Nature: Future of open access

There was an interesting comment on open access in the latest issue of Nature. A previous comment suggested that open access models based on “pay to publish, free to read” hurt science in developing countries. I very much agree with the recent reply by Massimo Sandal which suggests the opposite. Massimo’s reply is based on the argument that scientists read many more articles than they publish and must first read journals before they can publish them. Of course one would have to look at the average price per article read versus the price per article published to do a full economic analysis. For my own research, I’m sure I’ve read thousands of articles, and published a handful of papers. Some have been in pay-to-publish journals, but most were not. OFf the top of my head, my reading costs have exceeded my publication costs by nearly an order of magnitude.

I think this is still an open question, and it would be interesting to see some data on it.

Advertisements

One thought on “Nature: Future of open access

  1. Hi,
    I am the author of the Nature Correspondence you are talking about. I was ego-googling and I found your post!

    I must say the choice of Nature of publishing my Correspondence, while flattering, was perhaps not the best idea. I am not the most qualified person to talk about open access, in fact, and later I discovered that letters of much more qualified persons were refused. See http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2008/07/more-nature-coverage-of-oa-in.html to have an idea.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s