3.7 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| History of open access | 3/4 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_open_access | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T10:14:35.524738+00:00 | kb-cron |
== 2000s == The number of open-access journals increased by an estimated 500% during the 2000s. Also, the average number of articles that were published per open-access journal per year increased from approximately 20 to 40 during the same period, resulting in that the number of open-access articles increased by 900% during that decade. In 2000 BioMed Central, a for-profit open access publisher with now dozens of open-access journals, was launched by what was then the Current Science Group (the founder of the Current Opinion series, and now known as the Science Navigation Group). In some ways, BioMed Central resembles Harold Varmus' original E-biomed proposal more closely than does PubMed Central. As of October 2013 BioMed Central publishes over 250 journals. In 2001, 34,000 scholars around the world signed "An Open Letter to Scientific Publishers", calling for "the establishment of an online public library that would provide the full contents of the published record of research and scholarly discourse in medicine and the life sciences in a freely accessible, fully searchable, interlinked form". Scientists signing the letter also pledged not to publish in or peer-review for non-open-access journals. This led to the establishment of the Public Library of Science, an advocacy organization. However, most scientists continued to publish and review for non-open-access journals. PLoS decided to become an open-access publisher aiming to compete at the high quality end of the scientific spectrum with commercial publishers and other open-access journals, which were beginning to flourish. Critics have argued that, equipped with a $10 million grant, PLoS competes with smaller open-access journals for the best submissions and risks destroying what it originally wanted to foster. PLOS launched its first open-access journal, PLOS Biology in 2003, with PLOS Medicine following in 2004, and PLOS One in 2006. The first major international statement on open access was the Budapest Open Access Initiative in February 2002, launched by the Open Society Institute. Two further statements followed: the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing in June 2003 and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities in October 2003. Also in 2003, the World Summit on the Information Society included open access in its Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action. In 2006 a Federal Research Public Access Act was introduced in US Congress by senators John Cornyn and Joe Lieberman. The act continues to be brought up every year since then, but has never made it past committee. 2007 recorded some backlash from non-OA publishers. In 2008 Ajit Varki worked with publisher Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press and David Lipman to create the first viable model for a major Open Access textbook combining a print version with a freely accessible online edition hosted at NCBI, the 2nd edition of Essentials of Glycobiology. Perhaps the first dedicated publisher of open-access monographs in the humanities was re.press who published their first title in that 2006. Two years later in 2008 Open Humanities Press, another publisher of humanities monographs, was launched. Most recently, the Open Library of Humanities launched in September 2015. In 2008 USENIX, the advanced computing systems association, implemented an open access policy for their conference proceedings. In 2011 they added audio and video recordings of paper presentations to the material to which they provide open access.