Susan R. Owens, Revolution or evolution? A shift to an open-access model of publishing would clearly benefit science, but who should pay?EMBO Reports, 2003. Excerpt: "The driving force behind most scientists' careers is to achieve the maximum visibility for their research. Since the creation of the first scientific journals in the mid-seventeenth century, scientists have condensed their data and conclusions into a manuscript and happily handed this over to a publisher, who in return has printed it and distributed it to those willing—or whose institutes are willing—to pay a subscription fee. But the triple whammy of rising journal prices, an exploding number of journals and imploding library budgets means that the bulk of this work can now only be accessed by a small fraction of its intended audience. The arrival of the World Wide Web has the potential to change this reality: now that the vast majority of printed articles are also available in an electronic form, which is theoretically accessible by anyone with an interest and an internet connection, shouldn't all articles become free for everyone to read?...Even if the revolution does not materialize, it will no doubt speed up the evolution of the current pay-per-access model; it is therefore worth taking the time now to work out a system that is optimal." (Thanks to Garrett Eastman.)
Posted by
Peter Suber at 8/01/2003 12:56:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
