On Slideshare
558
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. European Initiatives / By Celina Ramjoué, Research Directorate- General, European Commission(101) 欧洲行动 / 塞丽娜·拉姆茹(欧盟委员会研究总署)(注 101) 注 101: The views expressed here are those of the author and may not under any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. 本文系著者的观点,任何情况下不能被视为欧盟委员会的官方立场 In addition to national activities, there are also Open Access initiatives on the European level. 除了国家层面的活动之外,还有欧洲层面的开放获取行动。 CERN••••••••••••••••• 欧洲核子研究中心 The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) is a pioneer in the area of Open Access. In 1953 the convention setting up CERN already noted that ‘the results [of CERN’s] experimental and theoretical work shall be published or otherwise made generally available’(102). Building on this practice, in the digital age it has become customary for researchers in the field of nuclear research as well as in the field of physics generally to deposit their publications in electronic archives. In a statement issued in late 2003, CERN spoke out in favour of open electronic distribution of knowledge (‘An electronic publishing policy for CERN’(103)) and in May 2004, it signed the Berlin Declaration. In March 2005, CERN published a document arguing for the Open Access publication model (‘author pays’ model). That same year, CERN set up a task force consisting of authors, publishers and research funding bodies, with the mandate to evaluate potential Open Access business models. Their report, published in June 2006, proposed what is known as the ‘Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics’ model (SCOAP3) to fund Open Access(104). 欧洲核子研究中心(CERN)是开放获取领域的先驱。1953 年设立 CERN 的协定已说明“[CERN 的]实验与理论工作的成果,应出版或公诸于世”(注 102)。有这样的基础,进入数字时代 后,核子研究与物理学领域内的研究者,已习惯将其出版物储存在电子档案馆中。在 2003 年 底发布的一项声明中,CERN 清楚表明赞成开放知识的电子传播(“CERN 电子出版政策”,注 103)。2004 年 5 月,CERN 签署柏林宣言;2005 年 3 月,CERN 再发表一份文件,主张开放 获取出版模式(“作者付费”模式)。同年,CERN 成立由作者、出版社与研究资助团体组成的 专责小组,评估可能的开放获取商业模式。在 2006 年 6 月发表的报告中,专责小组提出所谓 的“粒子物理开放获取出版资助联盟”模式(SCOAP3),资助开放获取(注 104)。 注 102: Article II.1, http://doc.cern.ch/archive/electronic/other/preprints//CM-P/cm- p00046871.pdf. 注 103: http://library.cern.ch/cern_publications/SIPBPubPol.17.11.03.htm.
  • 2. 注 104: http://library.cern.ch/OATaskForce_public.pdf. SCOAP3 is a consortium made up of research institutions, funding bodies, and libraries that will take over the funding of a series of journals that are particularly important for nuclear research during several years of transition to the Open Access model. During this time, the idea is for publishers to be funded by the consortium instead of by subscriptions. The originality of the SCOAP3 model lies in the fact that publishers maintain an important role and that authors do not have to finance the cost of publication themselves. A call for tender for SCOAP3 is planned for 2007. SCOAP3 是由研究机构、资助团体及图书馆组成的联盟,在转型至开放获取模式的若干年中, 将接手资助一系列对核子研究极为重要的期刊。它的构想是在此转型期,由联盟资助出版社, 以代替订阅。SCOAP3 模式的创意在于,出版社维持其重要作用,作者本身不需支付出版费 用。SCOAP3 计划于 2007 年招标。 European Commission and associated bodies ••••••• 欧盟委员会与相关团体 Under article 164 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, measures for the ‘dissemination and optimisation of the results of activities in Community research, technological development and demonstration’ shall be implemented for the purpose of strengthening European research policy (Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/105, 24 December 2002). 根据建立欧洲共同体的条约第 164 条,衡量“传播和优化欧共体的研究、技术发展与示范活动 的成果”,目的在于强化欧洲研究政策(Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/105, 24 December 2002)。 From this perspective, optimised access, efficient dissemination and reliable preservation promote the achievement of the aims of the Lisbon strategy of 2000, which called for the European Union to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economic area by 2010. The underlying thought here is that a wide dissemination of scientific and scholarly information will create the foundation for further research and innovation. 从这个角度看,优化获取、高效率传播和可靠保存,有助于达成 2000 年里斯本战略的目标, 要求到 2010 年时,欧盟成为最具竞争力与活力的知识经济区。其根本思想是,广泛传播科学 和学术信息,创立进一步研究和创新的基础。 Questions of access to and dissemination and preservation of academic information are dealt with by two EU Commissioners and two Directorates-General. The Directorate-General for Research, under the European Commissioner for Science and Research, Janez Potočnik, addresses them in the context of the creation of the ‘European Research Area’(105). The activities under the European Commissioner for Information Society and Media, Viviane Reding, and the relevant
  • 3. Directorate-General focus on the initiative ‘i2010: Digital Libraries’(106) and deal with many of the relevant technical questions. An important example is the DRIVER project (Digital Repository Infrastructure Vision for European Research), whose goal is to network more than 50 European repositories. 获取、传播与保存学术信息的问题,受到两个欧盟执委与两个总署关注。欧盟科学和研究执行 委员会所属研究总署署长雅奈兹·波托奇尼克,以创建“欧洲研究区”响应此议题(注 105)。 欧盟信息社会和媒体执行委员会的薇薇安·雷丁,及相关的总署,将重点放在发起“i2010:数 字图书馆”(注 106),处理相关的技术问题。一个重要的实例是 DRIVER 计划(欧洲研究数 字典藏库基础设施愿景),其目标是连结 50 多个欧洲典藏库。 注 105: http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/index_de.html. 注 106: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/digital_libraries/ index_en.htm. In the light of the controversial debate on Open Access, the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Research commissioned a Study on the economic and technical evolution of scientific publication markets in Europe(107). In addition to delivering an analysis of the European academic publishing market, this study, published in spring 2006, was supposed to formulate recommendations for the European Commission. 鉴于对开放获取的争议,欧盟委员会的研究总署委托一项研究,针对欧洲科学出版市场的经济 及技术发展(注 107)。此研究于 2006 年春季出版,除了分析欧洲的学术出版市场,也对欧 盟委员会提出具体的建议。 注 107: Dewatripont, Mathias et al., Study on the Economic and Technical Evolution of the Scientific Publication Markets in Europe. Final Report, commissioned by 是 DG Research, European Commission, 2006, http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/pdf/scientific- publication-study_en.pdf. One of the study’s main findings is that the market for academic journals is not characterised by traditional competition and that it displays certain special features. According to the study, it is of fundamental significance that the purchasers of scientific and scholarly journals are not their readers, but universities and libraries. This means that researchers are generally not informed about the high prices of journal subscriptions. The study further observes that between 1975 and 1995 there was a price increase of 200 to 300 % above the rate of inflation, which only flattened out somewhat during the mid-1990s with the start of the digital age. The study also concludes that journal prices depend on academic discipline, publisher and academic quality. Further trends underlined by the study are cuts in library budgets and falling numbers of subscriptions. 此研究的一个主要发现是,学术期刊市场并非传统的竞争型市场,显现某些特殊性。根据这项 研究,极为重要的是,科学与学术期刊的购买者并非其读者,而是大学和图书馆,这意味着研
  • 4. 究人员通常不了解期刊订阅的高价位。研究进一步观察到,在 1975-1995 年间,期刊价格的 上涨幅度高出通货膨胀率 200-300%,直到数字时代开始的 1990 年代中期,上涨幅度才趋于 平缓。研究还得出结论,期刊价格依学科、出版社和学术质量而有所不同。研究强调,未来的 趋势是图书馆预算削减,订阅数下降。 The study formulates recommendations on the questions of access, market issues, and continuing debate and research. On the topic of access, it recommends that publicly funded research results should be publicly accessible shortly after their publication. Further recommendations on the subject of access concern experimenting with business models, including dissemination as an evaluation criterion of academic work, and interoperability. With regard to market issues, the study proposes price strategies that promote competition and a close investigation of company mergers. In addition, a proposal is made to set up an advisory board for publication issues and to support further research on copyright, alternative forms of distribution, and technological developments. 