1 / 21

Capita selecta on scholarly communication

Capita selecta on scholarly communication. presented by Leo Waaijers , Manager of SURF Platform ICT and Reseach, to the 2004 Winter Meeting ‘Economic Models for Scientific Information, Production and Distribution’ of ICSTI Paris, January 15-16, 2004. Philosophy Who’s responsible?

ann
Download Presentation

Capita selecta on scholarly communication

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Capita selecta on scholarly communication presented by Leo Waaijers, Manager of SURF Platform ICT and Reseach, to the 2004 Winter Meeting ‘Economic Models for Scientific Information, Production and Distribution’ of ICSTI Paris, January 15-16, 2004. waaijers@surf.nl

  2. Philosophy • Who’s responsible? • Managerial concept • Generic innovations • Repositories • Open Access • To conclude waaijers@surf.nl

  3. Philosophy Scientific progress thrives on the symbiosis of creation & communication waaijers@surf.nl

  4. Upon hearing that he was awarded the Nobel Prize with Brenner and Horvitz, Sir John Sulston is quoted as saying that:"The worm [C. elegans] worked so well because the community held an ethos of sharing - just as the public genome projects have - from the beginning. We gave all our results to others as soon as we had them. From sharing, discovery is accelerated in the community. Research is hastened when people share results freely."(The Guardian, UK, October 8, 2002)

  5. Who’s responsible? If communication and creation are equally important, management is equally responsible for both. waaijers@surf.nl

  6. Managerial concept If managers are prepared to accept their responsability, is there a managerial concept to rely upon? waaijers@surf.nl

  7. organize study create publish Knowledge cycle(Nonaka, Senge, Prahalad, Weggeman, Jacobs e.a.) waaijers@surf.nl

  8. organize study create publish Classical roles Databases Library Agent Publisher Publisher Library waaijers@surf.nl

  9. Change drivers • Serials crisis • Information & Communication Technology • Knowledge management theory Concatenating 1980-2000 waaijers@surf.nl

  10. New approach Content management is a • strategical • integral • critical aspect of a knowledge intensive organisation waaijers@surf.nl

  11. New roles Content management + Human resources management waaijers@surf.nl

  12. Generic innovations • Repositories (OAI-MHP) • Open Access waaijers@surf.nl

  13. Open Access Comparing the Subscription Model and the Open Access Model in scholarly communication; Similarities and Differences waaijers@surf.nl

  14. Similarities • Identical products: Edited en refereed scientific articles bundled by subject in journals. • Permanently archived (e.g. through KB). • New journals never have an impact factor. • Publishing costs institute’s money. waaijers@surf.nl

  15. Differences

  16. Price per article waaijers@surf.nl

  17. An example For the year 2002 Wageningen University & Research Centre paid M€ 2.4 to get access to the most important scientific information. In an Open Access world (and publishing all its articles through BMC) Wageningen would have had to pay M$ 0.7* to get access to all scientific information published worldwide. * 1417 articles x $ 500 waaijers@surf.nl

  18. Price differences may be caused by: • paper ↔ electronic, • monopoly ↔ market, • commercial ↔ non-profit, • tollage ↔ toll-free. waaijers@surf.nl

  19. Food for thought "We believe there is a 50% risk of a change in the model ten years from now." and "BNP Paribas expresses its concern regarding the company’s (= Reed Elsevier’s) current subscription based access, as compared to the newer and more successful article-fee based open access system." ‘Professional Publishing’, 200 pp, BNP Paribas, October 2003http://www.newratings.com/new2/beta/article.asp?aid=341832 waaijers@surf.nl

  20. More food for thought • US Sabo Bill 1 ("Public Access to Science Act") • US Sabo Bill 2 ("Public Access to Science Act") • UK Parliament, Science and Technoloy Committee • Report on Changing Research Practices in the Digital Information and Communication Environment (Aus. Gov.) • AUS$ 12 million for managing university information • The Wellcome Trust Statement • The Berlin Decaration • The Budapest Open Access Initiative • Result: Directory of Open Access Journals (697 OA journals) waaijers@surf.nl

  21. To conclude The transfer to Open Access is a • win (scientists) • win (society) • win (universities/institutes) • win (libraries) • win (publishers?) • lose (shareholders) step. waaijers@surf.nl

More Related