[open-science] House of Lords (UK) Open Access - submissions invited

[Paola Di Maio]

Thank you for the heads up Peter and all-

As some of you may know, I have carried out extensive research
The first 'systematic enquiry' of its kind in this research field

showing that the UK is not always as cool as its propagandists like to
portray it :-)
in fact right the opposite, conservative, reactionary publishing
policies can hide behind
a false facade of openness

Disclaimer: I am an independent researcher and do not benefit
financially nor politically from the support of any organisation
including the OKFn :-)

Here some links I ll submit as evidence, FYI

Let me know if you have any questions

cheers

PDM




2012- Open Access UK: Challenges, Reality Check and Recommendations
Paola Di Maio
  DR2012-49.pdf — PDF document, 168 kB (172332 bytes)
http://digital-research.oerc.ox.ac.uk/papers/open-access-uk-challenges-reality-check-and-recommendations/view

2012 - Automating Online Auditing of Open Access Resources With a Web Service
Paola Di Maio DR2012-48.pdf — PDF document, 218 kB (223699 bytes)
http://digital-research.oerc.ox.ac.uk/papers/automating-online-auditing-of-open-access-resources-with-a-web-service/view

2010 - Open Access Policies From Chaos to Functional Regulatory
Interventions (working document)
http://www.academia.edu/786683/Open_Access_Policies_From_Chaos_to_Functional_Regulatory_Interventions

2011 - A Systemic Review of Open Access in Systems Engineering Research
http://journals.isss.org/index.php/proceedings55th/article/view/1726


2012- Open Science in 90 seconds   Paola Di Maio· (video for OpenAire)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCRTKvTrI1Y


On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Mike Taylor <mike at indexdata.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have sent my own response, and posted it here for anyone who's
>> interested:
>>
>> http://svpow.com/2013/01/12/my-submission-to-the-house-of-lords-science-and-technology-committee/
>>
>
> This is an outstanding document and says 80% of what I would have said.
>
> Rather than repeat it I suggest we create a response from the
> researchers/readers point of view stressing those not employed in UK
> universities (i.e. mainly the scholarly poor). I think we can reasonably
> argue that Open public scientific research is a massive public good and that
> by opening our research we are contributing to the welfare and prosperity of
> those outside Britain as well as in it. I suspect that this will have
> particular appeal to the Lords. To that extent I think we could reasonably
> take the approach:
> * OKF is a global movement (with UK origins)
> * we have collected significant experience and anecdotal evidence through
> our activities
> * this is almost certainly a very small proportion of the actual desire for
> scholarly information
> * in this area Britain's actions are a major beacon for the rest of the
> world.
>
> P.
>
>
>
>
>
>> If anything I said in there is at all useful towards a group response,
>> please feel free to use it.
>>
>> -- Mike.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11 January 2013 12:10, Mike Taylor <mike at indexdata.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> By all means, yes. But what's CRUCIAL is that we send our individual
>>> responses as soon as possible, and don't let that get held up or
>>> derailed by a potentially long-winded process of putting together one
>>> we can all sign up to.
>>>
>>> -- Mike.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11 January 2013 11:20, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> > Should we try to get a response together
>>> >
>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> > From: Alma Swan <a.swan at talk21.com>
>>> > Date: Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 8:48 AM
>>> > Subject: [GOAL] Re: [SCHOLCOMM] New Year's challenge for repository
>>> > developers and managers: awesome cross-search
>>> > To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal at eprints.org>,
>>> > SPARC
>>> > Open Access Forum <SPARC-OAForum at arl.org>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > The UK's House of Lords (upper chamber of Parliament) Science &
>>> > Technology
>>> > Committee is conducting an enquiry into Open Access. Written
>>> > submissions are
>>> > welcome. Individuals and organisations are invited to give their views
>>> > on
>>> > the actions taken by Government and RCUK following publication of the
>>> > Finch
>>> > report.
>>> >
>>> > The HoL has issued guidance
>>> >
>>> > <http://www.openscholarship.org/jcms/c_7334/hol-guidance-notes-open-access-enquiry>
>>> > on how to make written submissions.
>>> >
>>> > In particular, there are four issues highlighted by the committee:
>>> >
>>> > support for universities in the form of funds to cover article
>>> > processing
>>> > charges, and the response of universities and HEIs to these efforts
>>> > embargo periods for articles published under the Green model
>>> > engagement with publishers, universities, learned societies and other
>>> > stakeholders in the development of research council Open Access
>>> > policies and
>>> > guidance
>>> > challenges and concerns raised by the scientific and publishing
>>> > communities,
>>> > and how these have been addressed
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > The deadline is 18th January.
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > GOAL mailing list
>>> > GOAL at eprints.org
>>> > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Peter Murray-Rust
>>> > Reader in Molecular Informatics
>>> > Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
>>> > University of Cambridge
>>> > CB2 1EW, UK
>>> > +44-1223-763069
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > open-science mailing list
>>> > open-science at lists.okfn.org
>>> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>>> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>