Federal Repositories: Comparative Advantage in Open Access?

      	Previous	 	Contents	 	Next
	Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship
	Fall 2005

	DOI:10.5062/F47942N7



      

    Viewpoints
    Federal Repositories: Comparative Advantage in Open Access?
    
Alvin Hutchinson
  Smithsonian Institution Libraries
  Washington, DC
hutchinsona@si.edu  
    


     

By spending billions each year on scientific research, the U.S. government    is at the same time responsible for the creation of a large volume of peer-reviewed    research articles. Much of this valuable content is published commercially    and available only to subscribers of what are often high-priced periodicals.    However, publications by federal employees as a part of their official duties    are not subject to exclusive copyrights, and several recent initiatives have    attempted to publicize this exemption more widely. With web servers and related    information technology a routine part of government services, exploiting the    public domain status of the federal scientists' publications would be an easy    way to both maximize the impact of agency research and at the same time benefit    scientists everywhere.     

In most cases, papers submitted to peer-reviewed journals by federal scientists   are not subject to copyright transfer to the publisher as would be the case with   a university or other private sector author. Publishers appear to be aware of   this situation. Many manuscript submission forms today allow federal authors to   declare that their paper meets this criterion for being in the public domain and   journal web sites sometimes include a note identifying federally authored papers.
   The recent policy encouraging deposit of publications resulting from NIH-funded    projects into the PubMed Central (PMC) digital repository is helping to focus    attention on the issue of access to federally funded science. Although deposit    in the archive is not mandatory and includes manuscripts from non-federal    authors, it is a good first step in acknowledging provenance over federally    funded science. The basic argument behind the initiative is that since the    research is taxpayer-funded, there is no reason that it should be restricted    or "owned" by anyone. This exemplifies the spirit of the copyright    law provision mentioned above. Although preliminary evidence points to a slow    adoption of PMC deposit by many authors, this may reflect uncertainty by non-federal    employees (NIH grantees, contractors and others) about rights to deposit a    manuscript which has been published commercially. However, this impediment    should not exist where the author is a federal employee. 
   The NIH isn't the only government agency creating or financing scientific    research, however. Many other government bodies create peer-reviewed science    every year, much of it published commercially and restricted to subscribers.    A PubMed or BIOSIS search on the Author Address (AD) field, for example, shows    a large body of peer-reviewed science authored by taxpayer-funded scientists.    Because scientists throughout the world often work in underfunded facilities    where library budgets are strained, it is time for government agencies to    help one another by collecting and making publicly available their peer-reviewed    scientific output in a systematic way. Open access digital repositories from    scientific agencies (e.g. USDA, Dept. of Interior, NOAA) would free up volumes    of research which should be publicly available. Although well-known efforts    at the Los Alamos National Laboratory and other U.S. Dept. of Energy offices    have made progress in freeing up federal research through e-print repositories,    much more can be done.
   By adopting models in place at universities and other nonprofits, a series    of federal science e-print repositories could make a large body of peer-reviewed    works available to the scientific community. Complying with current repository    standards (OAI-PMH, for example) would expose these publications to information    harvesters and web crawlers, making it easier for those who most need the    material to discover and use it. This clearly supports the mission of most    scientific organizations. 
   Preliminary evidence shows that open access to scientific papers increases    citation rates and readership, and while that may be a debatable measurement    of scholarly achievement, it is the wider dissemination of scientific research    that should be the main factor in propelling this change. This is after all    one of the primary goals of scientific research: to build on the work of others    and guide future inquiry. A strong policy from federal agencies that ensures    the availability of the results of their scientific research would contribute    to the momentum already begun by the NIH and others. The absence of restrictions    on making the peer-reviewed manuscripts of U.S. government scientists publicly    available should be exploited given that the technology is no longer a barrier.
   According to Roy Tennant of the California Digital Library, the first consideration    in the creation of a digital library is whether one has the rights to reproduce    the material. With this hurdle removed and many technological barriers falling,    federal government agencies should begin capturing and providing access to    the fruits of their labor. In economics this is known as "comparative    advantage" and it behooves federal agencies (and their libraries) to    exploit this loophole both for their own benefit and that of the scientific    record.
   
   Caveat: I am neither an attorney nor an intellectual property expert so I    would welcome any comments or clarifications on this topic by librarians,    lawyers or publishers. 
   Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are solely the author's and do    not reflect any official position or policy of the Smithsonian Institution.

       

  

  	Previous	 	Contents	 	Next