From Lord Sainsbury of Turville.
Sir, In your editorial on open-access publishing ("Open access", November 9) you seem to misunderstand both the government's position and the nature of open-access publishing.
As was made very clear in our response to the Commons science committee, the government is very happy to see users of research in this country having a choice between traditional "subscriber pays" publishing and open-access publishing. That is why it is making certain that there is a level playing-field by encouraging the research councils to support scientists wanting to take the open-access route.
What the government does not think is right to do is to promote one model, open-access publishing, in the marketplace. It is not clear that on a like-for-like basis open-access publishing will have a lower cost base, and as it will transfer some of the payments from industry users to the authors, it is likely to lead to higher costs for universities and research institutes. Also, because Britain produces 5.3 per cent of articles in the world's science journals while accounting for only 3.5 per cent of subscriptions, we would also lose out as a country.
The government believes that providing a level playing-field and giving users a choice is the best way to avoid arbitrarily giving either kind of publishing an advantage.
David Sainsbury, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science and Innovation, Department of Trade and Industry, London SW1H 0ET
