The Open Access Divide

Xia, Jingfeng

doi:10.3390/publications1030113

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other than several academic respondents mentioning that they observe strict ethical anonymity if any of their research participants could be compromised, they are arguably under fewer constraints in how and with whom they can communicate compared with, for example, stakeholders in government and enforcement. However, despite the rise in open access, albeit its contested merits (Joseph 2013;Xia 2013), journal paywalls and academic exclusivity are often cited as reasons that continue to perpetuate the research-implementation mismatch, which especially hinders information exchange between academics and conservation practitioners (Jarvis et al 2015). The priorities inherent to academic research and publication can also hinder applicable communication and perceived usefulness of contributions from academics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Network analysis of a stakeholder community combatting illegal wildlife trade

Moshier

Steadman

Roberts

2019

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The illegal wildlife trade has emerged as a growing and urgent environmental issue. Stakeholders involved in the efforts to curb wildlife trafficking include nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), academia, and state government and enforcement bodies. The extent to which these stakeholders work and communicate among each other is fundamental to effectively combatting illicit trade. Using the United Kingdom as a case study, we used a social network analysis and semistructured interviews of stakeholders to assess communication relationships in the counter wildlife trafficking community. The NGOs consistently occupied 4 of the 5 most central positions in the generated networks, whereas academic institutions routinely occupied 4 of the 5 most peripheral positions. However, NGOs were the least diverse in their communication practices compared with the other stakeholder groups. Stakeholders identified personal relationships as the most important aspect of functioning communication. Participant insights also showed that stakeholder‐specific variables (e.g., ethical and confidentiality concerns), competition, and fundraising can have a confounding effect on intercommunication. Evaluating communication networks and intrastakeholder communication trends is essential to creating cohesive, productive, and efficient responses to the challenges of combatting illegal wildlife trade. Article impact statement: Communication among those combatting illegal wildlife trade is confounded by stakeholder variables (ethics, confidentiality), competition, and fundraising.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Network analysis of a stakeholder community combatting illegal wildlife trade

Moshier

Steadman

Roberts

2019

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, green OA requires that authors lodge (in most cases) "post-print" versions of their works in a repository. A post-print is a version of the manuscript after peer-review and revision but before formatting and proofreading by the publisher [8] (p. 129). Post-prints are available to the public without payment through a repository, sometimes after an embargo period.…”

Section: The Scholarly Communication Crisis and Trends In Open Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…What makes it possible is the internet and the consent of the author or copyright-holder." In conjunction with rapid developments in communications technologies [4], the OA movement took shape primarily in North American and European countries in response to protracted publishing timelines and inflated subscription prices [8] (p. 125). In 2002, the Budapest Open Access Initiative first enunciated a vision of an alternate open access future for scholarly publishing [4,7].…”

Section: The Scholarly Communication Crisis and Trends In Open Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Martin Paul Eve comments, "the humanities still trail behind the sciences in open publishing" [6] (p. 1). Moreover, beyond disciplinary divergences, there exists an "open access divide" between academics who advocate the free sharing of research outputs and pedagogical materials, and those who resist it for a variety of reasons [8]. While the perspectives of open access advocates have been well-known since the inception of the movement [7], attitudes and understandings of OA publishing as held by scholars from different disciplinary, cultural, and experiential backgrounds are not as apparent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the perspectives of open access advocates have been well-known since the inception of the movement [7], attitudes and understandings of OA publishing as held by scholars from different disciplinary, cultural, and experiential backgrounds are not as apparent. Indeed, Jingfeng Xia argues that "few studies have made an effort to focus upon OA concepts and practices as understood by scholars, which demonstrates a critical research need that requires further attention" [8] (p. 119). Such studies would attempt to understand "how individual scholars perceive and participate in OA initiatives, which are influenced by their disciplinary norms, thematic research concentrations, roles in the OA undertaking, and cultural traditions and regional backgrounds" [8] (p. 113).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Landscapes of Research: Perceptions of Open Access (OA) Publishing in the Arts and Humanities

Gross

Ryan

2015

Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:It is widely known now that scholarly communication is in crisis, resting on an academic publishing model that is unsustainable. One response to this crisis has been the emergence of Open Access (OA) publishing, bringing scholarly literature out from behind a paywall and making it freely available to anyone online. Many research and academic libraries are facilitating the change to OA by establishing institutional repositories, supporting OA policies, and hosting OA journals. In addition, research funding bodies, such as the Australian Research Council (ARC), are mandating that all published grant research outputs be made available in OA, unless legal and contractual obligations prevent this. Despite these broader changes, not all scholars are aware of the new publishing environment. In particular, the rate of adoption of OA models in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) has historically been lower than Science, Technology and Medicine (STM) disciplines. Nevertheless, some local and international OA exemplars exist in HSS. At Edith Cowan University in Perth, Western Australia, the faculty-administered environmental humanities journal, Landscapes, was migrated to the institutional open access repository in 2013. Subsequently, researchers in the Faculty of Education and Arts were surveyed regarding their knowledge, understandings, and perceptions of OA publishing. The survey was also designed to elicit the barriers to OA publishing perceived or experienced by HSS researchers. This article will present the findings of our small faculty-based OA survey, with particular attention to HSS academics (and within this OPEN ACCESSPublications 2015, 3 66 subject group, particular attention to the arts and humanities), their perceptions of OA, and the impediments they encounter. We argue that OA publishing will continue to transform scholarship within the arts and humanities, especially through the role of institutional repositories. The "library-as-publisher" role offers the potential to transform academic and university-specific publishing activities. However, the ongoing training of university researchers and personnel is required to bring into balance their understandings of OA publisher and the demands of the broader Australian and international research environment.

show abstract

Promoting Open Scholarship in Africa: Benefits and Best Library Practices

Raju¹,

Adam²,

Powell³

2015

lib

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge, as a prerequisite for development, is contingent on information. The main value of information is in its ability to be used, reused, and shared. Open access (OA) allows for the easy dissemination and preservation of information by providing all scholarly communication and knowledge at no cost to the end user. In the rapidly expanding, global knowledge-based economy, Africa's steady progress from the peripheral to the epicenter of knowledge production is not to be ignored, not least because of its reliance on OA. Such access environments and institutional repositories throughout the continent are playing significant roles in maximizing the impact of research output. This paper reveals that OA content is more citable, not simply because of the quality of the output, but instead of the advantage that OA brings in maximizing accessibility and increased citation. It goes on to show that OA will enhance the research community's existing system for evaluating and rewarding research productivity. Ultimately, OA has the ability to elevate (South) Africa, its universities and institutions, to the status of knowledge producers rather than mere knowledge consumers.

show abstract

The Open Access Divide

Cited by 3 publications

References 85 publications

Network analysis of a stakeholder community combatting illegal wildlife trade

Network analysis of a stakeholder community combatting illegal wildlife trade

Landscapes of Research: Perceptions of Open Access (OA) Publishing in the Arts and Humanities

Promoting Open Scholarship in Africa: Benefits and Best Library Practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About