Dr David Spurrett has shown that if there is a will there is a way! Setting up institutional archives is eventually the best - most cost-effective - solution. All of us - scientists and scholars - should work towards it and persuade our university administrators and policymakers in governments and donor agencies to promote it.
Arun [Subbiah Arunachalam] > Iain Stevenson wrote: > >is> (a). Implicitly, the publication model of open-access and self-archiving >is> reflects the publishing culture of Anglo-American STM research, well-funded >is> with grants that include publication costs and I suspect also salaried >is> research assistantsa nd post-docs to do the leg-work in archiving. In the >is> tradition of social science and humanities research, typified by sole >is> researchers with smallish (or no) grants, self-archiving probably isn't >easily >is> achieved, unless the institution where the worker is based provides, >staffs and >is> pays for a self-archiving system. And where does that leave the >self-funded >is> independent scholar who is still a feature of many of the soft-sciences? > > I have to disagree. As a researcher in a humanities department, with limited > grants, no salaried assistants and no postdocs, I've found no serious > obstacles > to self-archiving. The software (I have deposited papers in two different > archives > both of them running eprints) is easy to use, registration simple and clear, > and > the process of archiving a paper takes very little time. > > (I'm 'lucky' to work in the philosophy of science and cognitive science, both > of > which have eprints archives, but I'm presently agitating/archivangelising for > my university to set up an institutional archive.) > > David Spurrett
