3 ms·
I think the most effective solution so far is the NIH public access policy, http://publicaccess.nih.gov/ http://publicaccess.nih.gov/. For all NIH funded work t
by s0rce 13y ago
I think the most effective solution so far is the NIH public access policy, http://publicaccess.nih.gov/ http://publicaccess.nih.gov/. For all NIH funded work the authors have to release the paper. What happens is the Scientists get to publish in high-impact closed-access journals, like Nature/Science and then the pre-press manuscript is made available open access. I'm not sure what would happen to the closed-access journal business model if more federal science funding agencies went this way but I assume everyone would read the free version.
- new299 13y agoI don't know about the NIH specifically but often what happens is journals will charge to make/allow an to be article open access. The NIH will give/include in grants funds for paying journals to make a paper open access (often a few thousand USD). So in some ways the journals don't care, because they're getting paid. Personally, I don't like an author pays model much either, as it doesn't account for scientists working outside their grants (or God forbid independent scientists).