Running head: CURRENT
TRENDS IN OPEN ACCESS POLICY
Current Trends in Open Access Policy
Loreli Brandt
San Jose State University
Abstract
This
paper examines current (2009) trends in Open Access policy. The importance of
Open Access is discussed; current trends are reviewed; and future possibilities
are identified.
Note: for a detailed history of the Open Access
Movement prior to 2009, see Peter Subers timeline at: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/timeline.htm.
The Importance of Open Access
Robin
Peek, Associate Professor at Simmons Graduate School of Library and Information
Science, created the following scenario to illustrate the importance of the
Open Access Movement:
Perhaps what we need is a visual image of what OA
means to the advancement of science: imagine the starship Enterprise on a mission in space. Suddenly , an alien object (a
giant worm) appears on the port side. Capt. Kirk asks the computer, What is
that thing pursuing us? The computer works on the problem and offers an
explanation. However, the data about the object is on a subscription-only
database that will cost $30 for a single-use license. Kirk asks his bridge crew
if anyone has a credit card (of course, they dont because the uniforms dont
include pockets). Then, Kirk runs to his ready room and finds a credit card (a
relic of the 20th century). As the creature seems to be on the verge
of swallowing the Enterprise, Kirk
gives the credit card to Mr. Spock who retrieves the article and sends a
message of friendship to the alien creature. With not a moment to spare, the
gesture of friendship stops the creature from snacking on our heroes.
Fascinating, notes Spock as he tries to call up an image on the monitor to
share with the bridge crew. But the digital rights management kicks in and
issues the command: You must purchase a multi-use license to view this image
by more than one person. So much for collaboration.
Improving
access to research is the goal of the Open Access Movement. Journal
cancellations are increasing and chronic serialitis (Fisher, B., 2009) is a
pandemic. The importance of Open Access cannot be overstated. According to the
World Health Organization:
Abstract
access to health research publications is an essential requirement in securing
the chain of communication from the researcher to the front-line health worker.
As has been well documented, rising costs of subscriptions and permission
barriers imposed by publishers have barred access to the extent that local
health research and health care have been damaged through lack of information.
A key to resolving the deep knowledge gap lies in creating a global knowledge
base that includes essential research emanating from both research communities
in developing countries as well as from international research.
We are all citizens of the world, as
Socrates reminded, and without global access to accurate and current
information, there is little hope that we will continue to evolve as a species.
Current Trends
Widespread faculty
dissatisfaction with journal cancellations has spawned a number of Open Access
adoptions. (Hackman, T., 2009). Open-access mandates [from institutions and
funding bodies] have almost doubled globally in the year that has elapsed since
Harvards mandate in May 2008, says Steven Harnard, an advocate of open access
at the University of Southhampton, U.K. (Nature, 2009). While not all-inclusive,
the following is a synthesis of recent trends within the United States and
abroad in support of the Open Access Movement.
One particularly hopeful new trend is the
first International Open Access Week, held October 19-23, 2009. Open Access Week is an opportunity to broaden
awareness and understanding of Open Access to research, including access
policies from all types of research funders, within the international higher
education community and the general public. The now-annual event has been
expanded from a single day to accommodate widespread global interest in the
movement toward open, public access to scholarly research results.
(OpenAccessWeek.org, 2009). Open Access Week is an educational tool that not
only broadens awareness but also provides information to dispel misconceptions.
In the United Kingdom
the Wellcome Trust dedicated $3.3 million USD (during Open Access Week) to
fund open access publication fees for its researchers over the next 12 months
(openaccessweek.org, 2009). This kind of support is important as sustainability
is one of the challenges facing the Open Access Movement. In the United States
the University of Tennessee recently created an Open Publishing Support Fund
to assist faculty publish in open access journals. (Howard, J., 2009).
Another sustainability
effort, the compact, is gaining popularity. Universities would commit on
behalf of their authors to underwrite reasonable processing fees for articles
in open-access journals for which funds are not otherwise available (in
particular, for research not funded by grants). (Shieber, S.M., 2009). Compact
fees are applicable only to open-access publishing fees. Dartmouth, Harvard and
UC Berkeley are among those who have already signed the compact. This model
changes the way universities support journal publishing from having them pay
fees to publishers for access to the journals, to paying fees when faculty
members have their work accepted. (Jaschik, 2009).
Government support for
the Open Access Movement is critical. Suber points to Ireland as one of the
best regimes in terms of pushing OA. The Government funded new OA archives at
Irish universities while simultaneously requiring Government-funded research to
end up in them. (Quinn, N., 2009). In the United States, the Omnibus
Appropriations Act of 2009 made the National Institutes of Health (NIH) s
public access policy a legislative mandate. This Act requires the deposit of
grant-funded research findings into the National Institute of Medicines PubMed
Central. Presently, A bill designed to make scientific research funded by the
US governments 11 largest funding bodies accessible for free by the general
public is hibernating in the US legislature (Grant, 2009). This bill is
S.1373, the Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA). This pending legislation is supported by the
stated objectives in the report of the Intergovernmental Working Group on
Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Propertyto promote public access
to the results of government funded research (Chan, et al, 2009).
Universities in the
United States are adopting Open Access policies in increasing numbers. In June [2009], the University of Kansas,
Lawrence, was the first public university in the United States to adopt an open
access policy regarding scholarly research. Now, SPARC (Scholarly Publishing
and Academic Resources Coalition) is offering resources to encourage other
universities to take the plunge (Library Journal, 2009).
Several universities in
Hong Kong have adopted Open Access policies and more are expected to follow
suit in 2010 in response to the knowledge exchange and research assessment
incentives. (Chan, D., 2009). University College London (UCL) recently adopted
an open access publishing policy, adding to the rapid increase in such
mandates over the past year. (Nature, 2009).
The Council of Scientific
and Industrial Research in India recently urged the establishment of
institutional repositories in each of its more than 35 laboratories as well as
conversion of all their journals to open access. (Chan, et al, 2009). The
University of Pretoria in South Africa also recently adopted an open access
mandate. (Chan, et al, 2009).
The National Library of
Swedens project, called OpenAccess.se, aims to promote maximum accessibility
and visibility of works produced by researchers, teachers and students. (Chantavaridou,
2009). NORA is Norways initiative to facilitate standardization and
cooperation between Norwegian open access repositories and currently harvest
approximately 40 repositories. (Chantavaridou,
2009).
A step towards global
open access was taken recently by global pharmaceutical behemoth Pfizer.
(Pharma, 2009). Pfizer recently reached an agreement with BioMed Central to
launch an open-access waiver fund, which will support automatic waivers of
publication fees for authors from low-income countries. As a result,
researchers in low-income countries can publish research articles in BioMed
Centrals open access journals without the need to pay a publication fee.
Pfizers support for open-access publishing is driven by a recognition of the
wide benefits of global access to the latest research results, and the crucial
role that open access journals can play in the communication of those results.
(Pharma, 2009).
The above demonstrates
a current worldwide interest in and willingness to embrace Open Access. What does the future hold?
Future
Possibilities
The
future of the Open Access Movement is uncertain. Though there is much support,
as detailed above, there are still many obstacles to overcome.
Misconceptions
are still challenging the Open Access Movement. One such misconception is that
Open Access means bypassing peer review. In reality, the Open Access Movements
goal is to remove access barriers, not quality filters. (Suber, P., 2009).
Another misconception confuses quality for prestige. Open Access journals can
be of high quality at birth, however, prestige develops over time. The
misconception that authors must choose between Open Access journals and
prestige journals is particularly insidious. Since Open Access is compatible
with prestige, no such decision is necessary. The differences in publication
fees and subscription fees are often misunderstood. Publication fees buy access
for everyone with an Internet connection; subscription fees buy access for
private use only. (Suber, P., 2009).
Sustainability
concerns continue to arise. Journals that charge fees have revenue from the
fees. Journals that charge no fees use various business models, sometimes
relying on subsidies rather than revenue. There are many business models that
future journals may employ. Among them are Advertising, Endowments,
Fund-Raising, Institutional Subsidies, Membership Dues, Priced Editions,
Publication Fees, Submission Fees, and Volunteer Effort. Hybrid Journals, where
authors determine whether or not the article gets immediate OA, have already
demonstrated their potential.(OAD)
The implementation of
Open Access faces other obstacles, especially with regards to the global digital divide. Some of these are:
political instability, pervasive corruption, and inefficiency,systemic
economic inequality, environmental degradation, and racial, religious, and
gender discrimination. (Baker, M., 2009). As libraries continue to work on
opening access to scientific and scholarly research, and as they assume more
and more the roles, responsibilities, and capacities of publication, they are
strategically placed to help significantly reduce the global digital
information divide. (Baker, M., 2009).
Although some journals
may be willing to waive the authors fee, some scholars may choose not to
public in an open access journal, rather than subject themselves to
embarrassment. (Christian, 2008). The mere fact that open access journals are
available on the Internet may not be sufficient to achieve the object of the
open access initiative in the developing world. Due to inadequate information
communication technology infrastructure in the developing world, Open Access in
principle does not always translate to Open Access in action. (Christian,
2008). There is a misconception in some conservative developing countries where
open access has become associated with vanity publishing. Free and poor or
low quality are associated, while expensive and high quality are associated.
(Christian, 2008).
Misconceptions are not
limited to developing countries. There are those that fear that open access
would mean the death of peer-reviewed journal literature. (Hackman, T., 2009).
Others were told that public access equals government censorship (Drake,
M.A., 2007). Education is the solution to the misconception problem and it
behooves each of us to take on the role of educator.
On a more positive note, the World Health
Organization will continue to support the Open Access movement in line with
their position: It is our view that the United Nations and other international
organizations should give strong support to the open access movement, which
holds such promise for both research and public health. (Chan, et al, 2009).
The future also brings
more research. Additional research will be conducted to develop a better
understanding of the common characteristics of OA scholarly publishing and
citation network. Exploring the characteristics of formal scholarly
communication on the web is becoming more important because increasing numbers
of authors, journals, and institutions publish and self-archive their research
results online. (Kousha, 2009).
