Abstract
In this article, we present an overview of the major changes occurring in electronic publishing, with a focus on open access. We shall argue that the notion itself of publication is undergoing a deep transformation, as it is no longer the monopoly of a limited number of specialised companies and institutions, but, through the web, it has become an option available to an infinite number of collective and individual actors.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The book industry has ‘completely changed its face within just a few years when it comes to “professional information” (which includes science, technical and medical, or STM, learned journals, but also legal and other professional information). Today, this wealth of information is predominantly born digital, distributed digitally, and not available anymore by the item – or – volume – in a book store near you’ (Wischenbart, 2010: 22).
Harvard has been a trendsetter in adopting a publication policy requiring that all its members deposit a copy of their new publications at Harvard's institutional repository, with a ‘nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to each of his or her scholarly articles, in any medium, (…) The Dean or the Dean's designate will waive application of the policy for a particular article upon written request by a Faculty member’ (Sparc, 2008).
Palgrave Connect, Cambridge Books Online and Oxford Scholarship Online allow remote institutional access only, while Wiley allows also pay-per-view individual access.
See the Association of American University Presses: http://www.aaupnet.org/resources/collaborative.html.
Federica, the web-learning platform of the University of Naples Federico II, hosts over 300 courses and 5,000 lessons, completely open access, with enhanced interactions to a wide array of selected electronic sources (http://www.federica.unina.it/il-progetto-federica/spot-eng/).
See above, note 8. For an updated review of similar initiatives, see Suber (2010).
See the Sherpa-Romeo's website: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/.
http://www.afsp.msh-paris.fr/publi/rfsp/rfsp.html. In France, Hyper Article en Ligne – Sciences de l’Homme et de la Société (L′archive ouverte HAL-SHS ) is another digital library featuring Arts and Humanites research works: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/.
British Library Press Room, 2 November 2009: Transitions in Scholarly Communications – a portfolio of research projects: http://www.bl.uk/news/2009/pressrelease20091102b.html.
Almost one million items are available, with full-text and open access options, thanks to Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (http://www.ndltd.org/), launched by UNESCO to promote and distribute electronic research material.
2008 JCR Social Science Edition: http://thomsonreuters.com/.
Frank Rhodes, President Emeritus, Cornell University, quoted in Duderstadt (2001: 55).
References
Abelson, A. (2008) ‘Open access publishing: the future of scholarly journal publishing’, MIT Faculty Newsletter 21 (2): 10–11.
APE, Academy Publishing in Europe. (2009) ‘The impact of publishing’, A short conference Report, 20–21 January, Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science.
Borgman, C.L. (2007) Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Calise, M. and De Rosa, R. (2008) ‘E-Research: An introduction to on-line political science sources for beginners (and skeptics)’, International Political Science Review 5: 595–618.
Calise, M. and Lowi, T.J. (2010) Hyperpolitics: An Interactive Dictionary of Political Science Concepts, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, available at www.hyperpolitics.net.
Crow, R. (2006) ‘Publishing cooperatives: An alternative for non-profit publishers’, FirstMonday 11: 9 available at http://firstmonday.org/.
Duderstadt, J.J. (2001) ‘The future of the university in the digital age’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 145: 54–72.
Harley, D., Acord, S., Earl-Novell, S., Lawrence, S. and King, C.J. (2010) Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines, UC Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education, available at http://escholarship.org/uc/cshe_fsc.
Harnad, S. (2008) ‘The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access: An update’, Serial Review 34: 36–40.
Ithaka Report, by Brown, L., Griffths, R. and Rascoff, M. (2007) ‘University Publishing in a Digital Age’, available at http://www.ithaka.org/.
Jankowski, N.W. (ed.) (2009) ‘The Contours and Challenges of e-Research’, E-Research: Transformations in Scholarly Practice, Introduction, New York: Routledge, pp. 3–34.
Kaase, M. (2000) ‘Political science and the internet’, International Political Science Review/Revue internationale de science politique 21 (3): 265–282.
Keating, M. (2009) ‘Putting European political science back together again’, European Political Science Review 1 (2): 297–316.
King, G. (2009) ‘The Changing Evidence Base of Social Science Research’, in G. King, K. Schlozman and N. Nie (eds.) The Future of Political Science: 100 Perspectives, New York: Routledge, available at http://gking.harvard.edu/files/evbase.pdf.
Klingemann, H.-D. (2008) ‘Capacities: Political science in Europe’, West European Politics 31 (1–2): 370–396.
Laponce, J.A. (2004) ‘Minority languages and globalization’, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 10 (1): 15–24.
May, C. (2005) ‘The academy's new electronic order? Open source journals and publishing political science’, European Political Science 4: 14–24.
Meyer, E., and Schroeder, R. (2009) ‘Sifting through the online web of knowledge’, Scientific Publication 3.0, available at interdisciplines.org/liquidpub/papers/4.
Nentwich, M. (2008) ‘Political science on the web: Prospects and challenges’, European Political Science 7: 220–229.
PEER Behavioural Research Report. (2009) ‘Authors and users vis-à-vis journals and repositories baseline report’, available at www.peerproject.eu.
Sparc. (2008) ‘Open doors and open minds: what faculty authors can do to ensure open access to their work through their institution’, Science Commons White Paper, available at http://www.arl.org/sparc/publications/opendoors_v1.shtml.
Sparc. (2010) ‘Public Access to Federally Funded Research: Comments’, available at Sparc website http://www.arl.org/sparc/openaccess/.
Suber, P. (2010) ‘SPARC Open Access Newsletter’, January 2010 issue 141, available at http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/01-02-10.htm.
Thompson, J.B. (2005) Books in the Digital Age, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Waltham, M. (2009) ‘The future of scholarly journals publishing among social science and humanities associations’, HSS Journals Publishing Report, available at www.nhalliance.org/bm~doc/hssreport.pdf.
Ware, M. (2009a) ‘Web 2.0 scholarly communication’, Mark Ware Consulting, April, available at http://mrkwr.wordpress.com/articles/.
Ware, M. (2009b) ‘The STM Report, an overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing’, Mark Ware Consulting, STM publishers, September.
Willinsky, J. (2006) The Access Principle. The Case for Open Access to Research and Scholarship, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wischenbart, R. (2010) ‘Ranking of global publishing industry 2009’, Publishing Research Quarterly 26 (1): 16–23.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Calise, M., de Rosa, R. & Marín, X. Electronic Publishing, Knowledge Sharing and Open Access: A New Environment for Political Science. Eur Polit Sci 9 (Suppl 1), S50–S60 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2010.35
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2010.35