Well, David, if it's evidence you want, you could provide
it?
You write that if you were still a publisher, you would
migrate
to OA because you see it has a better long-term future.
Take the
challenge. Become a publisher (again) and show all the
skeptics!
Joe Esposito
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Prosser" <david.prosser bodley.ox.ac.uk>
To: <liblicense-llists.yale.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 4:31 PM
Subject: RE: Subscription to Open Access Transition
> Joe
>
> Well, in this case there ain't no global warming -
yet! We
> have a proposed mechanism (as the proportion of free
material
> approaches 100% there will be a fall in subscriptions)
but to
> date the evidence - unfortunately only in one subject
area -
> shows that hasn't happened. Thoughtful people with
experience
> in the field might find that odd, but it's true and so
I'm
> afraid people will continue to talk about it. They
will also
> point out that the melting subscriptions we have seen
over the
> past two decades have had nothing at all to do with
> self-archiving.
>
> Now, does that mean that sensible publishers shouldn't
worry?
> No, of course not. As you say, they have a
responsibility to
> model potential futures and changes in the publishing
> environment and to take action based on what they see
is the
> most likely direction of change. If I were still a
publisher I
> would be looking to move my journals to open access as
soon as
> I could as I think the open access business models
offer a
> stronger long-term future than subscription models.
But I
> would hope that I would base my decisions on evidence
as well
> as experience.
>
> David
|