AAP Issues Official Response to NIH Policy
The Association of American Publishers, a chief opponent the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) initial draft policy to make the research it funds freely available within six months, has replied to the NIH’s watered-down final policy. The message: work with us. "Publishers agree with the NIH that science and society-at-large are best served by the widest possible dissemination of published health and medical research," the AAP said. "However, if the NIH’s new public access initiative is to add real value for researchers and patients, it must complement rather than compete with or duplicate the significant advancements and substantial investments that publishers have already made."
Last month, the NIH released a final policy that requested, rather than required, grantees to deposit their papers in PubMed Central with 12 months (see LJ Academic Newswire 2/8/05). The policy succeeded in uniting the two sides of the issue in their dissatisfaction. Proponents of the draft policy feared that 12 months would become the de- facto embargo, and wondered what the final policy would really achieve. Publishers questioned whether the NIH’s request was tantamount to a demand, given that the NIH is a major funder of research. However, just as proponents of the draft proposal have cautiously embraced the new policy- -essentially saying that it is better than no policy– publishers also now seem to be cautiously reaching out to NIH. "We were encouraged that the NIH responded to some concerns of publishers and the research community by incorporating both voluntary choice and flexibility," the AAP said. "As the NIH goes forward with its plan, it must be careful to distinguish a professional and scholarly publishing environment that consistently delivers excellence, integrity, and innovation from one in which "free" access is subsidized through regulation."
Library Journal Academic Newswire (TM), The Publishing Report, March 3, 2005
