Property Deals Hut

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Friday, 2 September 2005

SPARC | Comments to RCUK

Posted on 12:33 by Unknown
Open Access Working Group Responds to Call for Comments

Research Councils United Kingdom
Draft Position Statement on Research Outputs

This memorandum presents the views of several leading U.S. organizations concerned with the wide, affordable, and effective dissemination of scientific and scholarly research results: the American Association of Law Libraries, the American Library Association, the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries, the Association of College and Research Libraries, the Association of Research Libraries, the Medical Library Association, and SPARC (the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition).

We commend the Research Councils’ decision to establish a policy designed to improve access to the results of publicly funded research, and in particular, applaud the four principles upon which this policy based. We appreciate the RCUK’s decision to actively seek comments from a wide range of stakeholders. Although our organizations are not located in the United Kingdom, we offer our views because the scholarly publishing process and journals markets are highly international – involving authors, subscribers, readers, and research funding from many nations. Additionally, there is substantial cooperation among stakeholders on both sides of the Atlantic in seeking solutions. The views expressed herein are closely aligned with those of SPARC Europe (www.sparceurope.org), a coalition of European libraries based at Oxford University in the U.K., which advocates changes in the scholarly publishing market to better serve the international research community ...
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home
View mobile version

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Ann Okerson on the state of Open Access: Where are we, what still needs to be done?
    One of a series exploring the current state of Open Access ( OA ), the Q&A below is with Ann Okerson , Senior Advisor on Electronic Stra...
  • Interview with Richard Jefferson
    Today I am publishing an interview with Richard Jefferson , founder and CEO of CAMBIA , and advocate for the Biological Open Source Movement...
  • The Open Access Interviews: Dove Medical Press
    Richard Poynder talks to Tim Hill, the Publisher of Dove Medical Press, a small OA publisher based in Auckland, New Zealand Tim ...
  • Michelle Willmers on the state of Open Access: Where are we, what still needs to be done?
    One of a series exploring the current state of Open Access ( OA ), the Q&A below is with Michelle Willmers , Project Manager of the Open...
  • Open Access in Poland: Interview with Bożena Bednarek-Michalska
    Bożena Bednarek-Michalska is an information specialist and deputy director of the Nicolaus Copernicus University Library in Torun , Poland. ...
  • Dominique Babini on the state of Open Access: Where are we, what still needs to be done?
    Dominique Babini This is the ninth Q&A in a series exploring the current state of Open Access ( OA ). On this occasion the questions are...
  • UK House of Commons Select Committee publishes report criticising RCUK’s Open Access Policy
    The House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Committee has today published a critical report on the Open Access ( OA ) polic...
  • The Open Access Interviews: Wellcome Trust’s Robert Kiley
    Over the past year Open Access (OA) publishing has gained considerable mindshare, not just amongst researchers and librarians, but publishe...
  • Open Access in 2009: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    As 2009 draws to a close advocates of Open Access ( OA ) will doubtless be looking back and weighing up the year's events. So what has b...
  • Compact for Open-Access Publishing Equity: Mistaking intent for action?
    The recent launch of the Compact for Open-Access Publishing Equity ( COPE ) has attracted both plaudits (e.g. here and here ) and criticism...

Categories

  • ARC
  • Aspesi
  • Australia
  • Big Deal
  • BioOne
  • BMC
  • BOAI
  • Content Mining
  • COPE
  • CUP
  • Data Mining
  • eBooks
  • Elsevier
  • Free Software
  • FRPAA
  • Gold OA
  • Green OA
  • Harnad
  • India
  • InTech
  • ITHAKA
  • Jayakanth
  • John Wilbanks
  • Journal Prices
  • Library of Congress
  • Mandates
  • Michael Eisen
  • Michael Hart
  • MIT Press
  • Murray-Rust
  • Nature
  • NHMRC
  • NIH
  • OA Advantage
  • OASPA
  • OMICS
  • Open Access
  • Open Society Institute
  • Open Source
  • OSTP
  • Peer Review
  • Peter Suber
  • PLoS
  • PLoS ONE
  • Project Gutenberg
  • Repositories
  • Research
  • Research Works Act
  • Robert Kiley
  • Rockefeller University Press
  • RWA
  • Scholarly Publishing
  • Sciyo
  • Select Committee
  • Serials Crisis
  • SPARC
  • Springer
  • Text Mining
  • UC Press
  • UCL
  • Velterop
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Wiley
  • World Bank

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (31)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (9)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2012 (43)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  July (6)
    • ►  June (4)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (7)
    • ►  January (13)
  • ►  2011 (22)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (5)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  March (4)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2010 (20)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2009 (22)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2008 (14)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2007 (9)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2006 (27)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (7)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ▼  2005 (31)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ▼  September (7)
      • Starting a new bushfire
      • Education Guardian | Open access failings 'cost UK...
      • £1.5 billion lost annually in potential return on ...
      • UK library community responds to the RCUK Proposal
      • WSIS working group comment on RCUK policy
      • SPARC | Comments to RCUK
      • BMJ | Results of publicly funded research should b...
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (6)
  • ►  2004 (2)
    • ►  August (2)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile