The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Making the case for web-based self-archiving

Making the case for web-based self-archiving
Making the case for web-based self-archiving
Canada is not yet maximising the return on its public investment in research. Canadian research councils spend 1.5 billion dollars annually. Canada produces at least 50,000 research journal articles per year, but if it is worth funding and doing at all, research must be not only published, but used, applied and built upon by other researchers (‘citation impact’). The online-age practice of self-archiving has been shown to increase citation impact by a dramatic 50-250%, but so far only 15% of researchers are doing it spontaneously. Citation impact is rewarded by universities (through promotions and salary increases) and by research-funders such as SSHRC (through grant funding and renewal) at a conservative estimate of 100 dollars per citation. If we multiply this by the 85% of Canada's annual journal article output that is not yet self-archived, this translates into an annual loss of 2.125 million dollars in revenue to Canadian researchers for not having done (or delegated) the few extra keystrokes per article it would have taken to self-archive their final drafts. But this impact loss translates into a far bigger one for the Canadian public, if we reckon it as the loss of potential returns on its research investment. As a proportion of the Canada’s yearly 1.5 bn dollars research expenditure (yielding 50,000 articles x 5.9 = 295,000 citations), our conservative estimate would be 50% x 85% x 1.5 bn = 640 mn dollars worth of loss in potential research impact(125,375 potential citations lost). The solution is obvious, and it is the one the RCUK is proposing in the UK: to extend the existing universal 'publish or perish' requirement to 'publish and also self-archive your final draft on your institutional website'. The time to close this 50%-250% research impact gap is already well overdue. This is the historic moment for Canada to set an example for the world, showing how to maximise the return on the public investment in research in the online era.
eprints, self-archiving, citation analysis, research impact, research funding, research assessment, institutional repositories, open access
Harnad, Stevan
442ee520-71a1-4283-8e01-106693487d8b
Harnad, Stevan
442ee520-71a1-4283-8e01-106693487d8b

Harnad, Stevan (2005) Making the case for web-based self-archiving. Research Money, 19 (16).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Canada is not yet maximising the return on its public investment in research. Canadian research councils spend 1.5 billion dollars annually. Canada produces at least 50,000 research journal articles per year, but if it is worth funding and doing at all, research must be not only published, but used, applied and built upon by other researchers (‘citation impact’). The online-age practice of self-archiving has been shown to increase citation impact by a dramatic 50-250%, but so far only 15% of researchers are doing it spontaneously. Citation impact is rewarded by universities (through promotions and salary increases) and by research-funders such as SSHRC (through grant funding and renewal) at a conservative estimate of 100 dollars per citation. If we multiply this by the 85% of Canada's annual journal article output that is not yet self-archived, this translates into an annual loss of 2.125 million dollars in revenue to Canadian researchers for not having done (or delegated) the few extra keystrokes per article it would have taken to self-archive their final drafts. But this impact loss translates into a far bigger one for the Canadian public, if we reckon it as the loss of potential returns on its research investment. As a proportion of the Canada’s yearly 1.5 bn dollars research expenditure (yielding 50,000 articles x 5.9 = 295,000 citations), our conservative estimate would be 50% x 85% x 1.5 bn = 640 mn dollars worth of loss in potential research impact(125,375 potential citations lost). The solution is obvious, and it is the one the RCUK is proposing in the UK: to extend the existing universal 'publish or perish' requirement to 'publish and also self-archive your final draft on your institutional website'. The time to close this 50%-250% research impact gap is already well overdue. This is the historic moment for Canada to set an example for the world, showing how to maximise the return on the public investment in research in the online era.

Text
researchmoney.html - Other
Download (13kB)

More information

Published date: October 2005
Keywords: eprints, self-archiving, citation analysis, research impact, research funding, research assessment, institutional repositories, open access
Organisations: Web & Internet Science

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 261534
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/261534
PURE UUID: b2677e89-96d3-468a-b5d2-75dbec35bb8d
ORCID for Stevan Harnad: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-6153-1129

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 08 Nov 2005
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 02:48

Export record

Contributors

Author: Stevan Harnad ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×