Anthropology News• February 2008

�

i N f o C u S

Advances in information technology enable open access publication models that grant anyone connected to the internet access to published work. Along with other scholarly communities, AAA faces difficult choices on if and how to pursue a transition to open access publications. This question involves consider-ations of the viability of journal finances, the quality of scholarship accessed by various publics, and AAA’s commitments to its mission and ethics statements. The articles in this series, co-edited by Jason Cross and Stacy Lathrop, examine these high-stakes choices.

o P e N a C C e S S

Open Access and AAAJason Cross Duke u

A AA President SethaLow and President-ElectVirginiaDomin-guez encourage a re-

thinkingofwhatwewantAAAtobefiveand15yearsfromnow.Astheconditionsofscholarshipanditspublicrelevancechange,wearecalledtoreconsidertherolesand

functions ofassociationslikeAAAandits sections.Inthisspirit,the contrib-utors to thisIn Focus ad-dress openaccess (OA)publ ishingand knowl-

edge exchange in relation to themission, values and disciplinaryinterestsofAAA.

In our recent past, changesin the world of publishing andtheir relationtoAAAgovernanceand finances have been a sourceof uncertainty and internal ten-sion. These same changes, how-ever, might offer the conditionsfor reorganizing the exchange ofanthropological knowledge inways that maintain (or improveon)thequalityofscholarlyreviewwhile expanding the access andparticipationofthoseinvestedinthestakesofthatknowledge.

Wiley-Blackwell now hasa five-year contract to manageAnthroSource and AAA journaldistribution,takingonanyfinan-cial risks, and granting our sec-tions a breath of fresh air. Thedeal also presents AAA with animportant opportunity to care-fullyconsiderOAinaninformed,deliberatemanner—withoutfearsofhastydecisions.

What is oa?OA publishing refers to onlineposting of material accessible byanyone connected to the inter-net—that is, not requiring a sub-

scription,membershiporpaymentfor viewing. Any OA model caninclude a print-on-demand fea-ture,providinghardcopiesfortherelatively fewwhodemand thematafee.Easeofaccessiskey.Oth-erwise,unlessresearcherswhoarenotsubscribedtoAnthroSource(bethey students, academics, schoolteachers,activists,policymakersorinterested citizens) have a strongenoughdesiretoreadaAAAjour-nalarticleandtheabilitytopayforit,ormaketheefforttoaccessitbyconnectingtoaninstitutionwithasubscription,theywillmoveontoanOAinformationsource—andUSanthropologygivesupanop-portunitytocontributetothere-searchofanon-AAA-memberwhoisnotconnected toa subscribinginstitution.

In a stronger vision of OA,articles and other online con-tent is licensed under a CreativeCommons license. The researchcanthenbeusedforvariouspublicinterestpurposeswithoutneedingtoseekpermission,solongasthesourceandauthorarecited.

ManyAAAmembersarebegin-ningtoseehowOApracticescanadvance our mission and eth-ics.Still,theanticipatedtrade-offsanduncertaintiesofanyOAtran-sition makes caution (and evenassertive hesitation) reasonable.We will need careful research onbusinessmodelstoassesswhetherand how to make an OA transi-tion. The potential value of OAtoourscholarshipanditsrole intheworld,though,shouldatleastmerit consideration of whetherornotOA is aprioritydeservingcareful,evencreative,attention.

Political economy of KnowledgeAs anthropologists, we like tothinkabout things incontext.Solet’s also put our own situationwithinabroaderpoliticaleconom-iccontext:Newtechnologieshavemade many knowledge-intensive

activitieslessdependentonphysi-cal capital, and therefore moreopen to nonexclusive models ofproductionanddistribution.Opensourcesoftware,onlinecommuni-ties, even material-heavy realmslike biotech and manufacturingarebeing transformedbyproduc-tion and exchange practices thatarelessdependentonexclusivity.

OA publishing is part of thisrevolutionarytransformation.Theaccess-expanding effects of thischange, however, are in trouble.Theyrelyonincreasedconnectivi-tythatisindangerofbeingdamp-ened and controlled by majorplayersinvariousindustries.FromWTO negotiations to municipalbroadband, these companies uselegislation (eg, intellectual prop-erty)andconsolidationtosustainexclusivity-dependent businesspractices,impedingtheriseofless(ornon)exclusivemodels.