就获取问题、市场问题及持续性争议与研究,此研究提出了建议。在获取问题上,建议公共资 助的研究成果,应该在出版之后,尽快公开获取;并进一步建议进行商业模式的实验,包括以 传播作为学术作品评估的准则,以及互操作性。在市场问题上,提出推动竞争的价格策略,并 密切调查公司合并案。此外,还有一个建议是,设立出版问题咨询委员会,支持进一步研究版 权、可替代的发行形式以及科技的发展。 At the end of 2006, two bodies associated with the European Commission spoke out explicitly in favour of Open Access. The Scientific Council of the European Research Council (ERC), which was set up in connection with the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development, published a statement on Open Access in December 2006. This document underlines that ‘it is the firm intention of the ERC Scientific Council to issue specific guidelines for the mandatory deposit in Open Access repositories of research results — that is, publications, data and primary materials— obtained thanks to ERC grants, as soon as pertinent repositories become operational’.(108) The European Research Advisory Board (EURAB) recommended that the European Commission adopt an Open Access policy for publications that are financed by the Framework Programme for Research. The relevant document states that ‘EURAB recommends that the Commission should consider mandating all researchers funded under FP7 to lodge their publications resulting from EC-funded research in an Open Access repository as soon as possible after publication, to be made openly accessible within 6 months at the latest.’(109) 2006 年底,与欧盟委员会相关的两个机构,明确表态赞成开放获取。根据第七期研究与技术 开发框架计划,欧洲研究委员会(ERC)成立科学理事会,于 2006 年 12 月发表开放获取声明。 这份文件强调指出,“ERC 科学理事会有着坚定的意愿,发布指导方针,一旦相应典藏库开始 运作,受 ERC 资助的研究成果,包括出版物、数据和原始资料,均强制存放于开放获取典藏 库”。(注 108)欧洲研究咨询委员会(EURAB)建议,欧盟委员会对于受到“研究框架计划”资 助的出版物,采用开放获取政策。相关文件指出,“EURAB 建议,欧盟委员会应考虑,对所有 受到第七期研究框架计划资助的研究者,在受资助的研究出版后,必须尽快将出版物存放于开
  • 5. 放获取典藏库,至迟不超过六个月”(注 109)。 注 108: http://erc.europa.eu/pdf/open-access.pdf. 注 109: http://ec.europa.eu/research/eurab/pdf/eurab_scipub_report_recomm_dec 06_ en.pdf. In the run-up to a conference to take place in mid-February 2007 and to the planned adoption of a Communication from the European Commission on access, dissemination and preservation, Denmark’s electronic research library (DEFF), the German Research Foundation (DFG), the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC), the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) Europe and the Dutch organisation for the collaboration of higher education institutions (SURF) launched a petition supporting the recommendation of the study described above, which stated that publicly funded research results should be made publicly accessible shortly after publication. On 15 February 2007, this petition was handed over to Commissioner Potočnik with more than 20 000 signatures. Signatures can still be added (http://www.ec-petition.eu). 欧盟委员会针对获取、传播与保存,于 2007 年 2 月中旬召开一次会议计划,通过一份《通 讯》。在准备阶段,丹麦的电子研究图书馆(DEFF)、德国研究基金会(DFG)、英国联合信 息系统委员会(JISC)、欧洲学术出版及学术资源联盟(SPARC)和荷兰高等教育机构协作组 织(SURF)共同发表请愿书,支持前述研究的建议,要求公共资助的研究成果,应该在出版之 后,尽速公开获取。2007 年 2 月 15 日,有 2 万多人签署的请愿书递交给波托奇尼克执委。请 愿书仍可继续签署(http://www.ec-petition.eu)。 As a countermove, publishers and publishing associations issued the ‘Brussels Declaration on STM Publishing’ on 13 February. This declaration names a list of principles supported by the publishers, including the fact that they are responsible for the organisation of peer review and that a uniform change of the publishing system (‘one size fits all’) cannot work (http://www.stm-assoc.org/brussels- declaration/). This declaration was handed over to Commissioner Potočnik with approximately 40 signatures on 15 February. Signatures can still be added to this document, too. 