[Open-access] SPARC Europe has classified the UK's open access policy in a category of it's own

[Mike Taylor]

I like your positive perspective, Mark. But the flat facts of the
matter is, the SPARC statement is just plain wrong. We won't advance
any agenda with misstatements.

-- Mike.


On 13 February 2013 23:53, Mark MacGillivray <mark at cottagelabs.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Ross Mounce <ross.mounce at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I emailed SPARC & Alma about this. Here is Alma's reply (and the message I
>> sent to them). I completely disagree tbh and am at a loss with what to do
>> next. Alma seems to avoid directly addressing the clear point I addressed to
>> her/SPARC:
>
>
> Presumably you are worried that the classification of RCUK in solitary will
> make it look bad. But you have failed to influence the people making the
> classification. So instead, positively re-enforce it.
>
> Blog and tweet etc about how great it is that SPARC have acknowledged the
> leading stance that RCUK has taken, and how proud you are that RCUK are
> doing such great things for open access. If only other orgs across Europe
> could follow such lead, and attempt to join RCUK in SPARCs class-leading
> categorisation...
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> ---------------
>>
>>
>> On 13/02/2013 19:22, "Ross Mounce" <ross.mounce at okfn.org> wrote:
>>
>> Dear SPARC,
>>
>> It has come to my attention that you have recently published an analysis
>> of funder Open Access policies:
>>
>> http://sparceurope.org/analysis-of-funder-open-access-policies-around-the-world/
>>
>> I am perplexed by the classification of RCUK in this scheme. Fred Friend
>> has put it in a class of it's own under the title: "Gold (journal-based)
>> Open Access required"
>>
>> The RCUK policy is summarised here:
>> http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/documents/RCUK%20_Policy_on_Access_to_Research_Outputs.pdf
>> In this document it clearly says "The Research Councils will continue to
>> support a mixed approach to Open Access..."
>>
>> All of the documents available on the site clearly indicate that both
>> green and gold OA are allowed
>> http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/outputs.aspx  if only that gold is
>> preferred. Preferred does NOT equal 'required'.
>>
>> So whilst I appreciate that the RCUK policy has certain interesting
>> features, in Friend's classification scheme it clearly belongs with the
>> other funders in the "Either Green or Gold routes satisfy policy
>> requirements" category.
>>
>> Could this change be made ASAP?
>> I fear RCUK's lone listing may adversely affect opinion of it. Furthermore
>> it undermines the credibility of SPARC if they publish untrue statements
>> such as this.
>>
>>
>> Many thanks,
>>
>>
>> Ross
>>
>> -------------------------
>> On 13/02/2013 19:22, "Alma Swan" <> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Ross
>>
>> Thank you for your message. I am sorry you are perplexed. Our
>> classification, unlike that of Science Europe, is trying to show the
>> differences between policies and the directions in which policymakers appear
>> to wish to travel.
>>
>> RCUK is claiming that it's 'leading the world' and Fred’s classification
>> reflects that. RCUK can't do that and be the same as others that have gone
>> before, and indeed it isn't.
>>
>> This classification acknowledges the ground-breaking move that RCUK has
>> made. The policy requires publication in an RCUK-compliant journal, which it
>> defines as one that provides immediate OA (on payment of an
>> article-processing fee if it requires to be paid). If the journal does not
>> provide OA, then the Green route can be used. No other policy in the world
>> is the same as this and the classification highlights this individual
>> stance.
>>
>> Best  regards,
>>
>> Alma
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>> Alma Swan, BSc, PhD, MBA
>> Director of Advocacy Programmes, SPARC Europe: www.sparceurope.org
>> Director, Key Perspectives Ltd: www.keyperspectives.co.uk
>> Convenor, Enabling Open Scholarship: www.openscholarship.org
>> Director, Directory of Open Access Journals: www.doaj.org
>> +44 (0)1392 879702
>> Skype: almaswan
>> http://bit.ly/aQXNEy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-access mailing list
>> open-access at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-access
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-access
>>
>