- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

open-access is the future: no, it is not! only if it is non-corporate: the capitalist political economy of academic journals and open access
by Ingbert Floyd 08 Feb '08

08 Feb '08

In general, I agree with Christian Fuchs. And thank you very much for sending out the DOAJ link! Resources like this enable us to move more easily to open-access publishing venues. However, I feel he has misrepresented my position a bit, so let me clarify what I was trying to say. I don't think it is *impossible* to create a no-author-charges no-reader-charges model. All I was saying, is that I have thought about this a lot, and I'm not sure how it would best be funded. You accuse me of claiming that academic articles are commodities. I'm not sure what, exactly, a commodity is (I've seen conflicting definitions). However, I do know, that if you want something to exist on the internet, the way our current "global" economic system works, somebody has to pay somebody some money. Computers, fiber-optic cables, electrical power, maintenance personel; none of that is free. Then there are more direct costs, such as paying authors and reviewers so they have time to write, and paying someone to do the indexing and organization work so you can find the article. One way or another, all of this costs money, because in the end, people are doing the work, and people need food and shelter, and want quality of life. And we don't live in a barter economy (thankfully!). Thus, to take a step back, and analyze one of your statements, writing journal articles is not "free" labor. It is a cost currently borne primarily by Universities. Those of us who are full-time employed academics are, as a condition of our employment, expected to write journal articles. In the case of pre-tenured faculty, their job security depends on it. You are right in saying that journal publishers *do not* bear these costs. But they do bear other costs. There is nothing stopping us as academics from simply sending out mass emails to people, with our articles as attachments. Or from purchasing our own web spaces and posting our writings there (a tact which many people, academic and non-academic, in fact, take). But the journal system seems to have certain advantages (topical co-location, expert recommendation in the form of peer-review, indexing and link structure creation, advertisement of new authors and new ideas, etc.) over these other methods of distribution, such that most people want to keep it around. To take another step back, anything on the internet is not really *free* to access in some universal sense. If you want personal internet access, most people have to pay someone for it. And if you go to the public library in the US, you still have to pay transportation expenses, even if the only such expenses are time, food, and new shoes. I know most of these economic models do not factor time into account, but that's a pretty big expense in many cases. I used to be poor (I doubled my income by becoming a PhD student), and let me tell you, we (my old room-mates and I) liked the idea of a public library, but it was impractical for us to take advantage of its resources, even though they were "free". Maybe what I've written above is debatable. Certainly, there might be other metaphors to use besides economic metaphors to describe how we live our lives, and spend our time. But in the end, if we're going to talk about something being free as in "free beer", I think it is easier to stick with economic metaphors, since it will avoid confusion from mixing too many metaphors together. So, how *do* I consider this issue? Well, for me it's an issue of processes and consequences, on individual, local, and societal levels. I recognize that the internet is not "free", but I also recognize it's a phenomenal distribution mechanism, when unhampered by subscription barriers. I think that it is desirable for academic information to be free as in "free beer", for both the producers to publish and the consumers to obtain. But I also value some of the services that current publishing mechanisms and traditions supply. I am open to new ideas for conducting this process, though after a recent experience with an open reviewing process, I'm a bit more cautious in my endorsements of such processes before all the kinks have been worked out. But in the end, I feel one has to be realistic, and recognize there are *some* costs that have to be borne by *somebody*. The question for me, is who, and how? I like the organization-subsidized model. I think there is a lot of benefit from adopting such a model, and that the publication process *can* be insulated (to some degree) from the financial pressures. But I recognize the criticisms of this model, and as a result, I don't think that this model should be universally adopted. There need to be alternatives so we don't have an oligarchy of organizations which control academic publishing. After spending an hour reviewing the list Christian Fuchs sent out (http://www.doaj.org/) I noticed that there are a number of open access journals on the list that are author-pays, and another group of journals which are funded by large corporations (IBM being the most salient one). IBM's reputation has changed recently, but it used to behave a lot like Microsoft does now. I'd be a little concerned if our journals were in such hands. Other organizations which fund journals are universities. In general, I like the idea of a University Funded model, but especially when US state-owned universities are the ones responsible for the funding, the funding will always be tenuous, as ill-considered legislation, budget cuts due to mismanaged government funds, and poor management are recurring realities of the state-school environment. Maybe rich, elite universities could be the ones responsible for funding and maintaining academic publishing venues as their funding and administration is much more reliable, but not everybody is comfortable with granting those institutions even more power over how academic work functions. I am comfortable with it, because I see it as a manner in which those universities can exercise academic social responsibilitiy by helping to fund a chunk of the academic distribution process. However, I would not want the academic publishing process to be *solely* concentrated in the hands of such a limited *number* of institutions, whether they are elite or not. Which is one reason the current drive to consolidate publishers worries me. That leaves non-academic, non-profit organizations of various sorts. And this is also problematic because there are only so many of them, and most of them are biased toward certain kinds of funding, thus potentially creating a lack of academic production in certain fields simply because no foundations have been created by wealthy benefactors interested in supporting academic publication in those areas. For all of these reasons, I think the marketplace of academic ideas is still, currently, better served by exploring a diversity of options. Let us have a diversity of organizational-supported models developed. To hedge our bets, let us also have non-profit author-pay models, and non-profit reader-pay models, in case these models prove to have unexpected benefits. It is only once we have created various alternatives, and seen the consequences of our actions, that we will be in a better position to determine what the future of academic publishing ought to look like. As long as we maintain a diversity of options, we will have many choices of publishing routes to take. Therefore, at this stage, about the only boycott I would support is a boycott of for-profit academic publishers. It seems there has been a wave of profiteering in academic publishing recently, where for-profit publishers have raised their prices at 5-6 *times* the rate of inflation for over 20 years, and for questionable gains in services provided. Libraries have been unable to resist these price-hikes, because they cannot drop their subscriptions without significantly damaging the ability of their faculty to do their work. The significance of this, is that, it used to be the case that individual professors would purchase individual subscriptions to most journals in their field, out of their own salary. But these days, this practice has all but disappeared, because few professors can afford this luxury any more. Now, the for-profit/non-profit line is not the cleanest line in the world, as there are non-profits who behave like for-profits, and vice-versa. But I think it is a fair simplification of reality, and the exceptions are few and far enough between, that one can learn about them via word-of-mouth. And blog posts. And listserv discussions. Ingbert -- ========================================== Ingbert Floyd PhD Student Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign http://ingbert.org/ || skype: spacesoon Check out the unofficial GSLIS Wiki: http://www.gslis.org/ "Dream in a pragmatic way." -Aldous Huxley -- ========================================== Ingbert Floyd PhD Student Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign http://ingbert.org/ || skype: spacesoon Check out the unofficial GSLIS Wiki: http://www.gslis.org/ "Dream in a pragmatic way." -Aldous Huxley

