I basically agree with Eric's outline. This would be the way to wrap up the cost of publishing within the cost of research.
I have repeatedly stated that this should be the case. Publishing is an integral part of research, and its financing does not have to follow business plans largely dictated by print age constraints. There is nothing wrong with subsidizing publishing (it is already the case in many countries), especially if one considers that research would not be sustainable without huge subsidies from governments. Can anyone tell me how private interests would have tracked the Higgs Boson? The only issue to deal with is how to keep the funders at arm's length from the publications while retaining an interest in quality. However, this problem is far less troubling than the relationship of commercial publishers and editorial boards (including editors, especially when the latter are compensated in one fashion or another). Examples of good behaviour abound and should be followed. International setups or multi-institutional alliances between charities would largely alleviate this limited worry. So, basically, systematically creating funder-supported journals in all major disciplines, perhaps following the super-journal model of PLoS One, would be the optimal way to go on the gold side of things. If this solution were to be implemented, a degree of competition would nevertheless remain by virtue of regional or national ambitions: Europeans would want their journal, as would probably the Chinese, the Indians, Latin Americans, Africans, etc... This would ensure a continuous flow of innovations in the publishing processes and mechanisms. Large collections of journals such as SciELO and RedALyC in Latin America could explore how to mutate into a few super-journals. They might need transitional funds from some willing foundation to do so, but I believe it is feasible. There is a lot to think about here. Jean-Claude Guédon PS And, just for equilibrium's sake, this is only on the Gold side. Much work remains to be done on the Green side as well. Ultimately, we will have to work on their convergence. Le jeudi 26 juillet 2012 à 11:39 -0700, Eric F. Van de Velde a écrit : > For funders that already have set up a Green OA mandate with an > funder-sponsored repository, it would be a relatively small additional > investment to sponsor journals. > > > > They would not have to manage it themselves. They could put out a > periodic Request for Proposals to manage journals on their behalf. Any > scholarly publisher or start-up could compete for that business, > thereby ensuring the management is done at minimal cost. > > > The only thing the funder would have to do is put together editorial > boards. This is something they already do when they put together > proposal-review panels. > > > The result would be Gold Libre OA without author-paid fees. The cost > to research funders is likely minimal, and they would gain a > significant quality-assessment tool. In fact, these are Gold OA > journals that would not have the "vanity-press incentive" built-in > when Gold OA is paid for by authors (the so-called predatory Gold OA > journals). > > > Would such a model be workable? Any unintended consequences? Has it > been tried anywhere? > --Eric. > > > http://scitechsociety.blogspot.com > > Google Voice: (626) 898-5415 > > Telephone: (626) 376-5415 > Skype: efvandevelde -- Twitter: @evdvelde > E-mail: eric.f.vandeve...@gmail.com > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Jean-Claude Guédon > <jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca> wrote: > > Like Stevan Harnad, I say: enough with colours! > > The important thing to remember is that gold OA is not, repeat > *NOT* limited to author-pay schemes. There are indeed many > journals that are gratis to authors and libre to readers (e.g. > SciELO and RedALyC journals in latin America and beyond). To > my mind, this is the optimal version of Gold. > > Jean-Claude Guédon > > Le jeudi 26 juillet 2012 à 06:16 -0600, Beall, Jeffrey a > écrit : > > > I make the distinction between gold open-access and platinum > open-access. > > > > Author fees + free to reader = gold open access > > No author fees + free to reader = platinum open access > > > > This discussion, I think, demonstrates that this distinction is > significant and worthy of a separate appellation. > > > > > > Jeffrey Beall, Metadata Librarian / Associate Professor > > Auraria Library > > University of Colorado Denver > > 1100 Lawrence St. > > Denver, Colo. 80204 USA > > (303) 556-5936 > > jeffrey.be...@ucdenver.edu > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On > Behalf Of Reckling, Falk, Dr. > > Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 4:53 AM > > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Hat Tip: Let's not leave Humanities behind in > the dash for open access > > > > > > I think there is still a misunderstanding with Gold OA. Running a > OA journal does not necesserily mean to charges article fees! > > > > Take Economics as an example: meanwhile there are some good OA > journals, most of them are new but with very prominent advisory boards (which > is a good predictor of being successful in the long run) > > > > a) E-conomics (institutional funding): > > http://www.economics-ejournal.org/ > > > > b) Theoretical Economics (society based funding): > http://econtheory.org/ > > > > c) 5x IZA journals published with SpringerOpen (institutional > funding): > > http://journals.iza.org/ > > > > d) Journal of Economic Perspective (a former subscription journal > but now society based funding): > > http://www.aeaweb.org/jep/index.php > > > > All of them are without APCs, and that model also works in many > other fields. > > > > What is needed is a very good editorial board and a basic funding > by an institution/society, or by a consortium of institutions or by a charity > or ... > > > > Or why not considering a megajournal in the Humanities and apply a > clever business model as PEERJ tries it right now in the Life Science?: > http://peerj.com/ > > > > In the end, it is up to the community to develop models which fit > their needs ... > > > > Best Falk > > > > > > > > > > Am 26.07.2012 um 12:09 schrieb "l.hurt...@ed.ac.uk" > <l.hurt...@ed.ac.uk>: > > > > > The question isn't whether they're free or not, but whether they > play > > > major roles as venues and outlets for important Humanities > > > scholarship. And also it's still the case that traditional print > > > journals involve long print cues and delays in publication. And > also > > > it's the case that university libraries paying ridiculous > subscription > > > charges for journals in the Sciences have less funding for > monographs > > > (still the gold standard in Humanities), and even put pressure on > > > Humanities to cut their journals. > > > Finally, there is the concern that the current move to "gold OA" > with > > > pages charges, etc., will adversely affect Humanities scholars. > > > So, please, no snap and simple replies. Let's engage the > problems. > > > Larry Hurtado > > > > > > Quoting Jan Szczepanski <jan.szczepansk...@gmail.com> on Wed, 25 > Jul > > > 2012 22:53:06 +0200: > > > > > >> Is more than sixteen thousand free e-journals in the humanities > and > > >> social sciences of any importance in this discussion? > > >> > > >> http://www.scribd.com/Jan%20Szczepanski > > >> > > >> Jan > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> 2012/7/25 <l.hurt...@ed.ac.uk>: > > >>> Webster concisely articulates the concerns that I briefly > mooted a > > >>> few days ago. > > >>> Larry Hurtado > > >>> > > >>> Quoting Omega Alpha Open Access <oa.openacc...@gmail.com> on > Wed, 25 > > >>> Jul 2012 11:03:30 -0400: > > >>> > > >>>> Hat Tip: Let's not leave Humanities behind in the dash for > open > > >>>> access http://wp.me/p20y83-no > > >>>> > > >>>> Nice article this morning by Peter Webster on the Research > > >>>> Fortnight website entitled "Humanities left behind in the dash > for > > >>>> open access." > > >>>> > <http://www.researchresearch.com/index.php?option=com_news&template > > >>>> =rr_2col&view=article&articleId=1214091> Check it out. > > >>>> > > >>>> Webster observes that much of the current conversation around > the > > >>>> growth of open access focuses on the sciences and use of an > > >>>> "author-pays" business model. He feels inadequate attention in > the > > >>>> conversation has been given to the unique needs of humanities > > >>>> scholarship, and why it may be harder for humanist scholars to > > >>>> embrace open access based on the "author-pays" model. > > >>>> > > >>>> "There is no Public Library of History to match the > phenomenally > > >>>> successful Public Library of Science." > > >>>> . > > >>>> > > >>>> Your comments are welcome. > > >>>> > > >>>> Gary F. Daught > > >>>> Omega Alpha | Open Access > > >>>> Advocate for open access academic publishing in religion and > > >>>> theology http://oaopenaccess.wordpress.com oa.openaccess @ > > >>>> gmail.com | @OAopenaccess > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>> GOAL mailing list > > >>>> GOAL@eprints.org > > >>>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> L. W. Hurtado, PhD, FRSE > > >>> Emeritus Professor of New Testament Language, Literature & > Theology > > >>> Honorary Professorial Fellow New College (School of Divinity) > > >>> University of Edinburgh Mound Place Edinburgh, UK. EH1 2LX > Office > > >>> Phone: (0)131 650 8920. FAX: (0)131 650 7952 > www.ed.ac.uk/divinity > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > > >>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> GOAL mailing list > > >>> GOAL@eprints.org > > >>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Jan Szczepański > > >> F.d Förste bibliotekare och chef för f.d Avdelningen för > humaniora > > >> vid Göteborgs universitetsbibliotek > > >> E-post: jan.szczepansk...@gmail.com > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> GOAL mailing list > > >> GOAL@eprints.org > > >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > L. W. Hurtado, PhD, FRSE > > > Emeritus Professor of New Testament Language, Literature & > Theology > > > Honorary Professorial Fellow New College (School of Divinity) > > > University of Edinburgh Mound Place Edinburgh, UK. EH1 2LX Office > > > Phone: (0)131 650 8920. FAX: (0)131 650 7952 > www.ed.ac.uk/divinity > > > > > > -- > > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > > > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > GOAL mailing list > > > GOAL@eprints.org > > > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > > > _______________________________________________ > > GOAL mailing list > > GOAL@eprints.org > > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > > > _______________________________________________ > > GOAL mailing list > > GOAL@eprints.org > > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
