Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2003;327:54 (5 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7405.54-a
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORWith reference to the editorial by Delamothe et al,1 last year my library paid €2.8m (£1.9m; $3.2m) for subscriptions to refereed journals. We could have saved this amount in a completely open access world, as all articles would be freely available on the internet.
Also, we had to pay for the refereeing, editing, and posting on the internet of the articles that my university published. It concerned 1413 articles. To the amount of €500 each, this makes €706 500. So for me there is no debate about the question in which world scholarly communication is cheaper. Moreover, the ultimate result is far more accessible in the open access world than in the subscription world.
The point is, however: how do we get from A to B? We cannot do away with
the old journals before we have the new ones in place, with their impact
factors and brands.
Leo J M Waaijers, university librarian
PO Box 9100, 6700 HA Wageningen, Netherlands leo.waaijers@wur.nl