Open Access and AAA
2
Anthropology News • February 2008 IN FOCUS 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. OPEN ACCESS Open Access and AAA JASON CROSS DUKE U A AA President Setha Low and President- Elect Virginia Domin- guez encourage a re- thinking of what we want AAA to be five and 15 years from now. As the conditions of scholarship and its public relevance change, we are called to reconsider the roles and functions of associations like AAA and its sections. In this spirit, the contrib- utors to this In Focus ad- dress open access (OA) publishing and knowl- edge exchange in relation to the mission, values and disciplinary interests of AAA. In our recent past, changes in the world of publishing and their relation to AAA governance and finances have been a source of uncertainty and internal ten- sion. These same changes, how- ever, might offer the conditions for reorganizing the exchange of anthropological knowledge in ways that maintain (or improve on) the quality of scholarly review while expanding the access and participation of those invested in the stakes of that knowledge. Wiley-Blackwell now has a five-year contract to manage AnthroSource and AAA journal distribution, taking on any finan- cial risks, and granting our sec- tions a breath of fresh air. The deal also presents AAA with an important opportunity to care- fully consider OA in an informed, deliberate manner—without fears of hasty decisions. What is OA? OA publishing refers to online posting of material accessible by anyone connected to the inter- net—that is, not requiring a sub- scription, membership or payment for viewing. Any OA model can include a print-on-demand fea- ture, providing hard copies for the relatively few who demand them at a fee. Ease of access is key. Oth- erwise, unless researchers who are not subscribed to AnthroSource (be they students, academics, school teachers, activists, policymakers or interested citizens) have a strong enough desire to read a AAA jour- nal article and the ability to pay for it, or make the effort to access it by connecting to an institution with a subscription, they will move on to an OA information source—and US anthropology gives up an op- portunity to contribute to the re- search of a non-AAA-member who is not connected to a subscribing institution. In a stronger vision of OA, articles and other online con- tent is licensed under a Creative Commons license. The research can then be used for various public interest purposes without needing to seek permission, so long as the source and author are cited. Many AAA members are begin- ning to see how OA practices can advance our mission and eth- ics. Still, the anticipated trade-offs and uncertainties of any OA tran- sition makes caution (and even assertive hesitation) reasonable. We will need careful research on business models to assess whether and how to make an OA transi- tion. The potential value of OA to our scholarship and its role in the world, though, should at least merit consideration of whether or not OA is a priority deserving careful, even creative, attention. Political Economy of Knowledge As anthropologists, we like to think about things in context. So let’s also put our own situation within a broader political econom- ic context: New technologies have made many knowledge-intensive activities less dependent on physi- cal capital, and therefore more open to nonexclusive models of production and distribution. Open source software, online communi- ties, even material-heavy realms like biotech and manufacturing are being transformed by produc- tion and exchange practices that are less dependent on exclusivity. OA publishing is part of this revolutionary transformation. The access-expanding effects of this change, however, are in trouble. They rely on increased connectivi- ty that is in danger of being damp- ened and controlled by major players in various industries. From WTO negotiations to municipal broadband, these companies use legislation (eg, intellectual prop- erty) and consolidation to sustain exclusivity-dependent business practices, impeding the rise of less (or non) exclusive models. Activists in the Access to Knowledge (a2k) campaign (link- ing movements from healthcare and software to public education and science) claim that the ways these struggles play out will deter- mine the institutional architecture of the knowledge economy for sev- eral decades to come. Our decisions on OA anthropology will also align our long-term professional inter- ests with one or the other gov- erning values for the knowledge economy—exclusivity-dependent commodification or OA. I am not suggesting that we determine our publishing models based on a2k politics. However, understanding this context helps explain why AAA deliberations on OA are watched closely by knowl- edge industries and a2k activists. It also makes us aware of the future political context in which we participate as we determine where our professional interests and values lead us. Let’s Deliberate OA Serious consideration of OA op- tions will require attention and resources. Therefore, we might first determine whether or not we think that OA deserves to be a pri- ority. By deliberating OA options in relation to our stated mission and ethics, we can decide if OA objectives should help guide AAA decisions, or if OA should merely be a value that supplements deci- sion making but does not play as central a role as other priorities. Among our professional inter- ests, we need to consider our pres- ence and relevance in a changing public sphere. Researchers and diverse publics are accessing OA information more often. OA arti- cles get cited more, and research is increasingly done away from university library portals, chan- neling investigators toward OA knowledge. Here, we should con- sider our stated mission to dis- seminate anthropological knowl- edge (and our own personal inter- ests in doing so), as well as the quality of social science research relied on by academic and non- academic publics doing online research. Expanding calls for AAA to promote public, engaged and practicing anthropology should also lead us to think about pub- lic interest values in going OA. Additionally, commitment to a World Anthropologies initiative and other attempts to “decolo- nize” knowledge should include reexamination of publication models that sustain asymmetries of access to knowledge and par- ticipation in knowledge produc- tion and exchange. Ethical analysis of our knowl- edge exchange models should also be greatly affected by the feasibil- ity of OA. If we were no longer to need an exclusivity-dependent business model for quality review and dissemination of research, would we be consistent with our ethics in maintaining a system premised on restricting access? Are informants who often give researchers “open access” to their knowledge owed access them- selves, especially if their participa- tion in research was under some impression of contributing to gen- eral knowledge or understanding? Deliberations about whether or not OA should even be a pri- ority would do well to include COMMENTARY Jason Cross
-
Upload
jason-cross -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
3
Transcript of Open Access and AAA
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 �
![AAA Out-of-Band Authentication (SMS) and Fortinet Secure Access · ATTRIBUTE Fortinet-Access-Profile 26 [vid=12356 vty=6 vat=string] 3.0 4TRESS AAA Configuration This chapter describes](https://static.fdocuments.us/doc/165x107/5e79b5683fd8fb57175f69c7/aaa-out-of-band-authentication-sms-and-fortinet-secure-access-attribute-fortinet-access-profile.jpg)
