House of Commons Science & Technology Committee Inquiry into Scientific Publications

In December 2003, the UK's House of Commons Science & Technology Committee launched an inquiry into scientific publications to investigate pricing, access and availability issues. Written evidence was submitted to the inquiry in February 2004, in March 2004 the inquiry began to hear oral evidence, and in July 2004 the inquiry report - titled Scientific Publications: Free for all? - was published. On November 8, 2004, the UK Government published its response to the Committee's report.

Information for journalists: BioMed Central's reaction to the report, press contacts and more information. Further updates will be added to this page as they become available.

House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report

• Scientific Publications: Free for all?    (HTML)
• Scientific Publications: Free for all?    (PDF, 649 KB)
• Written Evidence    (HTML)
• Additional responses to the report    (HTML)
• HCST Committee's publications page    (HTML)

UK Government's response

• UK Government's Response to the Committee's report    (HTML)

Reaction to UK Government response

• HCST Committee comments on the Government response   (HTML)
• HCST Committee's press release    (HTML)
• Financial Times editorial    (HTML)

BioMed Central submissions to the inquiry

• Main BioMed Central submission    (PDF, 45 KB)
• Additional submission: Report on accessibility of NHS research    (PDF, 80 KB)

Other written submissions to the inquiry

• American Association of Law Libraries, American Library Association, Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries, Association of College & Research Libraries, Association of Research Libraries, Medical Library Association, Public Knowledge, and the Scholarly Publication and Academic Resources Coalition    (PDF, 146 KB)
• Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers    (PDF, 72 KB)
• Blackwell Publishing   (DOC, 59 KB)
• Society of College, National and University Libraries   (HTML)
• Electronic Publishing Trust   (HTML)
• Elsevier    (PDF, 298 KB)
• Institute of Mechanical Engineers   (PDF, 153 KB)
• Institute of Physics    (DOC, 80 KB)
• International Union of Crystallography   (HTML)
• John Cox Associates   (PDF, 220 KB)
• Oxford University Press    (HTML)
• Physiological Society    (HTML)
• Public Library of Science   (PDF, 1400 KB)
• Royal Society   (PDF, 134 KB)
• SHERPA   (PDF, 115 KB)
• Society for General Microbiology   (PDF, 90 KB)
• Society of Endocrinology    (DOC, 124 KB)
• University of Southampton   (DOC, 29 KB)
• SPARC Europe   (DOC, 85 KB)
• The Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals    (DOC, 37 KB)
• The Royal College of Psychiatrists   (HTML)
• Wellcome Trust   (PDF, 99 KB)
• Wiley   (HTML)
• World Cancer Research Fund International   (PDF, 8 KB)
• World Summit on the Information Society   (PDF, 673 KB)

Transcript of oral evidence sessions

• Session 4 - May 5th 2004 - Research Councils, Higher Education Funding Council for England, Research Councils UK
• Session 3 - April 21st 2004 - British Library, Authors' Licensing & Collecting Society, Joint Information Systems Committee, Cambridge University, University of Hertfordshire, University of Reading, Cardiff University, University of Oxford, University of Liverpool
• Session 2 - March 8th 2004 - APSLP, Oxford University Press, Institute of Physics, BioMed Central, Public Library of Science
• Session 1 - March 1st 2004 - Macmillan, Wiley, Blackwell, Reed Elsevier

Additional material

• (Mis)Leading Open Access Myths BioMed Central responds to criticisms of the Open Access publishing model
• Nature web focus. Access to the literature: the debate continues. Commissioned insights and analysis from scientists, librarians, publishers and other stakeholders, plus links, and articles from Nature archive. All content is available free.

Press coverage

The House of Commons Science & Technology Committee report has generated a lot of media interest. Stories have appeared on BBC News online and in Science, The Daily Telegraph, Financial Times, The Guardian, Guardian Education, The Scientist, Managing Information and more.