Activists in the Access toKnowledge (a2k) campaign (link-ing movements from healthcareand software to public educationand science) claim that the waysthesestrugglesplayoutwilldeter-minetheinstitutionalarchitectureoftheknowledgeeconomyforsev-eraldecadestocome.OurdecisionsonOAanthropologywillalsoalignour long-term professional inter-ests with one or the other gov-erning values for the knowledgeeconomy—exclusivity-dependentcommodificationorOA.

I am not suggesting that wedetermineourpublishingmodelsbased on a2k politics. However,understanding this contexthelpsexplainwhyAAAdeliberationsonOAarewatchedcloselybyknowl-edge industries and a2k activists.It also makes us aware of thefuture political context in whichwe participate as we determinewhere our professional interestsandvaluesleadus.

let’s Deliberate oaSerious consideration of OA op-tions will require attention andresources. Therefore, we mightfirstdeterminewhetherornotwe

thinkthatOAdeservestobeapri-ority.BydeliberatingOAoptionsin relation to our stated missionand ethics, we can decide if OAobjectivesshouldhelpguideAAAdecisions,orifOAshouldmerelybeavaluethatsupplementsdeci-sionmakingbutdoesnotplayascentralaroleasotherpriorities.

Among our professional inter-ests,weneedtoconsiderourpres-enceandrelevanceinachangingpublic sphere. Researchers anddiverse publics are accessing OAinformationmoreoften.OAarti-cles get cited more, and researchis increasingly done away fromuniversity library portals, chan-neling investigators toward OAknowledge.Here,weshouldcon-sider our stated mission to dis-seminate anthropological knowl-edge(andourownpersonalinter-ests in doing so), as well as thequality of social science researchrelied on by academic and non-academic publics doing onlineresearch.ExpandingcallsforAAAto promote public, engaged andpracticing anthropology shouldalso lead us to think about pub-lic interest values in going OA.Additionally, commitment to aWorld Anthropologies initiativeand other attempts to “decolo-nize” knowledge should includereexamination of publicationmodels that sustain asymmetriesof access to knowledge and par-ticipation in knowledge produc-tionandexchange.

Ethical analysis of our knowl-edgeexchangemodelsshouldalsobegreatlyaffectedbythefeasibil-ity of OA. If we were no longertoneed an exclusivity-dependentbusinessmodelforqualityreviewand dissemination of research,would we be consistent with ourethics in maintaining a systempremised on restricting access?Are informants who often giveresearchers“openaccess”totheirknowledge owed access them-selves,especiallyiftheirparticipa-tion in research was under someimpressionofcontributingtogen-eralknowledgeorunderstanding?

Deliberationsaboutwhetherornot OA should even be a pri-ority would do well to include

C o M M e N T a R yJason Cross

February 2008 • Anthropology News

7

i N f o C u S

concreteconsiderationofpossibleOA business models, transitionoptions, lessons from other OAprojects, andassessmentsofhowcrucial exclusive access to AAAjournals and AN is in attractingand maintaining AAA members.To that end, a short-term AAAOA Task Force (6-month term)could research business modelsand present a report on optionsand probable impacts to theCommitteeontheFutureofPrintandElectronicPublishingandtheAAAExecutiveBoard.Thegeneralfindingsofthisreportcouldthenbepresentedpubliclyatanexecu-tive board-sponsored public poli-cyforumatthenextAAAAnnualMeeting, where we could hostexperts from several publishingentitiesandexpertsonOApolicy.Sections, journalsandotherAAAcommunitiescandiscussOAand

express their general positionsthroughtheirAAArepresentation.Thesestepscanhelpusdeterminewhether OA is a AAA priority.Reading through mission, ethicsand planning statements on theAAAwebsite, youwill likely findthat many objectives would beadvanced by an OA anthropol-ogy.Thequestion formostofusthen will turn on the details ofOA alternatives and their impactonourfinancesandotherpriori-ties.Howweapproachthatassess-ment, however, will depend onour knowledge and the framingconcerns, concepts and assump-tions we bring to the analysis.ThecontributionstothisInFocusseriesinviteustorethinkourpos-sible OA futures and their com-patibility with AAA and its part-nerships.Solet’sgetinformedandcreative.

