[Taxacom] Help with finding a paper

Stephen Thorpe stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Wed Oct 7 22:41:00 CDT 2015


Mike,

Buying a research paper can be a valid use of funds, yes, but it can also be a way to dispose of funding that would otherwise have to be used unprofitably. The move to open access means that a huge proportion of research funding will have to be diverted to getting papers published. I'm speculating that both publishers and institutions with relatively unprofitable public good obligations both have a vested interest here. I'm not jealous/envious of anything. I'm just sick of seeing public money spent cheaply, instead of on the original taxonomic research that it was intended for. Perhaps not surprisingly, many scientists and managers are more concerned with making a living than they are with the actual science. There is a fine line here, but it is often crossed. We have umpteen digitisation projects all digitising the same stuff as each other. We have millions (worldwide) being wasted on databasing unrevised specimens. The list goes on. It simply IS
 "driving an industry".

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 8/10/15, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Help with finding a paper
 To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Received: Thursday, 8 October, 2015, 2:24 PM
 
 
 
 On 10/7/2015 6:10 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
 > Mike,
 >
 > So have you been a senior manager in an
 institution which uses public funding for taxonomic
 research?
 Yes, I have, as well as serving as
 a National Science Foundation Program 
 Officer giving away $13 million a year, dealing
 with oversight, IDC 
 rates and approval of
 expenditures.   Everyone is under pressure to 
 think up projects that will bring in and spend
 research money, but the 
 competition usually
 means that they cannot be total bullshit, although 
 some occasionally are.  Strangely, many great
 advances are made by 
 people on projects
 accused of such bs by the jealous or envious.  But, 
 your example would require that this is
 commonplace enough to drive an 
 industry. 
 Not a chance.  And, your example suggests an institution
 gets 
 a 100% ICD that becomes unrestricted
 for unsupervised expenditures, and 
 I have
 never seen such a thing, nor heard credible first-hand
 examples.  
 Buying a research paper is a
 valid use of funds, so your example of it 
 being done to waste money is ludicrous.  Find
 a librarian that would 
 agree to such an
 example.  Every library on earth has to prioritize 
 expenditures, and has a backlog of things that
 are validly needed. Such 
 an example simply
 would not allow such a person to survive in an 
 institution.
 
 Mike
 
 
 > I haven't, but, by your argument, if
 you haven't either, then you don't know what you are
 talking about either, so my speculation could be true as far
 as you know. I am talking about a situation where the
 institution has the opportunity to grab more public funding
 than it can cope with if it had to use all of the
 non-overheads for actual research, due to having too few
 scientists, and occupying most of their time with other more
 profitable commercial work. So, either, they turn down the
 extra public funding because they don't have the
 manpower/time to spend it on research, or they take it
 anyway, grab the overheads, and spend the rest on things
 which don't require any science to be done, but which
 can still be spun as part of the scientific research (e.g.
 subscriptions, databasing, travel, etc.) Someone I know who
 does work as a scientist in such an
 >   institution has more than
 once described to me how he and his colleagues are under
 pressure from their employer to think up [quote]any bullshit
 project[unquote] to spend research funding on. How
 widespread a problem this is in the world I do not know.
 >
 > Stephen
 >
 >
 --------------------------------------------
 > On Thu, 8/10/15, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu>
 wrote:
 >
 >   Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Help
 with finding a paper
 >   To:
 taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   Received: Thursday, 8
 October, 2015, 12:06 PM
 >   
 >   Wow, glad you understand
 >   that this is speculation,
 because this is
 >   really
 nonsense.  What possible economic model
 >   are you studying? Clearly
 >   you have never
 >   been involved in actually
 keeping an institution open,
 >   done the books, administered
 a grants program
 >   or
 negotiated IDC rates.
 >   
 >   Mike
 >   
 >   On
 >   10/7/2015 4:57 PM, Stephen
 Thorpe wrote:
 >   > I have
 long speculated that a primary goal
 >   of keeping science funding
 flowing through the system
 >   explains most/all of the
 economics. With that as the primary
 >   goal, what the funding is
 actually spent on is very much a
 >   secondary concern. Many
 institutions "recoup
 >   overheads" from public
 science funding. So for every
 >   dollar that they can spend on
 a subscription, the
 >   institution might gain a
 dollar, and nobody has to do any
 >   actual science, so everybody
 (institution, scientist,
 >   publisher) wins, except for
 the public! I speculate that
 >   this is what is really
 driving "Open Access", and
 >   possibly also the growing
 restrictions on sending specimens
 >   between countries (so the
 taxonomist has to travel to the
 >   specimen, paid for by public
 science funding!)
 >   >
 >   > Stephen
 >   >
 >   >
 >   --------------------------------------------
 >   > On Thu, 8/10/15, Dean
 Pentcheff <pentcheff at gmail.com>
 >   wrote:
 >   >
 >   >   Subject:
 Re: [Taxacom] Help
 >   with
 finding a paper
 >   >   To:
 >   "Fred Schueler"
 <bckcdb at istar.ca>
 >   >   Cc:
 "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
 >   <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>,
 >   "David Seburn"
 <davidseburn at sympatico.ca>
 >   >   Received:
 Thursday, 8
 >   October, 2015,
 11:47 AM
 >   >
 >   >   I speculate
 that it has
 >   >   nothing to
 do with
 >   taxonomists or
 environmental
 >   >   consultants.
 Both of those
 >   constituencies are
 >   >   so tiny
 >   and commercially
 >   >   trivial
 >   that they
 >   >   simply
 don't
 >   count when
 publishers develop policies.
 >   >
 >   >   The people
 who can pay are
 >   >   commercial
 biomedical and
 >   industrial
 >   >   researchers.
 >   Their ability to pay (and
 their
 >   >   corporation's
 legal
 >   obligation
 >   >   to do
 so)
 >   >   drives the
 system.
 >   >
 >   >   -Dean
 >   >   --
 >   >   Dean
 Pentcheff
 >   >   pentcheff at gmail.com
 >   >
 >   >   On Wed, Oct
 7, 2015 at
 >   3:20
 >   >   PM, Fred
 Schueler
 >   <bckcdb at istar.ca>
 >   >   wrote:
 >   >
 >   >   > many
 have
 >   >   written:
 >   >   >
 >   >   > Hello
 all
 >   >   - I
 am having trouble getting
 >   a copy of the following
 paper
 >   >   from
 >   >   >> my
 usual
 >   sources...
 >   >   >>
 >   >   >
 >   >   > *
 somebody should study
 >   who
 is willing to
 >   >   pay $39
 >   for a paper they've
 only
 >   >   >
 >   >   known
 through the
 >   publisher's website
 abstract - if they
 >   >   know
 it's really
 >   >   > good
 they must
 >   >   have known
 somebody who has
 >   the pdf
 or an institutional
 >   >   >
 subscription, and gotten
 >   a
 copy that way,
 >   >   and
 >   otherwise they just ask
 >   >   >
 TAXACOM.
 >   >   >
 >   >   >
 You'd assume it
 >   >   would be
 commercial
 >   consultants who
 would be willing to
 >   >   > just
 click $39 away, but
 >   in
 their
 >   >   environmental
 >   assessments they never
 seem
 >   >   > to
 cite anything from
 >   the
 peer-reviewed
 >   >   literature.
 A real mystery -
 >   maybe
 >   >   > the
 >   >   publishers
 just put those
 >   whacking
 great prices on the
 >   >   individual
 >   >   >
 articles to keep
 >   libraries
 >   >   terrified
 into
 >   paying the whacking
 great prices
 >   >   > for
 subscriptions.
 >   >   >
 >   >   > does
 anyone know?
 >   >   >
 >   >   >
 fred.
 >   >   >
 >   >   ------------------------------------------------------------
 >   >   >
 >      Frederick W.
 >   >   Schueler
 & Aleta
 >   Karstad
 >   >   >
 Daily
 >   >   Paintings -
 http://karstaddailypaintings.blogspot.com/
 >   >   >
 Vulnerable Watersheds -
 >   http://vulnerablewaters.blogspot.ca/
 >   >   >
 Mudpuppy Night in Oxford
 >   Mills - http://pinicola.ca/mudpup1.htm
 >   >   > 
    RR#2
 >   Bishops
 Mills,
 >   >   Ontario,
 >   Canada K0G 1T0
 >   >   >
 >   on the
 >   >   Smiths
 Falls
 >   Limestone Plain 44*
 52'N 75* 42'W
 >   >   >
 >      (613)258-3107 <bckcdb
 >   >   at
 istar.ca> http://pinicola.ca/
 >   >   >
 >   >   ------------------------------------------------------------
 >   >   >
 >   >   _______________________________________________
 >   >   >
 Taxacom Mailing List
 >   >   >
 >   >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   >   > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   >   > The
 Taxacom Archive back
 >   to
 1992 may be
 >   >   searched
 >   at:
 >   >   > http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >   >   >
 >   >   >
 Celebrating 28 years
 >   >   of Taxacom
 in 2015.
 >   >   >
 >   >   _______________________________________________
 >   >   Taxacom
 Mailing List
 >   >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   >   http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   >   The Taxacom
 Archive back to
 >   1992 may
 be
 >   >   searched
 at:
 >   http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >   >
 >   >   Celebrating
 28 years of
 >   >   Taxacom in
 2015.
 >   >
 >   >
 >   _______________________________________________
 >   > Taxacom Mailing List
 >   >
 >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   > The Taxacom Archive back
 to 1992 may be
 >   searched
 at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >   >
 >   > Celebrating 28 years
 >   of Taxacom in 2015.
 >   
 >   --
 >   __________________________________________________
 >   
 >   Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D.,
 >   F.R.E.S.
 >   
 >   Montana Entomology
 >   Collection
 >   Marsh Labs, Room 50
 >   1911 West Lincoln Street
 >   NW
 >   corner of Lincoln and
 S.19th
 >   Montana State
 >   University
 >   Bozeman, MT 59717
 >   USA
 >   
 >   (406)
 >   994-4610 (voice)
 >   (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
 >   mivie at montana.edu
 >   
 >   _______________________________________________
 >   Taxacom Mailing List
 >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   The Taxacom Archive back to
 1992 may be
 >   searched at:
 http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >   
 >   Celebrating 28 years of
 >   Taxacom in 2015.
 >   
 >
 > .
 >
 
 -- 
 __________________________________________________
 
 Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D.,
 F.R.E.S.
 
 Montana Entomology
 Collection
 Marsh Labs, Room 50
 1911 West Lincoln Street
 NW
 corner of Lincoln and S.19th
 Montana State
 University
 Bozeman, MT 59717
 USA
 
 (406)
 994-4610 (voice)
 (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
 mivie at montana.edu
 
 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 
 Celebrating 28 years of
 Taxacom in 2015.
 



More information about the Taxacom mailing list