1 0

New Rev 3.01 E-Government EndNote Library Available for Download
by Jochen Scholl 08 Feb '08

08 Feb '08

The Digital Government Society of North America (DGSNA) <www.dgsociety.org> makes available for download the new revision 3.01 of the Electronic/Digital Government EndNote Library. The library currently contains close to 2,400 references of peer-reviewed, English-language journal articles, conference papers, book chapters, and monographs. The library is current as of January 2008. The next revision will become available in July of 2008. The references can be downloaded as an EndNote XML document free of charge under a GNU license agreement. Once the XML document is downloaded, it can be easily imported into recent versions of EndNote libraries (or, compatibles). http://tinyurl.com/ysglpg https://catalysttools.washington.edu/webq/survey/jscholl/22768 (long URL) Please let us know, if you find any errors or omissions ( gahelp(a)help.ischool.washington.edu ) Hans J (Jochen) Scholl, PhD Digital Government Society of North America Mailing address: University of Washington Mary Gates Hall, Suite 370c Seattle, WA 98195-2840

1 0

FW: Call for Papers: THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF ACADEMIC JOURNAL PUBLISHING
by Christian Fuchs 08 Feb '08

08 Feb '08

Prichard, Craig schrieb: > > Dear All, > > Please find below a call for papers for a special issue of the open > access journal /ephemera/ on the Political Economy of Academic Journal > Publishing (deadline November 1, 2008). If you are aware of colleagues > with a particular interest in this topic please could you forward this > call for papers to them. > > Best regards, > > Craig Prichard and Steffen Böhm > > ___________________________________________________________ > > * * > > *The Political Economy of Academic Journal Publishing* > > * * > > *Call for Papers & Proposal for a Special Issue of /ephemera: theory & > politics in organization/ (www.ephemeraweb.org > <http://www.ephemeraweb.org/>) to be edited by* > > * * > > *Craig Prichard & Steffen Böhm * > > * * > > ‘Publish or perish’, that famous diktat, is without doubt the central, > pervasive and unassailable logic governing most academic work in the > current period. The central figure, the one around which this decree > currently revolves, is, of course, the academic journal article. While > the book and perhaps the lecture remain important in some locations, > the journal article has become the core currency and the very measure > by which academic jobs, careers, reputations and identities are made > and traded. > > Yet despite all the hours congealed into ‘the article’, and the years > spent perfecting the craft of writing for journal publications, many > of us know very little about the industry that surrounds our work and > to which we contribute so much. Of course, we may recall certain > events: Some will have noted the sale, for nearly US$1 billion, of > Blackwell’s 875-strong journal collection to US company Wiley in late > 2006. Others will be aware that they can now, if they so wish, > purchase their already published papers as individual downloads on > Amazon.com. There will be some for whom internet-based open access > journals (such as /ephemera/) or online repositories are now the > natural home of their written academic work. There may be others whom > have confronted the crisis that surrounds journal subscription pricing > and are seeing the demise of library journal collections in their > university libraries. And there may be a few among us who recognize > those journals and publishers that feature in Ted Bergstrom’s hall of > shame for the most expensive journals currently published > (http://www.journalprices.com <http://www.journalprices.com/>). But > for all those that recognize such events and processes there are many > more for whom such events have ‘taken a while to get our attention’, > as Ron Kirby, the University of California mathematician who led the > editorial revolt against Reed Elsevier’s pricing strategy at the > journal /Topography/, said recently. > > This special issue is an invitation to begin to change that. It is a > call for contributions that directly and critically explore the > dynamics, problems, tensions, and issues that surround the political > economy of academic journal publishing. Part of this is an invitation > to explore alternative ways of organizing the production of academic > work, particularly the theory, politics and organization of open > access publishing, which is, perhaps, the most promising initiative to > challenge corporate forms of journal publishing today. This > exploration of alternatives is an acknowledgement that the writer and > academic author could be regarded, at various moments, as agent, > challenger and also victim of hegemonic regimes. We invite > inter-disciplinary contributions from around the world and > particularly welcome submissions from countries of the Global South, > which have seen particular growth of open access publishing initiatives. > > Possible topics include (this is not an exhaustive list): > > - Political economy of open access publishing > > - Academic publishing and the knowledge society > > - How to organize an open access journal? > > - Political economy of corporate and university press publishing > > - The place of journal publishing in the overall apparatus of academic > publishing > > - Historical perspectives of academic journal publishing > > - The hegemony of UK/US publishing & referencing and its global economy > > - Issues of censorship in the process of publishing > > - Issues of inclusion/exclusion in journal publishing > > - Academic publishing in the Global South > > - Desires and identities connected to journal publishing > > - The public sphere and journal publishing: Who do we really reach? > > - The role of journal publishing in the setup and maintenance of > professions and disciplines > > - Cases of open access publishing > > - The organisation of open access repositories > > - Case histories of open access repositories > > - Copyright vs Copyleft > > - Publishing and language: the hegemony of English > > - Intellectual property and the impact on academic publishing > > - What is a journal’s ‘impact’ and how to measure it? > > - The specific role of /ephemera: theory & politics in organization > /in the world of journal publishing and potential ‘alternative impact > factor measurements’ > > - Academic evaluation and performance measurement systems (such as the > RAE in the UK) > > - Publishing outside academia > > Full papers should be submitted to the special issue editors via email > by 1 November 2008. Papers should be between 5000 and 9000 words; > multimedia work is welcome. All submissions should follow /ephemera/’s > submission guidelines: http://www.ephemeraweb.org/ journal/submit.htm > <http://www.ephemeraweb.org/%20journal/submit.htm>. All relevant > submissions will undergo a double blind review process. The special > issue is scheduled to be published in late 2009. > > Special issue editors: > > Craig Prichard > > Tari Whakahaere Kaipakihi , > > Te Kunenga Ki Purehuroa > > Pouaka Motuhake 11-222 > > Papaioea, Aotearoa > > Department of Management 214 > > Massey University, Private Bag 11-222 > > Palmerston North, New Zealand > > Phone: +64 (0) 6 356-9099 ext. 2244 > > Email: c.prichard(a)massey.ac.nz <mailto:c.prichard@massey.ac.nz> > > Steffen Böhm > > School of Accounting, Finance and Management > > University of Essex > > Wivenhoe Park > > Colchester CO4 3SQ UK > > Phone: +44 (0) 1206 87 3843 > > Email: steffen(a)essex.ac.uk <mailto:steffen@essex.ac.uk> > > _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > -- _____________________________ Univ.Ass. Dr. Christian Fuchs Assistant Professor for Internet and Society ICT&S Center - Advanced Studies and Research in Information and Communication Technologies & Society http://www.icts.uni-salzburg.at University of Salzburg Sigmund Haffner Gasse 18 5020 Salzburg Austria christian.fuchs(a)sbg.ac.at Phone +43 662 8044 4823 Fax +43 662 6389 4800 Information-Society-Technology: http://fuchs.icts.sbg.ac.at http://www.icts.uni-salzburg.at/fuchs/ Co-Editor of tripleC - peer reviewed open access online journal for the foundations of information science: http://triplec.uti.at New Book: Fuchs, Christian. 2008. Internet and Society: Social Theory in the Information Age. New York: Routledge. 408 Pages. http://fuchs.icts.sbg.ac.at/i&s.html http://www.routledge.com/shopping_cart/products/product_detail.asp?sku=&isb… "It is the duty of the press to come forward on behalf of the oppressed in its immediate neighbourhood" (Karl Marx) "two contradictory hypotheses: (1) that advanced (...) society is capable of containing qualitative change for the foreseeable future; (2) that forces and tendencies exist which may break this containment and explode the society" (Herbert Marcuse).

2 1

Hoover's Connect: An Impressive Online Business/Social Network
by Gerry Mckiernan 07 Feb '08

07 Feb '08

***APOLOGIES FOR RECEIPT OF DUPLICATE POSTINGS*** Colleagues/ A Most Interesting Business/Social Online Network: _Hoover's Connect_: Hoover*s, Inc., a D&B company, announced the official launch of Hoover*s Connect, a business networking tool that helps users get introduced to and establish relationships with targeted prospects. [snip] Hoover*s Connect is designed to provide an effective, nonintrusive way for its users to connect to a person through someone the prospect may already have a strong relationship with and who is therefore best suited to make that introduction. [snip] Hoover*s Connect is easy to use. When the user goes to a particular Hoover*s company record and clicks the "Connect" button, various referral paths appear that highlight the strongest path within that user*s network. The service allows users to build their networks actively (by inviting colleagues to join) as well as passively (through an Outlook plug-in that applies unique social networking algorithms to automatically rate relationship strength). [More] For Additional Information about Hoover's Connect and Links to The Home Page and The Demo Site Please Visit [ http://onlinesocialnetworks.blogspot.com/2008/02/hoovers-connect-business-n… ] Regards, /Gerry Gerry McKiernan Associate Professor Science and Technology Librarian Iowa State University Library Ames IA 50011 gerrymck(a)iastate.edu There is Nothing More Powerful Than An Idea Whose Time Has Come Victor Hugo [ http://www.blogger.com/profile/09093368136660604490 ] Iowa: Where the Tall Corn Flows and the (North)West Wind Blows ... [ http://www.alternativeenergyblogs.blogspot.com/ ]

1 0

Re: [Air-L] IR 9.0 Deadline extension
by Tuszynski, Stephanie 07 Feb '08

07 Feb '08

And here I was all set to join Rhiannon's revolution... the spoils of war without the bloodshed! (Thanks Brian!) Stephanie Tuszynski Visiting Assistant Professor Department of Theatre and Film University of Toledo

1 0

Questions, questions...
by Brian Loader 07 Feb '08

07 Feb '08

Now about these colloqiums, panels and roundtables... FAQs 1. Can I send my proposal to that nice Program Chair chap and hope that he puts it on the system? Answer: No you must submit it yourself but if you have any problems or made a mistake please contact that very nice Charlie Breindahl person who (unlike the Program Chair who just talks about ICTs)is a wizard with the site - charlie.breindahl(a)gmail.com 2.If some colleagues and I are part of a panel proposal, can we also be part of a roundtable proposal? Answer: Yes probably. The rules are: one paper + one panel = fine One paper + one roundtable = fine one paper + two panels = fine (but any element may be rejected) One paper + one panel + one round table = fine (but any element may be rejected) more than one paper / unless there are _really_ compelling reasons second author is o.k.) / not so fine. You can be second author of anything over and above what you submit above. Obviously we are looking to provide high quality sessions with the widest possible contributions. 3. "Graduate students wishing to be a candidate for the Student Award must send a final paper by June 30, 2008". Does it mean that they do not have to submit abstract first and get accepted before submitting the full paper? Answer: Proposal/abstract should be submitted in the usual way. Full papers for Student Award by June 30, 2008. 4.Can you tell me how long panels and roundtables are scheduled to last and how many people are supposed to participate in each type of session? Answer: The sessions will be one and a half hours long. There is no fixed numbers but my experience is that together with a Chair/Moderator you should consider four to six participants. BUT please think about the needs of the audience who will want to participate in the discussions. I'm sure someone on the list (Barry Wellman?) can provide us with a social scientific law which demonstrates that academics will always talk for twice the allotted time given to them. Therefore leave plenty of time for interaction and debate. 5.i'm just writing up a panel proposal for the conference and am not sure of the word count. the call for papers suggests 600-800 words for information about the panel (not including paper abstracts). i'm wondering if this should include the information about presenters too? Answer: The poposal should list panel members. Very brief biogs with accompanying abstracts please. 6. Any information on the Doctoral Colloquium yet? Answer: We are delighted to announce that Professor Klaus Bruhn Jensen will be facilitating the Doctoral Colloqium on Wednesday 15 October. More details to follow on the list and website soon. OK that's it for now but please ask more questions if you are still unsure of anything. Brian Brian D. Loader Co-Director, Social Informatics Research Unit (SIRU), Department of Sociology, Wentworth College, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD Email bl506(a)york.ac.uk Tel: +44(0) 1904 432639 Fax: +44(0) 1904 433043

1 0

Job ad: Research associate at NCeSS (re-advertisement)
by Yuwei Lin 07 Feb '08

07 Feb '08

*** Apologies for Cross-posting *** Research Associate Vacancy at NCeSS Hub (Re-advertisement) Closing date: 25/02/2008 Reference: HUM/70376 http://www.ncess.ac.uk/about_us/vacancies/ The primary objective of the National Centre for e-Social Science (NCeSS) is to develop and promote the application of innovations in digital research infrastructure (commonly known as e-Infrastructure) for the benefit of economic and social scientists: see http://www.ncess.ac.uk. NCeSS comprises a coordinating Hub, based at the University of Manchester, and seven major research Nodes at other UK universities. The Hub wishes to appoint a Research Associate with a background in Economics, Econometrics, quantitative Social Science, or Computer Science combined with extensive experience of working with economic and social scientists. The post-holder will investigate how e-Infrastructure - networked, distributed, scalable computational tools and services - can encourage and assist economic and social researchers to use (and re-use) quantitative data in tackling their substantive research. This investigation will contribute to the ESRC's National Data Strategy, which aims to develop a world class social science data infrastructure capable of delivering all the data necessary to address current and future research needs in the social sciences. The post is tenable from the earliest possible date for two years. This is a re-advertisement and previous applicants need not re-apply. Salary: £26,666 to £32,796 p.a. Informal enquiries: Tel: + 44 (0) 161 275 1381 Email: rob.procter(a)ncess.ac.uk To request a hard copy of application form: Katy Middlebrough Tel: + 44 (0) 161 275 4723 Email: Katy.Middlebrough(a)manchester.ac.uk Please quote reference HUM/70376 Closing date: 25/02/2008 Interview date: w/c 03/03/2008 For full details of the post, and to download an application form, please visit http://www.ncess.ac.uk/about_us/vacancies/

1 0

IR 9.0 Deadline extension
by Brian Loader 07 Feb '08

07 Feb '08

I have now received a number of requests for an extension to the submission deadline for IR 9.0 - please don't send any more! Having informally agreed to these I am now formally extending the submission date to FRIDAY 22 FEBRUARY (please don't ask exactly what time lets just say Friday!! Actually where does Friday end?). Hope this helps everyone who wants to submit a proposal but is under time constraints. I will shortly be providing answers to all your other questions on the list. When I find all the answers... Keep those submissions coming in. Brian Brian D. Loader Co-Director, Social Informatics Research Unit (SIRU), Department of Sociology, Wentworth College, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD Email bl506(a)york.ac.uk Tel: +44(0) 1904 432639 Fax: +44(0) 1904 433043

3 2

Re: [Air-L] open-access is the future: boycott locked-down academic journals
by Jason Wilson 07 Feb '08

07 Feb '08

Hi all, As someone involved with the journal danah singles out, I've responded to this on danah's blog, and reposted on a group blog I'm involved with. To cut and paste the response would be too large for the list's size limits. Suffice to say that I found this assessment of academic publishing as simplistic as I did the first time I heard these ideas, many years ago. I think anyone who is in new media studies, and who has had good experiences with academic publishing, should join this debate. It certainly feels important to me. Dr Jason Wilson Research Associate Queensland University of Technology Brisbane Australia j5.wilson(a)qut.edu.au jason_a_wilson(a)yahoo.com.au http://spooner.beds.ac.uk/nmrg http://gatewatching.org ----- Original Message ---- From: danah boyd <aoir.z3z(a)danah.org> To: aoir list <air-l(a)aoir.org> Sent: Thursday, 7 February, 2008 4:07:51 PM Subject: [Air-L] open-access is the future: boycott locked-down academic journals At AOIR this year, we heard a lot about open-access journals and the future of academic publishing. These talks were extremely well- received. At the same time, I have a sneaking suspicion that most of us came back home and continued to publish with the same respected journals that we've always published with. I've certainly seen a lot of CFPs from folks wanting to publish issues in locked-down journals. Today, an article of mine was finally published in Sage's Convergence series. I should be excited by this, but I'm actually quite depressed. While I'm lucky to be visible enough that some folks will find out about my article and ask me for a copy, most of the articles in that issue will barely get read because they are virtually inaccessible. Additionally, while scholars will ask me for my article, most policymakers and technologists will not, even though the article is probably more relevant to them than it is to you. I believe that the locked-down nature of this publishing regime silences academics while capitalizing off of our free labor at every turn. I think that this is unfair, unacceptable, and irresponsible. Thus, since I'm a blogger, I wrote a ranty blog entry about the topic: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2008/02/06/openaccess_is_t.html In said ranty blog entry, I laid out a set of steps for how to proceed to make change. For example, I think that all tenured faculty have a responsibility to stop publishing in locked-down journals and help build up the reputations of open-access ones. (I even believe that those who flout journal's restrictions by publishing their pieces on their websites are failing future generations by not pushing for change to happen.) I offer steps for scholars, libraries, universities, tenure committees, disciplinary associations, and scholars at all stages. In short, I'd like to see a boycott of locked-down academic journals. I think that it's particularly critical in our field since we are doing work that is relevant beyond the academy. I think that we need to stand in solidarity to stop this abuse of our labor and this silencing of our voices. Am I crazy? danah _______________________________________________ The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/ Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address. www.yahoo7.com.au/y7mail

1 0

IR 9.0 Submission Deadline
by Brian Loader 07 Feb '08

07 Feb '08

For those of you who promised yourselves that you would get that proposal submitted for the IR 9.0 Conference:Rethinking Communities, Rethinking Place submitted by the end of the day I just thought I would help with a reminder. Just go to: http://conferences.aoir.org/ And click on the 'submissions site' link... Deadline is Friday 8 February. Brian Brian D. Loader Co-Director, Social Informatics Research Unit (SIRU), Department of Sociology, Wentworth College, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD Email bl506(a)york.ac.uk Tel: +44(0) 1904 432639 Fax: +44(0) 1904 433043

8 11