Key questions in the UK’s shift to open-access research. Soon, we’ll all be reading publicly funded UK research free of charge. That momentous change has been in the works since last March, and in December the British government explained why and how it would happen (yes, although you might not guess it from recent media reports, the UK open-access shift was underway well before what the Guardian has called this year’s ‘Academic Spring’). The way it will work is simple: the agencies that support UK scientists will require them to make their research papers free. They’ve required this since 2006; but now they’re going to enforce it. Beyond a draft policy document from Research Councils UK (RCUK, the umbrella body for the United Kingdom’s seven taxpayer-funded grant agencies) little said since December has been added to the government’s outline, leaving open-access watchers speculating on some sticky issues around the switch.
The open-access delay The first issue: will research papers be instantly open or will publishers get to impose a delay? Para ti, Lucía | Orsai. Imágenes Cadena Nacional de un minuto, editada de forma tendenciosa miércoles 9 de abril, 2014 Lucas y Alex Plastilina celeste jueves 3 de abril, 2014 Ha llovido en el arenero del jardín de infantes, pero Alex y Lucas se sientan de todas formas en el suelo mojado.
Es el segundo recreo y hay nubarrones oscuros en el cielo de Mercedes. Son tristes las penas de amor jueves 27 de marzo, 2014 Segunda semana de clases en el Jardín de Infantes Nº 1 de Mercedes. Sociedad La trampa de McCracken jueves 20 de marzo, 2014 Que me perdonen este jueves las damas presentes, pero tengo la necesidad de hablar sobre fútbol. Protocolo en el subsuelo jueves 13 de marzo, 2014 Hace un tiempo me invitaron a Lima para dar una charla.
Vida privada La falsa biografía jueves 6 de marzo, 2014 Hernán Casciari nació en Mercedes, en 1971, y todo lo que sigue es relativo o fragmentario. Autoayuda El limpio, el sucio y el neutro jueves 27 de febrero, 2014 Hoy Orsai cumple diez años pero me pregunto: ¿y si nadie me lee? Editorial. The unreasonable Tevatron: Calculating the economic impact of basic science. John Womersley, chief executive officer of the U.K.'s Science and Technology Facilities Council. Photo: STFC During a recent symposium at Fermilab, a speaker took the stage to defend government investment in basic science. He used an odd tactic: He called particle physics unreasonable. John Womersley, chief executive officer of Britain’s Science and Technology Facilities Council, was referring to a saying by the eminently quotable George Bernard Shaw. Shaw said that a reasonable man adapts to society, but an unreasonable man insists that society adapt to him.
Therefore, Shaw argued, all progress depends on unreasonable people. “Particle physics is unreasonable,” Womersley said at the June 11 symposium celebrating the now-retired Tevatron particle accelerator. But scientists are persistent, he said; when they don’t have the things they need to conduct an experiment, they take it upon themselves to create them. The Tevatron was completed in March 1983 and ran until September 2011. El costo del saber. Todo comenzó con un posteo en el que un distinguido matemático inglés manifestaba su frustración en un blog.
Tim Gowers y sus colegas habían pasado años protestando entre ellos por los crecientes costos de las publicaciones académicas. Al igual que a muchos otros científicos, les molestaba que el trabajo que producían sus colegas y en buena medida financiaban los contribuyentes quedara detenido ante los paywalls (o acceso pago) de editoriales privadas que cobraban a las universidades británicas millones de libras por año por el privilegio de acceder.
En enero de este año, Gowers escribió un artículo en su blog en el que declaraba que a partir de ese momento se negaría a presentar o reseñar trabajos para toda publicación de Elsevier, la mayor editorial de publicaciones científicas del mundo. No imaginaba lo que sucedería a continuación. Miles de personas leyeron el post y centenares escribieron comentarios de apoyo. Detrás de los muros El precio, sin embargo, es sólo parte de la cuestión. Why panning for gold may be detrimental to open access research | Higher Education Network | Guardian Professional. The gold model for open access research may end up costing universities more, removing one of the significant advantages that open access was supposed to deliver.
Photograph: Murdo Macleod The government's response last week to the recommendations of the Finch Report on open access was a bold one, advocating a policy for extending access to publicly-funded research which will lead the way worldwide. If the rest of the world follows the UK's lead, then the future for scholarly publishing is bright indeed. However, the worry for institutions like UCL, who have consistently supported moves towards open access, is that the preferred model may end up costing us more, thereby removing one of the significant advantages that open access was supposed to deliver. The government response states explicitly that, for research funded by the public purse, it favours gold over green open access. It is not immediately obvious that any market pressure will be brought to bear on APCs for key journals.