On “In Pursuit of Open Science, Open Access is Not Enough,” by Claudio Aspesi and Amy Brand
Claudio Aspesi and Amy Brand warn the academic community about the pitfalls of an uncoordinated approach to open access in their article “In Pursuit of Open Science, Open Access is Not Enough.” The authors suggest that the current open access hype is opening the door for an increased monopoly of digitized academic services and assets by the Top 5 publishers. In particular, Aspesi and Brand highlight the increase of commercial publisher activity in the areas of data analytics, research and service hosting, and portal services, among others. This is of particular concern for the authors as they suggest this may lead to (further) inequitable access to research materials, a lack of diversity in the scholarly publishing world, and a scenario where universities remain beholden to commercial publishers for value-added services that replicate the model–and financial unsustainability–of the current subscription system. They warn:
If it doesn’t invest in alternative solutions, the academic community may find itself beholden to a small number of vendors for managing communities, data flows, research assessment, and learned society communications, all within digital silos that could hinder the growth of cross-disciplinary collaboration and discovery. (576)
To quell this tide Aspesi and Brand suggest that,
A first step to support competition and avoid monopolistic consolidation would be to engage in efforts to model consortial funding for and ownership of these and other non-commercial platforms. (576)
A coordinated approach among academic institutions in developing the infrastructure required for an equitable open scholarship system could bypass the current dangers Aspesi and Brand see on the horizon.
Work cited
Aspesi, Claudio, and Amy Brand. 2020. “In Pursuit of Open Science, Open Access is Not Enough.” Science 368 (6491): 574-77. doi:10.1126/science.aba3763.