While I've often argued that achieving OA and reforming peer review are independent projects, and that OA is compatible with every kind of review (from the most conservative to the most innovative), I've also added that OA and open review have certain synergies that are worth exploring. In the Naturedebate on peer review, Chris Anderson articulates one of these potential synergies:
Closed peer review works best in scarce environments, where many papers fight for a few coveted journal slots. Open peer review works best in an abundant environment of online journals with unlimited space or the post-publication marketplace of opinion across all work.
Anderson makes this point about "online journals", but seems to mean OA journals. His point doesn't apply to subscription-based online journals, which depend on artificial scarcity to keep their revenue coming in.
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.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