作为一种对抗,2 月 13 日出版社和出版协会发表“布鲁塞尔科技医学出版宣言”,列举一些出 版社支持的原则,包括它们负责组织同行评审,统一改变出版系统(一刀切)不可行 (http://www.stm-assoc.org/brussels-declaration/)。这项宣言有约 40 个签署 者,于 2 月 15 日交给波托奇尼克执委。此宣言也继续接受签署。 The conference, entitled ‘Scientific publishing in the European Research Area: access, dissemination and preservation in the digital age’ organised by the European Commission in Brussels on 15 and 16 February 2007, attracted around 470 participants, primarily from Europe, but also from other continents. The conference was opened by Commissioner Potočnik and closed by Commissioner Reding(110). This conference introduced the Communication adopted on 14 February ‘on scientific information in the digital age: access, dissemination and
  • 6. preservation’(111). This communication marks a milestone on the way to a European policy on access, dissemination and preservation, because it addresses these subjects together on a European level for the first time. Its objective is to ‘signal the importance of [...] a) access to and dissemination of scientific information, and b) strategies for the preservation of scientific information across the Union [… and to point] to the need for a continuing policy debate.’ 欧盟委员会于 2007 年 2 月 15-16 日组织的“欧洲研究领域的科学出版:数字时代的获取、传 播与保存”会议,吸引了 470 名与会者,主要来自欧洲,也有来自其它大陆的。这次会议由波 托奇尼克执委开场,雷丁执委收尾(注 110)。本次会议介绍了欧盟委员会于 2 月 14 日通过 的《通讯》“关于数字时代的科学信息:获取、传播与保存”(注 111)。此《通讯》标志着欧 洲获取、传播与保存政策的一个里程碑,因为是首次在欧洲层面上,一起表达对此主题的看 法。它的目标是“表明两方面的重要性 [...] 1) 获取及传播科学信息、2) 欧盟保存科学信 息的策略,[...并指出]继续进行政策辩论的必要性”。 注 110: 会议详情: http://ec.europa.eu/research/science- society/page_en.cfm?id=3459. 注 111: COM (2007) 56 final, http://ec.europa.eu/research/science- society/document_library/pdf_06/communication-022007_en.pdf The quotations are reproduced from the original document, fn. 1 of which states: In this Communication, the terms ‚scientific‘ or ‚science‘ refer to research activity in all scholarly subjects, including social sciences and the humanities (translator‘s note). 引文取自原文件 fn. 1 提到:在《通讯》中,科学一词指所有学科的研究活动,包括社会科 学与人文科学(英文译者注) The last part of the communication sets out the Commission’s position. It considers ‘initiatives leading to wider access to and dissemination of scientific information’ to be ‘necessary’ and states that ‘fully publicly funded research data should in principle be accessible to all’. In addition it ‘draws particular attention to the need for clear strategies for the digital preservation of scientific information.’ 《通讯》的最后一段,列出欧盟委员会的立场,认为“导向科学信息的更广获取及传播的行 动”是“必要的”,并指出“完全受公共资助的研究数据,原则上应当供所有人获取”。此外, 它“特别关注对数字保存科学信息的明确的战略需求。” The European Commission aims at 'measures to promote better access to the publications resulting from the research it funds': 'project costs related to publishing, including Open Access publishing, will be eligible for a Community financial contribution' and 'specific guidelines on the publication of articles in open repositories after an embargo period' will be issued, possibly for programmes being managed by the European Research Council. Secondly, the European Commission wants to finance a number of projects on the topics of preservation and the networking of repositories. Thirdly, it intends to make a contribution to the public debate through studies and the promotion of research on the scientific publication system. In addition, a political debate is planned, which will include the
  • 7. European Parliament, the Council, the Member States, and concerned stakeholders. 欧盟委员会的目标是“推动更好地获取那些经其资助的研究所产生的出版物”,“与出版、包括 开放获取出版有关的项目费用,可从欧盟获得财务支持”,将发布“在禁锢期后,在开放典藏库 中出版论文的具体指导方针”,计划可能由欧洲研究理事会管理。其次,欧盟委员会希望资助 若干保存方面和典藏库网络化的项目。第三,打算通过研究与推动研究,对科学出版系统的公 开辩论有所贡献。此外,正计划一场政治辩论,将包括欧洲议会、欧盟委员会、成员国和利益 相关者。 p. 120-123 Open Access: Opportunities and challenges. A handbook [开放获取 : 机会 及挑战] / European Commission, German Commission for UNESCO. -- Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008. -- 144 p., 14.8 x 21.0 cm. -- ISBN 978-92-79-06665-8. -- EUR 23459, http://tinyurl.com/3q8wo5