Jason Cross is a PhD candidate in cul-tural anthropology at Duke University and a member of the AAA Long-Range Planning Committee. He is also current-

ly completing a JD at Duke Law School, specializing in intellectual property and access to knowledge.

What do you think?

This In Focus series will be accessible through the new AAA website at www.aaanet.org, launched in early February. Recognizing that open access is of great interest to AAA members and larger anthropologi-cal communities, www.aaanet.org will now feature a blog where members and non-members alike can offer both their reactions to the In Focus series and their general thoughts on the open access issue.

We look forward to hearing from you!

Lee D Baker Duke u

T he most coveted realestate on any Englishlanguagewebsiteistheupper left hand cor-

ner.On theAAA site,our logo—with its prominent “Founded in1902”—gracesthatspot.Thefirsttab,rightbelowthelogo,isasec-tioncalled“AboutAAA.”Clickit,andyouarepresentedinboldfacetypewiththeMissionandGoalsof

this storiedo r g a n i z a -tion datingback over acentury.

As I wasp repar ingto writethis shortessay onthevalueofopen access,

I thought that I would use ourmission statement for a littlerhetorical purchase to help memake a persuasive argument thatwearenotinthebusinessofsellinganthropological knowledge, butwechoosetoassociateinordertodisseminatethisknowledgetosolvehumanproblems.Aspostedonourwebsite,thestatementreads:

Section 1. The purposes of theAssociation shall be to advanceanthropology as the science thatstudies humankind in all itsaspects,througharcheological,bio-logical,ethnological,andlinguisticresearch;andtofurthertheprofes-sionalinterestsofAmericananthro-pologists; including thedissemina-tion of anthropological knowledgeand its use to solve human prob-lems.

Section 2. To advance the scienceof anthropology, the Associationshall:Fosterandsupportthedevel-opment of special anthropologicalsocieties. . . Publish and promotethe publication of anthropologicalmonographsandjournals...

Asafootnoteonthewebpageexplicitlystates,thisstatementis“takenfrom”theoriginalconsti-tution, as published in American Anthropologist (5[2] in 1903).The statement,however,didnotsoundthewayWJMcGee,FranzBoas, and George Dorsey wouldhave penned it over a centuryago. It was too explicitly fourfield, too concerned with pro-fessionalization, and the gen-der neutral “humankind” was adead give away that it was nottaken verbatim from the organi-

zation’soriginalconstitution.So,Ichecked.

Asafacultymemberatamajorresearch university, I can get the1903volumeofAAonlinethroughmylibrary’shomepage,andasamember of AAA I can access itonline through AnthroSource. I

simply input the volume, year,andissue.Instantaneously,Ihavefullaccess toallof thatvolume’scontent.Itiseasyaccess,butnotopen.Myuniversitypays for theformerandIpayforthelatter.

Tomychagrinanddismay,themissionstatementwasnotthere.As is often the case, I naivelyassumed that the person whoposted the statement simplygot the volume or year wrongand took the editorial license tochange mankind to the morefelicitoushumankind.So,Ibegantosearchforkeyphrases.Ichose“Thepurposesof theAssociationshall”, “the dissemination ofanthropologicalknowledge,”and“foster and support the devel-opment of special anthropologi-cal.” I thought these key phas-es were unique and distinctiveenough to the statement that asearch of American Anthropologist

between 1900-1910 would locateit.Nothing.Itwasnotthere.

I eventually tracked it down,in 1903 (5[1]:178-190). It is ananonymous article simply titled“American AnthropologicalAssociation,” which recountedthe association’s founding andconcludedwithacopyofitsfirstconstitution. There is no mis-sionstatement,butunderArticleII the constitution addresses theobjects of the association, whichsort of sounds like the mission

statement so prominently placedon the association’s website. Fortherecorditreads,infull:

The objects of the Associationare to promote the science ofAnthropology; to stimulate theefforts of American anthropolo-gists; to coordinate anthropologywith other sciences; to foster localand other societies devoted toAnthropology;toserveasabondofunionamongAmericananthropolo-gistsandAmericananthropologicalorganizations present and prospec-tive;and topublishandencouragethepublicationofmatterpertainingtoAnthropology.

Within the span of 15 min-utes, I was able to verify thatthe citation of the AAA Mission

Mission Improbable and the Possible Mission

lee d baker

C o M M e N T a R y

See Mission on page �