European Commission Report Says Open Access At 'Tipping Point'

from the idea-whose-time-has-come dept

Techdirt has been reporting for some time on the growing number of moves towards making academic work freely available to the public — for example this recent major boost from the University of California. But what about the bigger picture? How is open access doing overall? The European Commission has just published a new report trying to answer those questions, which offers an extremely upbeat assessment:

The global shift towards making research findings available free of charge for readers — so-called ‘open access’ — was confirmed today in a study funded by the European Commission. This new research suggests that open access is reaching the tipping point, with around 50% of scientific papers published in 2011 now available for free. This is about twice the level estimated in previous studies, explained by a refined methodology and a wider definition of open access. The study also estimates that more than 40% of scientific peer reviewed articles published worldwide between 2004 and 2011 are now available online in open access form. The study looks at the EU and some neighbouring countries, as well as Brazil, Canada, Japan and United States of America.

Despite that good news, there’s no room for complacency. As we’ve noted before, publishers reluctant to come to terms with open access have started pushing back in various ways. But as the EU report indicates, they are clearly on the wrong side of history now.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or, and on Google+

Filed Under: , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “European Commission Report Says Open Access At 'Tipping Point'”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
out_of_the_blue says:

"explained by ... a wider definition of open access."

The Bush administration “widened” the definition of “manufacturing” to include hamburger flippers at McDonald’s “restaurants”. So with this unknown new definition you can’t actually compare figures: it’s a TRICK.

NOR is there any “tipping point” to information: that refers to, say, physical balance after which a system is propelled by gravity. But in publishing it’s possible that 99% could be trivial crap under open access and the remaining 1% the only worthwhile still with active copyright.

Just to show you what real analysis is like, to contrast with your going gaga over every suggestion that your notions are taking hold.

RonKaminsky (profile) says:

Re: Fraudulent _title_ to your post

Ioannidis’s well-accepted paper, if you actually read it, makes it clear that the reason for the conclusions he came to are not because 80% of research is executed by researchers who are intentionally committing fraud or academic misconduct of any kind. He doesn’t even mention fraud as a significant cause.

Nice way to misrepresent the ramifications of an interesting piece of research.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Brainwashed American is obvious

“”80% of published research is false””


“”80% research is false””


“”research is false””

Do you into words ?

PLoS Med. 2005 August; 2(8): e124.
Published online 2005 August 30. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
PMCID: PMC1182327

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
John P. A. Ioannidis

80% of the CONCLUSIONS are false.
Which in itself is also a conclusion of research.
Which must of course be 80% false or have an 80% chance of being false.
So you are quoting a research conclusion (WRONGLY) that has an 80% probability of being false.

Way to sound smart M8 !
HURRR DURRR , scientific study proves scientific studies are false
Seriously M8 , you taking the piss ?

Geeeze when will accept reality. The research is 99.999% legit. It’s the conclusions that are wrong. So they should be. That is why people argue in science, it is why you have peer review. It is the breeding ground of ideas and data analysis.

Research Data >>>> Analyze Results >>>> Conclusion
Research Data >>>> Analyze Results >>>> Conclusion
Research Data >>>> Analyze Results >>>> Conclusion
Research Data >>>> Analyze Results >>>> Conclusion
Research Data >>>> Analyze Results >>>> Conclusion

………..until the agreed conclusion is proven or probability proven to be greatest.

Also, Global warming…

97% of 12,000 peer-reviewed climate science papers agree warming is man-made.
How many of those researches used different data, different analytical tools etc..

Probability of global warming being man made is the greatest when compared to the probability of any earthly or astronomical reason.

RonKaminsky (profile) says:

Re: Re: Brainwashed American is obvious

It’s the conclusions that are wrong. So they should be.

Well, to be perfectly honest, the paper’s main recommendation is that “scientists should learn more about statistics” — one of the main causes is that research results concentrated on achieving the wrong statistical result (“p value”).

Still, another reason behind the result was bias — and this includes “publication bias” — caused by journal publications accepting less papers with negative or merely replicative results because they are “less sexy” and worse for marketing. The move to (presumably less profit-driven) open access should actually cause this bias to decrease — another, less talked about advantage to open access.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Fraudulent research

Another also… The scientist who proves that global warming is not man made would be a super star.
The goal of a scientist is to prove X or Y.
The stuff of legends is to prove an accepted conclusion of probability as false.

Think Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler who through time proved that the Earth revolves around the sun.

Proving an accepted theory like man-made global warming is false… is the Holy-Grail for climate scientists.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...