Budapest Open Access Initiative: BOAI Forum Archive[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [prev] [next] [options] [help]
[BOAI] Re: Origin of "green" and "gold" OA -- and of "fair" and "fool's" gold
From: Stevan Harnad <harnad AT ecs.soton.ac.uk>
On 2013-04-21, at 11:37 PM, Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp> wrote: > As for "green", >> "an ecological, self-help solution" > seems satisfactory and conclusive! > [But] why is OA journals publishing named "gold", not red, blue, ↵ white, etc?? In retrospect, it was perhaps a mistake to dub OA journal publishing the "golden road" to OA, with its unintended connotations of prmacy or ↵ superiority, instead of, say, the "yellow road," in parity with the "green ↵ road" of self-archiving. That might have avoided the many lost years of premature gold fever, gold rush ↵ and fool's gold. All I can say is that in my own mind it was (and is) completely obvious that global green OA through mandated self-archiving must come first, before the ↵ transition to gold OA pubishing. It is green self-archiving that will not only prepare the ↵ way and hasten the transition, but it will also force peer-reviewed journal publishing ↵ to downsize to its sole remaining essential function in the OA age, namely, peer ↵ review. By first making OA itself universal, along with its benefits, while ↵ subscriptions are still paying all publication costs in full, green OA self-archiving in ↵ repositories, once it is at or near 100% globally, makes it possible for institutions to cancel journal ↵ subscriptions. This in turn puts pressure -- and may be the only force that can put pressure ↵ -- on journal publishers to cut obsolete costs by unbundling and phasing out the ↵ products and services that global green OA makes unnecessary: the print edition, the ↵ publisher's proprietary online edition, access-provision and archiving. All of that is replaced by the global network of mandated OA repositories, ↵ leaving only each journal's service of peer review to be provided and paid for, at a fair, ↵ sustainable price, out of the institutional journal subscription cancelation savings. (And even the much lower price of the peer review service alone can and will be ↵ still further reduced by making it a (low) "no-fault" charge for the refereeing ↵ itself, irrespective of outcome, thereby unbundling the cost of rejected articles from the cost of accepted ↵ articles.) Instead, we are today still flirting with paying publishers pre-emptively for ↵ gold at today's gold OA asking price without first providing green OA, which means ↵ double-paying for uncancellable institutional subscriptions at the same time as paying for gold ↵ OA at an inflated price (not to mention double-dipping by hybrid subscription/gold publishers), thereby allowing publishers to set the price and the timetable for ↵ gold OA. I do not believe, however, that the absurd pass we have come to today -- with ↵ the UK, the former global leader in mandating green OA, now preferentially mandating gold OA, with all its perverse consequences of double-payment, depriving ↵ author's of the freedom to choose their journals, imposing unwanted licenses on them, and ↵ incentivizing publishers to offer hybrid gold and adopt and extend green OA embargoes in ↵ order to force authors to choose and pay for this fool's gold -- was simply the result of the ↵ connotations of a color term. There are at least 38 other reasons why authors have been so slow to ↵ self-archive, and they even have a name: "Zeno's Paralysis." The cure is known, however, and that is for research institutions and funders worldwide to mandate green OA self-archiving. And, thankfully, they seem at long last to be getting around to doing it, better late than neverů Once mandatory green OA has prevailed globally, and goes on to force a ↵ transition to fair gold, "gold" will have earned the extra connotations of its ↵ name. Stevan Harnad On 2013-04-21, at 11:37 PM, Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp> wrote: > Dear Jean-Claude and Stevan, > > Thank you for explaining. > > Days ago, one of my colleagues here in Japan asked me if gold OA is the ↵ royal road in highest grade over all flavors of OA. > He wondered so by analogy to "Gold Medals". > I could not answered to it with clarity. > > So I'd like to know furthermore, not their definitions but the etymology ↵ of the words. > > As for "green", > >> an ecological, self-help solution > > it seems satisfactory and conclusive! > > Then, why is OA journals publishing named "gold", not red, blue, ↵ white, etc? > > Shigeki > > (2013/04/19 21:32), Stevan Harnad wrote: >> On 2013-04-18, at 11:59 PM, Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp ↵ <mailto:ssugita AT chiba-u.jp>> wrote: >> >>> Someone please teach me about the original meanings or ↵ implications of "green" and "gold" at the time of the first ↵ BOAI recommendation. Why was self-archving named as "green" and OA ↵ journals as "gold"? >>> >>> green: green light? "RoMEO-green"? >>> gold: highest grade? (like "Gold Medal") >> >> The original BOAI ↵ <http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/openaccess/read>in 2002 consisted ↵ of two strategies, BOAI-1 and BOAI-2: >> >> To achieve open access to scholarly journal literature, we ↵ recommend two complementary strategies. >> >> *I. *Self-Archiving ↵ <http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/%7Eharnad/Tp/nature4.htm>: First, scholars ↵ need the tools and assistance ↵ <http://www.arl.org/sparc/core/index.asp?page=g20#6> to deposit their ↵ refereed journal articles in open electronic archives, a practice commonly ↵ called, self-archiving*.* When these archives conform to standards created by ↵ the Open Archives Initiative <http://www.openarchives.org/>, then search ↵ engines and other tools can treat the separate archives as one. Users then need ↵ not know which archives exist or where they are located in order to find and ↵ make use of their contents. >> >> *II. *Open-access Journals <http://www.doaj.org/>: ↵ Second, scholars need the means to launch a new generation of journals ↵ committed to open access, and to help existing journals that elect to make the ↵ transition to open access. Because journal articles should be disseminated as ↵ widely as possible, these new journals will no longer invoke copyright to ↵ restrict access to and use of the material they publish. Instead they will use ↵ copyright and other tools to ensure permanent open access to all the articles ↵ they publish. Because price is a barrier to access, these new journals will not ↵ charge subscription or access fees, and will turn to other methods for covering ↵ their expenses. There are many alternative sources of funds for this purpose, ↵ including the foundations and governments that fund research, the universities ↵ and laboratories that employ researchers, endowments set up by discipline or ↵ institution, friends of the cause of open access, profits from the sale of >> add-ons to the basic texts, funds freed up by the demise or ↵ cancellation of journals charging traditional subscription or access fees, or ↵ even contributions from the researchers themselves. There is no need to favor ↵ one of these solutions over the others for all disciplines or nations, and no ↵ need to stop looking for other, creative alternatives. >> >> >> These were then dubbed Green OA and Gold OA, respectively, in 2004: >> >> Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., ↵ Gingras, Y, Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., & Hilf, E. (2004) The ↵ Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access ↵ <http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10209/>./ Serials Review/ 30. *Shorter ↵ version:* The green and the gold roads to Open Access ↵ <http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/accessdebate/21.html>. /Nature Web ↵ Focus/.** >> * >> * >> >> None of this has anything to do with "highest grade" or ↵ "Gold Medals". >> >> And SHERPA Romeo's colour-code is regrettably (but incorrigibly, ↵ despite repeated requests across the years) at odds with the BOAI distinction, ↵ because it arbitrarily restricts "green" to publishers who endorse ↵ the self-archiving of both unrefereed preprints and refereed postprints, and ↵ "blue" for publishers who endorse the self-archiving of regereed ↵ postprints only, but not preprints: Both SHERPA/Romeo "green" and ↵ SHERPA/Romeo "blue" are of course BOAI Green. >> >> Metaphorically, one can say that Green OA is an ecological, self-help ↵ solution, on the part of the research community. Gold OA is a "de ↵ luxe" solution that also depends on the conversion of publishers to ↵ another cost-recovery model. >> >> My own view is that Globally Green OA mandates will first provide 100% ↵ OA and then induce publishers to convert to Gold OA (at a fair price: Fair ↵ Gold). >> >> Stevan Harnad >> >> >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page: >> http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f >> > > -- > Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp> > Chiba University Library, Japan > > -- > To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page: > http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f
[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [prev] [next] [options] [help]
E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org .