Abstract: The Bologna process aims at fostering a European Higher Education Area. In this presentation, we shall focus on the research side of this project and examine how a European Research Area can be designed and implemented. We begin by criticizing the use of neutral and largely undefined words such as “area” and submit that the European Union should design a research topography positioned between two worlds, a smaller one comprised of the member states on the one hand, and a bigger one corresponding to the rest of the world. Distinctions between science and society, and applied versus pure or theoretical science should also be revisited along the lines suggested by the concept of “mode 2” production of knowledge introduced by Michael Gibbons and his colleagues in 1994. Finally, the concepts of quality and excellence should be carefully distinguished. The former deals with minimum standard assurance while the latter identifies the very best. This distinction will require universities carefully to delineate their own internal behavioural boundary between quality assurance and the quest for excellence. We believe the European project should clearly focus on quality thresholds and leave the issue of competitive excellence to member states. With these tools in place, this paper identifies how a networked, distributed approach to research (largely inspired by the free software movement) is the best solution for European universities to address the concern for quality without inhibiting the quest for excellence. Finally, an implementation strategy is sketched: it targets mainly (but not exclusively) younger researchers while underscoring the importance of fully supporting Open Access to both the literature and the data.
From the body of the paper:
...[I]f more modest, and probably poorer, institutions are to be involved, access to the scientific literature is a crucial issue....The published literature is the code of science and it too needs to be open....[S]olving the issue of access to the relevant literature is a big part of the whole picture. Furthermore, research data complements the published literature. For institutions lacking the instruments to produce such data, access to data means the possibility of learning, of checking and verifying, and even of revisiting prior interpretations.
When access to the literature is denied, good scientific work cannot be done. Why is it denied ? Generally, and simply, for economic reasons. Many of the leading journals in science are extremely expensive and most libraries do not enjoy the kinds of budgets that would allow them to follow the steep rise in subscription or licensing costs. This is the reason why Open Access is a crucial piece in the building of a European Research Area....
Clearly, if a European Research Area is to be created, and if Open Access to the literature is crucial for its working correctly, a mandate to self-archive is needed. In fact, all research funded by European institutions should be placed in Open Access and a European mandate to that effect should be enacted....
Only with Open Access can the scientific literature and data be fully used....
Posted by
Peter Suber at 2/18/2009 12:30:00 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.
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.
