Albert Karen M
Talbot Research Library, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19111, USA.
J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 Jul;94(3):253-62.
The paper reviews and analyzes the evolution of the open access (OA) publishing movement and its impact on the traditional scholarly publishing model.
A literature survey and analysis of definitions of OA, problems with the current publishing model, historical developments, funding agency responses, stakeholder viewpoints, and implications for scientific libraries and publishing are performed.
The Internet's transformation of information access has fueled interest in reshaping what many see as a dysfunctional, high-cost system of scholarly publishing. For years, librarians alone advocated for change, until relatively recently when interest in OA and related initiatives spread to the scientific community, governmental groups, funding agencies, publishers, and the general public.
Most stakeholders acknowledge that change in the publishing landscape is inevitable, but heated debate continues over what form this transformation will take. The most frequently discussed remedies for the troubled current system are the "green" road (self-archiving articles published in non-OA journals) and the "gold" road (publishing in OA journals). Both movements will likely intensify, with a multiplicity of models and initiatives coexisting for some time.
本文回顾并分析了开放获取(OA)出版运动的演变及其对传统学术出版模式的影响。
对OA的定义、当前出版模式存在的问题、历史发展、资助机构的反应、利益相关者的观点以及对科学图书馆和出版业的影响进行文献调查和分析。
互联网对信息获取方式的变革激发了人们对重塑学术出版系统的兴趣,许多人认为该系统功能失调且成本高昂。多年来,只有图书馆员倡导变革,直到最近,对OA及相关倡议的兴趣才扩展到科学界、政府团体、资助机构、出版商和普通大众。
大多数利益相关者承认出版格局的变化不可避免,但对于这种转变将采取何种形式仍存在激烈争论。针对当前陷入困境的系统,最常讨论的补救措施是“绿色”道路(在非OA期刊上发表的文章进行自我存档)和“金色”道路(在OA期刊上发表)。这两种趋势可能都会加剧,多种模式和倡议将在一段时间内共存。