I do not understand Item 2.

I agree with item 4, with one small tweak: use that money line to create institutional, international, networks that, in turn create OA journals that are free to the reader and gratis to the author. In short, pool all that money to create SciELO type organizations without SciELO's fascination for impact factors. In parallel, make sure that authors publishing in these journals will be well considered by their institutions and grant funders. If they are paying for these journals, it should not be very difficult.

Jean-Claude Guédon
Professeur titulaire
Littérature comparée
Université de Montréal

Le lundi 25 janvier 2016 à 07:49 -0500, Stevan Harnad a écrit :
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Danny Kingsley <dak45@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
<Apologies for cross positing>

Hello all,

A new Unlocking Research blog published today “ Could the HEFCE policy be a Trojan Horse for gold OA?” - https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=488 is arguing that changes to the HEFCE policy are moving it from a green policy towards a gold one.

Defending Green Turf

There's no second-guessing human nature. And it's a no-brainer to guess that publishers will do all they can to circumvent the HEFCE/REF immediate-Green policy to steer it toward Gold and Hybrid-Gold.

But here are a few defensive strategies that could help:

1. The authors are the ones who know first when their papers are accepted: Implement a database of dated acceptance letters at the departmental level.

2. Do a REF rank-order exercise (not a "top four" exercise) every year, consisting of an author-ranked list of that year's publications, by order of likelihood of submitting for REF, together with acceptance date and publication date. Store and display that list permanently and publicly in the institutional repository as REF count-down, highlighting what risks being ineligible. (HEFCE will be accommodating; its goals are the right ones, and where temporary flexibility helps guide academic practice and culture toward the goal of Green rather than Fool's Gold, they will provide it.)

3. Do a monthly SCOPUS and WoS search for institutional published papers and follow up on all missing papers (perhaps at the departmental level rather than the library level -- wherever it is more effective).

4. Provide no funding for Gold or Hybrid-Gold.


A teaser:
The HEFCE Policy for open access in the post-2014 Research Excellence Framework kicks in 9 weeks from now. The policy states that, to be eligible for submission to the post-2014 REF, authors’ final peer-reviewed manuscripts of journal articles and conference proceedings with an ISSN must have been deposited in an institutional or subject repository on acceptance for publication. Deposited material should be discoverable, and free to read and download, for anyone with an internet connection.
The goal of the policy is to ensure that publicly funded (by HEFCE) research is publicly available. The means HEFCE have chosen to favour is the green route – by putting the AAM into a repository. This does not involve any payment to the publishers. The timing of the policy – at acceptance – is to give us the best chance of obtaining the author’s accepted manuscript (AAM) before it is deleted, forgotten or lost by the author. <snip>




Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: dak45@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3636-5939

To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page: