The opposite of Open Access
Here’s an interesting paper I found while looking for information on a topic: EVALUATING THE STATUS OF UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITES IN EGYPT. I’ve no idea if the content is interesting. However, the reason I don’t know that (and probably never will) is what makes the paper so interesting.
It’s available at -http://dx.doi.org/10.5848/APBJ.2012.00005– http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/apbj/ijmc/2012/00000014/00000001/art00005 . Actually I probably should have said it’s ‘available’ with air quotes instead. The reason is obvious when you try to download it. Like 90% of journals you can’t because you need a subscription, but usually there’s an option to buy the paper at some high rate. Not here. You have to subscribe to the journal to get the paper.
To be clear to read this paper on UNESCO World Heritage Sites in Egypt, because I have an interest in archaeological heritage, I have to subscribe to a journal that publishes in the same issue:
EARNINGS MANAGEMENT AND TRADE-OFF BETWEEN TAX SAVINGS AND REGULATORY SCRUTINY THE CASE OF SLOVENIAN PROPERTY INSURERS
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDUSTRY AND CAPITAL DETERMINANTS OF COMPULSIVE BUYERS’ BEHAVIOUR: THE CASE OF RETAIL CLOTHING MARKET IN LITHUANIA
EXPERIENTIAL CONSUMPTION OF TIME: A CASE STUDY OF CONSUMING FREE TIME IN THE CONTEXT OF ENTHUSIASM FOR HORSES -http://dx.doi.org/10.5848/APBJ.2012.00037–
I’m willing to believe these are all excellent papers in their field and well worth £150 as a bundle to the right person — but not to me. Publishing this way really does lock away research to a narrow audience. The barriers to getting the paper mean I won’t be including it in any research databases.
The punchline? Check the name of the publisher.
Edited due to a comment by +Rheza Rozendaal : I really should have checked the DOIs
Google+: View post on Google+