Re: Elsevier Gives Authors Green Light for Open Access Self-Archiving Albert Henderson 01 Jun 2004 18:44 UTC
On Mon, 31 May 2004, Joseph J. Esposito wrote (on liblicense) http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/ListArchives/0405/msg00143.html > 1. Does anyone know of any library cancellations of journals because of > the availability of some or all of the articles in such journals in self- > or institutional archives? I do not know of any such cancellations > myself, but I wonder if I am once again embarrassingly underinformed. Someone would first have to do a study that connected cancellations with open access. The problem is that the literature is dominated by open access promoters whose evidence can hardly be said to be objective. What evidence we do have is: [A] the failure of library spending to keep pace with the growth of academic R&D spending and output, leading to massive cuts in library coverage during the last 35 years. [B] the continued promotion of open access by university managers who claim to be offended by rising subscription prices (but not by rising R&D spending, by cuts in library spending, or by rising university profitability). Why would they connect open access with subscription prices if they did not see financial efficiencies promised by more cancellations? The massive number of cancellations and cuts in book acquisitions has never been directly connected by a study to the rising popularity of library photocopying. Nonetheless, the connection was obvious to many testifying to the Librarian of Congress re the 1976 Copyright Law and in later essays. My statistical study of the ratio of interlibrary borrowing to collection size (i.e. access to ownership) may help us to understand the performance of collections as well as the impact of the "access" technology. [The library collection failure quotient. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 26,3:159-170. 2000] By the gold standard of library patrons finding what they want when they want it, university policies have created a bottleneck in the flow of knowledge. The mean ratio of interlibrary borrowing to collection size of 80 major research universities doubled 1974 to 1998 as universities cut their libraries' share of spending by half. The trend in library spending justified by technology has surely had negative impacts on readers, authors, librarians, and publishers. Open access might solve readers' problems as well as relieve libraries of costly interlibrary borrowing. However, authors are generally not interested and publishers are reluctant to provide new technological support for more loss of business. Best wishes, Albert Henderson Pres., Chess Combination Inc. POB 2423 Bridgeport CT 06608-0423 <alh@chessNIC.com> .