Another obstacle to the Open Access movement is H.R. 6845, the Fair Copyright in Research
Works Act Bill. This Bill is currently in committee. If passed, it would
overturn NIHs public-access policy. The future of Open Access is dependent
upon our support. It is our responsibility to educate others about Open Access.
It is our responsibility to make our opposition to H.R. 6845, and others that
mimic it, known to our legislators.
The Chicago
Collaborative is an attempt at bringing all the stakeholders to the table to
work together in a collaborative fashion, rather than in confrontational
mode. (Plutchak, T.S., 2009). Making the results of scientific research more
readily available throughout the world is clearly a noble and important goal.
Building a sustainable system of scholarly communication that can meet that
goal will require reasoned engagement; rather than slogans and banner waving.
(Plutchak, T.S., 2009). Collaboration indeed.
References
Baker, M. (2009). Be Creative,
Determined, and Wise: Open Library Publishing and the Global South. Computers in Libraries. Nov 2009. 29:10.
Retrieved on November 22, 2009 from Ebscohost.
Chan, D. (2009). An integrative view of
the institutional repositories Hong Kong: strategies and challengies. Serials Review. September 2009, 35:3.
Retrieved on November 4, 2009 from Ebscohost.
Chan, L., Arunachalarm, S. & Kirsop,
B. (2009). Open access: a giant leap towards bridging health inequities. Bull World Health Organ. September,
2007, 87:631-5. Retrieved October 17, 2009 from EbscoHost.
Chantavaridou, E. (2009). Contributions
of open access to higher education in Europe and vice versa. OCLC Systems & Services. 2009. 25:3,
p.167-174. Retrieved on October 17, 2009 from EbscoHost.
Christian, G.E. (2008). Open Access
Initiative and the Developing World. African
Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science. April 2008. 18:1.
Retrieved on November 22, 2009 from Ebscohost.
Drake, M.A. (2007). OPEN ACCESS. Searcher. Jul/Aug 2007. 15:7. Retrieved
on November 22, 2009 from Ebscohost.
Fister, B. (2009). A long and winding
road for open access: are we there yet. Library
Journal.com. October 22, 2009. Retrieved on November 4, 2009 from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6703392.html.
Fister, B. (2009). Access to
publicly-funded research: why not now. Library
Journal.com. October 15, 2009. Retrieved on November 4, 2009 from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6701870.html?nid=2673&source=title&rid=1105906703.
Grant, B. (2009). Open access bill stalls
in Congress. The Scientist. October
8, 2009. Retrieved October 17, 2009 from http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/56046/.
Hackman, T. (2009). Whats the Opposite
of a Pyrrhic Victory? Lessons Learned from an Open Access Defeat. College & Research Libraries News.
October, 2009. 70:9. Retrieved on November 22, 2009 from EbscoHost.
Hadro, J. (2009). Open Access Week
Highlights Advocacy Efforts Worldwide. Library
Journal.com. October 22, 2009. Retrieved on November 4, 2009 from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6703523.html?nid=2673&source=title&rid=1999395792.
Howard, J. (2009). A New Push to Unlock
University-based Research. Chronicle of
Higher Education.March 6, 2009. 55:26. Retrieved on November 22, 2009 from
EbscoHost.
Jaschik, S. (2009). Breakthrough on Open
Access. September 15, 2009. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com on
November 22, 2009.
Kousha, K. (2009). Characteristics of
open access scholarly publishing, A multidisciplinary study. Aslib Proceedings. 2009, 61:4. P.
394-406. Retrieved on October 17, 2009 from EbscoHost.
Library Journal (2009). U.K. approves
open access; SPARC pushes for more. Library
Journal. September 15, 2009. 134:15. Retrieved on November 4, 2009 from
EbscoHost.
Nature
Magazine (2009). Open-access publishing gains another convert. Nature. June, 2009. 459:4. Retrieved on
October 17, 2009 from EbscoHost.
Pharma
Marketletter (2009). Pfizer supports open-access for researchers in low-income
countries. May 6, 2009. Retrieved October 17, 2009 from LexisNexis.
Plutchak, T.S.
(2009). Collaboration, not confrontation. Bulletin of the World Health
Organization, Aug 2009, 87:8. Retrieved on November 22, 2009 from EbscoHost.
Quinn, N. (2009). Open Access leads the way in promoting academic research. The Irish Times. FINANCE; Technology,
p.6. August 7, 2009. Retrieved October 17, 2009 from LexisNexis.
Shieber, S.M. (2009). Equity for
Open-Access Journal Publishing. PLoS
Biology. August 2009. 7:8. Retrieved on November 22, 2009 from EbscoHost.
Suber, P. (2009). Timeline of the
Open Access Movement. http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/timeline.htm
Suber, P. (2009). Welcome to the
SPARC Open Newsletter, Issue 132. Retrieved on November 22, 2009 at http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/04-02-09.htm#fieldguide
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-09-071.html
http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/OA_journal_business_models