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

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...
  • Open Humanities Press to publish OA books
    The Open Humanities Press ( OHP ) announced recently that it is entering the Open Access (OA) book publishing market, launching five new OA ...
  • Open Access: Profile of Eberhard Hilf
    Eberhard (Ebs) Hilf is a true veteran of the Open Access ( OA ) movement. A theoretical physicist based in Oldenburg , Hilf began his advo...
  • 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...
  • Open Access mandates: Judging success
    As Alma Swan has graphically demonstrated ( here and here ), mandates have begun to propagate nicely. It is worth noting that many of the...
  • Open Access given Papal Blessing?
    In his latest encyclical letter Pope Benedict XVI argues that rich countries are asserting their intellectual property with "excessiv...
  • Open Access: Whom would you back?
    Open Access ( OA ) advocates will tell you that there are two roads to OA. Green OA consists of researchers continuing to publis...
  • Open Access: Rethinking Harvard
    Last week the architect of Harvard’s Open Access ( OA ) policy, Stuart Shieber stated : “the Harvard open-access policy could not be, shoul...
  • Open Access: A publisher's perspective
    In an article I posted on 10th March I discussed the issue of whether the Green and Gold roads to Open Access ( OA ) should be vi...
  • Open Access: Who pays? How much?
    Last month the Scholarly Publishing & Academic Resources Coalition ( SPARC ) launched a new guide called Who pays for Open Access? Th...

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