Downloads provided by UsageCounts
This is an article I wrote for DG Research, Science and Innovation of the European Commission as member of RISE (Research Innovation and Science policy Experts). In this text, I argue that articles written and peer-reviewed by scholars should not be merchandises to trade, but knowledge commons to share with everyone and to preserve for future generations. Today, electronic publishing allows this change of paradigm, but most scientific publishers prefer to keep the business model of printing which benefits them. I explain how the 'gold open access' model (where publishers charge fees to publish in open access) is inadequate for researchers and should be replaced by the 'diamond open access' model, where no fees are required since researchers use the publishing platforms that funding agencies offer them as research infrastructures. I then come up with the following recommendations: - researchers should own the journals they create, for which they produce and peer-review the articles, - researchers need publicly-owned and open source publishing platforms to publish their peer-reviewed articles, - open peer-reviewing should be developed to improve the reproducibility of published results. Researchers should get control of electronic publishing as soon as possible. In the meantime, the 'green open access' model (where one version of a published article is available for free from a repository) remains the best solution to guarantee a smooth transition towards open access for all scholarly publications.
publishing, peer-reviewing, open access, open science, knowledge commons
publishing, peer-reviewing, open access, open science, knowledge commons
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 60 | |
| downloads | 54 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts