##MIT 弃用爱思唯尔，每年省200万美元，科研之路依然畅通
2020年，麻省理工学院（MIT）与全球顶级出版集团爱思唯尔谈判破裂，毅然取消了所有675种期刊的订阅合同。这一举动在当时引发了广泛关注，被视为学术界抵制高昂订阅费用和封闭期刊的里程碑事件。四年过去了，MIT 如今过得怎么样？
事实证明，MIT 的选择是正确的。根据该校图书馆最近发布的文章，自取消爱思唯尔期刊合同以来，MIT 每年可节省原始支出的80%以上，约200万美元。同时，图书馆通过提供替代访问方式，能够在几分钟内满足大多数文章请求。
MIT 的成功并非偶然。早在2019年，该校就成立了开放获取工作组，并制定了《MIT 有关出版商合约的指导性框架》，明确了该校对开放获取和公平的承诺。该框架强调学术研究成果应公开公平地提供给最广泛的受众，并为 MIT 社区提供有价值的服务。
在与爱思唯尔的谈判中，MIT坚持了这一框架原则，最终导致了合同的破裂。虽然部分教师担心取消订阅会影响文章访问，但 MIT 图书馆通过馆际互借等方式，确保了研究人员能够及时获取所需文献。
MIT 的经历为其他高校提供了宝贵的经验。在学术界日益重视开放获取的今天，MIT 的做法为高校如何摆脱大型出版集团的控制，实现知识的自由传播提供了新的思路。
值得注意的是，MIT 的成功并非意味着完全抛弃了爱思唯尔的期刊。在生命科学领域，由于爱思唯尔出版了大量重要期刊，MIT 教师仍然面临着一定挑战。这说明，在推动开放获取的同时，也要兼顾科研的实际需要，找到平衡点。
MIT 的案例表明，高校可以通过制定明确的原则，积极寻求替代方案，来打破大型出版集团的垄断，实现科研资源的共享与开放。这将有助于推动学术界向着更加公平、开放的方向发展。
英语如下：
##MIT Saves $2 Million Annually by Ditching Elsevier, Research Remains Unimpeded
**Keywords:** MIT, cost savings, open access
**NewsContent:**
In 2020, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) broke off negotiations with Elsevier, the world’s leading publishing group,and boldly canceled its subscription contracts for all 675 journals. This move sparked widespread attention at the time, being hailed as a landmark event in academia’s resistance to exorbitant subscription fees and closed journals. Four years later, how is MIT faring?
The evidence suggests that MIT’s choice was the right one. According to a recent article published by the school’s library, sincecanceling its Elsevier journal contracts, MIT has been able to save over 80% of its original expenditure, amounting to approximately $2 million annually. Simultaneously, the library, by providing alternative access methods, has been able to fulfill the majorityof article requests within minutes.
MIT’s success is no coincidence. Back in 2019, the school established an Open Access Working Group and formulated the “MIT Guiding Framework for Publisher Agreements,” clearly outlining the institution’s commitment to open access and fairness. This framework emphasizes that academic research findings should bemade available to the widest possible audience in a transparent and equitable manner, while also providing valuable services to the MIT community.
During negotiations with Elsevier, MIT adhered to these framework principles, ultimately leading to the contract’s termination. Although some faculty members expressed concerns that canceling subscriptions would hinder article access, MIT’s libraryensured researchers could obtain the necessary literature promptly through interlibrary loans and other methods.
MIT’s experience offers valuable lessons for other universities. In today’s academic world, where open access is increasingly valued, MIT’s approach provides a new perspective on how universities can break free from the control of large publishing groups andenable the free dissemination of knowledge.
It’s worth noting that MIT’s success doesn’t signify a complete abandonment of Elsevier journals. In the life sciences field, due to Elsevier’s publication of numerous important journals, MIT faculty still face certain challenges. This underscores the need to find a balance between promoting openaccess and addressing the practical needs of research.
MIT’s case demonstrates that universities can break the monopoly of large publishing groups and achieve the sharing and openness of research resources by establishing clear principles and actively seeking alternative solutions. This will contribute to the advancement of academia towards a more equitable and open future.
【来源】https://www.jiqizhixin.com/articles/2024-08-21-2
Views: 1