Budapest Open Access Initiative      

Budapest Open Access Initiative: BOAI Forum Archive

[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [options] [help]

boaiforum messages

[BOAI] word origin of "green" and "gold"

From: Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 12:59:28 +0900


Threading:      • This Message
             [BOAI] Origin of "green" and "gold" OA from harnad AT ecs.soton.ac.uk
             [BOAI] Re: word origin of "green" and "gold" from jean.claude.guedon AT umontreal.ca
             [BOAI] Re: Origin of "green" and "gold" OA from ssugita AT chiba-u.jp
             [BOAI] Re: Origin of "green" and "gold" OA -- and of "fair" and "fool's" gold from harnad AT ecs.soton.ac.uk
             [BOAI] Re: Origin of "green" and "gold" OA -- and of "fair" and "fool's" gold from ssugita AT chiba-u.jp

Dear BOAI 2002 vanguards,

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")


Best wishes,
-- 
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] Origin of "green" and "gold" OA

From: Stevan Harnad <harnad AT ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:32:24 -0400


Threading: [BOAI] word origin of "green" and "gold" from ssugita AT chiba-u.jp
      • This Message


On 2013-04-18, at 11:59 PM, Shigeki Sugita <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 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: First, scholars need the tools and assistance 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, 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: 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. Serials Review 30.  
Shorter version: The green and the gold roads to Open Access. 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

ATTACHMENT: message.html!

-- To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page: http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f

[BOAI] Re: word origin of "green" and "gold"

From: Jean-Claude =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Gu=E9don?= <jean.claude.guedon AT umontreal.ca>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 08:50:16 -0400


Threading: [BOAI] word origin of "green" and "gold" from ssugita AT chiba-u.jp
      • This Message



From memory:

1. The terms Green and Gold appeared shortly after BOAI.

2. Stevan Harnad invented these terms.

3. I should let Stevan clarify this, but, again from memory, Green
origin ally meant self-archiving, and Gold meant journals offering open
access to their content.

Then allkinds of things happened that did not simplify matters... :-) 

Jean-Claude Guédon

Le vendredi 19 avril 2013 à 12:59 +0900, Shigeki Sugita a écrit :

> Dear BOAI 2002 vanguards,
> 
> 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")
> 
> 
> Best wishes,


-- 



Jean-Claude Guédon
Professeur titulaire
Littérature comparée
Université de Montréal


ATTACHMENT: message.html!

-- To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page: http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f

[BOAI] Re: Origin of "green" and "gold" OA

From: Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:37:54 +0900


Threading: [BOAI] word origin of "green" and "gold" from ssugita AT chiba-u.jp
      • This Message

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] Re: Origin of "green" and "gold" OA -- and of "fair" and "fool's" gold

From: Stevan Harnad <harnad AT ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 07:14:07 -0400


Threading: [BOAI] word origin of "green" and "gold" from ssugita AT chiba-u.jp
      • This Message


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 never

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


ATTACHMENT: message.html!

-- To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page: http://www.soros.org/openaccess/forum.shtml?f

[BOAI] Re: Origin of "green" and "gold" OA -- and of "fair" and "fool's" gold

From: Shigeki Sugita <ssugita AT chiba-u.jp>
Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 16:54:35 +0900


Threading: [BOAI] word origin of "green" and "gold" from ssugita AT chiba-u.jp
      • This Message

> "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 never
>
> 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] [options] [help]

 E-mail:  openaccess@soros.org .