Free access to science speeds its use; would the same happen with government data?
Though we haven’t made much reference to the issue here (previously), there is a huge debate going on in the scientific world about paid vs open access to scientific publications, and particularly papers. In a press release at Eurekalert, a European scientific resource for journalists and the public (OK, often they’re the same), a new release finds that
Free access to science speeds its use: “A longitudinal bibliometric analysis of citations to papers published in the PNAS between June 8, 2004 and December 20, 2004 reveals that the open-access articles were more immediately recognized and cited by peers.”
Now, in some ways this isn’t surprising. Articles that are immediately available to anyone with an internet connection anywhere in the world are more likely to be picked up and referenced than something which is either in print form only, or which can only be accessed through a paid-for website (or both). I know from my own experience that searching a site like PubMed can be very frustrating: you find lots of links to papers, but then run into the ground because the full text – which you want – is behind a paywall.
What relevance though does this have to the Free Our Data campaign? First, it’s certainly interesting that data which is freely available gets more widely used – even in a community as prolific about linking and referencing as science. That seems to us to bolster the argument in favour of making the data collected by government agencies available to citizens and businesses in the UK at no cost.
Secondly, we think the argument is more easily won in the Free Our Data case. Scientific publishers aren’t taxpayer-supported; the argument about where the revenue stream in a “free scientific publication” world is becomes complicated. Much simpler in the Freed Data world: the taxpayer supports the collection of the data; taxpayers then get to use the data, which creates more business, which generates more taxes, in a virtuous circle.
And we’re still waiting for the Treasury or someone to explain to use what the marginal social cost of raising funds actually means.
(Via EurekAlert! – Breaking News.)
- The following posts may be related...(the database guesses):
- Government hits free data decision into the long grass (23 April 2009; score: 20.31%)
- Free Our Data: sessions this Thursday and Saturday, in Manchester and London (14 March 2007; score: 17.24%)
- Trading Funds review: terms of reference (25 June 2008; score: 16.83%)
- UEA CRU climate data is a free data issue too (22 December 2009; score: 16.47%)
- Geology is free (well, will be) (9 March 2007; score: 14.76%)
May 18th, 2006 at 10:31 pm
All such information should be made available to everyone, and not just a privileged elite.
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:23 pm
I think there is something in the scientific mind that welcomes an open approach. Technology could be said to breed geeks, but at least they are open to new and better ways of doing things.
An interesting example of this thesis can be seen on Ed Parson’s blog currently. For those who haven’t read other postings on this blog, Ed is Chief Technology Officer at Ordnance Survey. In one of his most recent postings on his personal blog ( http://www.edparsons.com/?p=234 ) he has been musing on an “open” approach to OS data.
Firstly, this is reassuring – in that at least someone in OS does have his eyes on the rest of the world. However it leapfrogs the objectives of this campaign. Ed argues that users will find and exploit the data if given access. Supporters of this campaign would welcome that, I’m sure, but it cuts out a beneficial step. The more likely route forward is that other GI specialists should exploit OS data in ways that OS hasn’t thought of, or doesn’t want to tackle. It’s in the interests of the wider set of potential users to let the GI geeks get their hands on OS data. That way the combination of technical specialist & commercial entrepreneur can come together.
It’s all a matter of hearts and minds though. Lets hope that Ed’s open-mindedness can reach those darker parts of OS that see any intrusion into their data as tantamount to theft!
July 13th, 2006 at 9:52 am
Read your article today who will address the postcode mess and it drew my thoughts to a flier i recieved yesterday from the royal mail redirection service inside was a flier from sky to this adress titled home mover.
the only reason they could have assumed that i was moving on is the fact that my partner and i have very painfully split up with her leaving home and redirecting her mail to her new adress.
this has upset me greatly i do not need this at this time is this legal it surely cant be ethical that royal mail can sell what is personal data from one of its agencies that must be dealing with some people going through one of the most difficult periods in their lives