What Do We Want? (We’re Not Sure!) When Do We Want It? (Hard to Say!): Reconciling the Needs of Analysis and Advocacy in Scholarly-Communication Reform
About the Event
Reforming scholarly communication is a tough job, made tougher by factors that include the lack of unanimity among stakeholders as to what reform should look like (or whether it’s needed at all); the wide variety of needs and interests among the system’s stakeholders; the structural complexity of the system itself; the lack of unanimity as to what “open access” means; the heavy weight of tradition in academic practice; and the high level of emotion that inevitably accompanies discussion of these issues. The difficulty and complexity of the reform project suggest that analysis is needed, but the moral and emotional weight of the issues involved naturally lead us in the direction of advocacy instead—and advocacy and analysis are, unfortunately, natural enemies.
In this session we will review salient aspects of the scholarly-communication landscape that make reform particularly challenging, some principles for addressing those challenges, and some possible mechanisms for applying these principles to bridge perspectives, including strategies for including the all-important authors’ voice.
This talk is presented by the BC Research Libraries Group in celebration of Open Access Week 2016.
Rick Anderson, President of the Society for Scholarly Publishing & Associate Dean for Collections and Scholarly Communication at the University of Utah
Note: Coffee and refreshments will be available starting at 9:00am
For more information and to register: http://www.lib.sfu.ca/help/publish/scholarly-publishing/needs-analysis-and-advocacy-scholarly-communication-reform