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: Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp>
> "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. Thanks. So I will point the colleague who asked me about it. > 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. Except for hybrid model, I don't hate OA journals, but rather I love leading ↵ and forward-thinking ones like PLoS, eLife, PeerJ, etc. However, it looks to me ↵ that, currently, OA journals only bring about a net increase in OA articles, ↵ instead of a transition from TA to OA. Thank you. Best wishes, Shigeki Sugita (2013/04/22 20:14), Stevan Harnad wrote: > On 2013-04-21, at 11:37 PM, Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp ↵ <mailto: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 ↵ <http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/accessdebate/21.html>" 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 <http://j.mp/OAGoldRush>. > > All I can say is that in my own mind it was ↵ <http://www.arl.org/search?cx=004218222077891954038:WMX466275079&cof=FORID:11&ie=UTF-8&q=subversive+proposal&sa=> (and is <http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/265753/>) 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 ↵ <http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july10/harnad/07harnad.html>" 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 ↵ <http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmsctech/399/39903.htm> in mandating green OA, now preferentially mandating > gold OA, with all its perverse consequences ↵ <http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september12/harnad/09harnad.html> 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 ↵ <http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/self-faq/#38-worries> why authors have ↵ been so slow to self-archive, > and they even have a name: "Zeno's Paralysis ↵ <http://j.mp/ZenoParalysis>." > > The cure is known, however, and that is for research institutions and ↵ funders > worldwide to /mandate green OA self-archivin/g. > > And, thankfully, they seem at long last to be getting around to doing it ↵ <http://roarmap.eprints.org>, > 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 ↵ <mailto: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> <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/ ↵ <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 <mailto: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 > > > > > -- > 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 .