Comparative Post-print green policies: Look no further than RoMEO
I was looking at the announcement of Palgrave Macmillan open access options and started to build a table to compare publisher post-print deposit rules:
Post-Print Green Open Access Policies June 21st, 2011
| Publisher | Policy | Source of Documentation |
|---|---|---|
| Palgrave Macmillan Journals | Upload to institutional repositories; public availability of post-print is delayed until 18 months after first online publication in the relevant journal issue. An acknowledgment should be included, with a link to the publisher version on the publisher website. | Self-archiving-policy |
Why did I stop?
I remembered the SHERPA/RoMEO: Publisher copyright policies & self-archiving web site, which provides a listing of publishers’ copyright conditions as they relate to authors archiving their work on-line. The service categorizes publishers and their conditions as:
This database-driven enterprise now lists the policies of more than 900 publishers, including my original target Palgrave Macmillan:
So who are the publishers that in this day and age that do not allow formally support personal or institutional archiving, the “white” category in the RoMEO rating? A short sample which links to the RoMEO entry:
- Radiation Research Society (jump through hoops, maybe you can)
- Physicians Postgraduate Press (if you must, put it in PMC)
- Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments (you would think they would want to get the word out!)
- Managed Care & Healthcare Communications (Let’s not talk about archiving, but if you must, put it in PMC)
RoMEO is an index to more than 900 publishers and their green open access archiving policies. Institutions with scholarly communication staff can make this site an important component of a researcher’s determination of where to publish. The rest of the academic community must build this tool into their resource pages on scholarly publishing.
