KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty / 2026 / Volume: 13 Issue: 2

The Open Access Movement as Commoning: Everyday Practices and Tactics of Academics in Türkiye

Tuğçe Gür Türkdoğan(İSTANBUL GELİŞİM ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-7170-5727
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2026-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

By examining how academics position themselves within the open access movement and experience its values through everyday practices and tactical responses, this study contributes to the literature on knowledge commons and the commodification of scientific knowledge production.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The open access movement has increasingly been discussed as a practice of commoning and as a response to the commodification of knowledge.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The aim of this research is to examine how academics working in higher education institutions in Türkiye position themselves within the open access movement.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:By examining how academics position themselves within the open access movement and experience its values through everyday practices and tactical responses, this study contributes to the literature on knowledge commons and the commodification of scientific knowledge production.
🔬Tür:Research Article
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Commoning · Open Access Movement · Tactical Responses

Abstract

The open access movement has increasingly been discussed as a practice of commoning and as a response to the commodification of knowledge. The aim of this research is to examine how academics working in higher education institutions in Türkiye position themselves within the open access movement. It explores how academics interpret and experience restrictions such as copyright within the context of the movement. More specifically, the study examines the everyday practices and tactical responses developed by academics in response to restrictions such as copyright and paywalls. To this end, semi-structured interviews were conducted with twenty-one faculty members from state and foundation universities in Türkiye. A phenomenological design was employed, and the data were analysed using thematic analysis. Thematic analysis revealed that academics interpret the open access movement as a productive buffer zone within the liminal space in which alternatives are constructed, and that they adopt various everyday practices and tactical responses to restrictions such as copyright limitations. Grounded in orientations toward an open, free, and independent understanding of science, these tactics include forming solidarity networks, fostering collaborative practices, and compliance with copyright and related rules. By examining how academics position themselves within the open access movement and experience its values through everyday practices and tactical responses, this study contributes to the literature on knowledge commons and the commodification of scientific knowledge production.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Türkdoğan, T. G. (2026). The Open Access Movement as Commoning: Everyday Practices and Tactics of Academics in Türkiye. Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, Volume: 13 Issue: 2. https://ajindex.com/articles/1642021

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (36)

  1. Benkler, Y. (2003). Freedom in the commons: Towards a political economy of information. Duke Law Journal, 52(6), 1245–1276.
  2. Björk, C. (2017). Open access to scientific articles: A review of benefits and challenges. Intern Emerg Med, 12, 247–253.
  3. Bohannon, J. (2016). Who’s downloading pirated papers? Everyone data from the controversial website Sci-hub reveal that the whole world turns to it for journal articles. Science, 352(6285), 508-512.
  4. Budapest Open Access Initiative. (2002). Read the Budapest Open Access Initiative, https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/
  5. Creswell, J.W. (2013) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th Ed.). SAGE Publications.
  6. de Certeau, M. (2009). Gündelik hayatın keşfi (L. Arslan Özcan, Trans.). Dost Kitabevi.
  7. Ekşi Sözlük. (2025). Makale aranıyor duyuruları. https://eksisozluk.com/makale-araniyor-duyurulari--1692367?p=1596
  8. Elbakyan, A., & Bohannon, J. (2021). Data from: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone [Dataset]. 352(6285), https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.q447c
  9. Faust, J. (2016). Sci-Hub A solution to the problem of paywalls, or merely a diagnosis of a broken system? Annals of Emergency Medicine, 68(1), 15-17.
  10. Fırat, B. Ö. (2004). Gezi komünü: Ortak mülkler ve müşterekleştirme. In M. Özbek (Ed.), Kamusal alan (pp. 567-573). Hil Yayınları.
  11. Frederick, D. E. (2020). Scholarly communications, predatory publishers and publishor perish culture in the 2020s. Library Hi Tech News, 37(5), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-01-2020-0007
  12. Gür Türkdoğan, T. (2021). Değişen Muhalefet Etme Biçimleri [Doctoral dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
  13. Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2006). Multitude, war and democracy in the age of empire. Penguin Books.
  14. Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallières, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., & Hilf, E. (2004). The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access. Serials Revie, 30(4), 310–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2004.10764930
  15. Harvard University Library. (2008). Harvard open access policies. https://library.harvard.edu/about/policies/harvard-open-access-policies
  16. Hess, C., & Ostrom, E. (Eds.). (2007). Understanding knowledge as a commons: From theory to practice. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6980.001.0001
  17. Himmelstein, D. S., Romero, A. R., Levernier, J. G., Munro, T. A., McLaughlin, S. R., Greshake Tzovaras, B., & Greene, C. S. (2018). Sci-Hub provides access to nearly all scholarly literature. ELife, 7, e32822. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32822
  18. Holley, R. P. (2018). Open access: Current overview and future prospects. Library Trends, 67(2), 214-240.
  19. Hutter M., & Throsby, D. (Eds.). (2008). Beyond price: value in culture, economics, and the arts. Cambridge University Press.
  20. Jessop, B. (2009). Hayalî bir meta olarak bilgi: Polanyici bir yaklaşımın katkıları ve sınırları. In A. Buğra & K. Ağartan (Eds.), 21. yüzyılda Karl Polanyi'yi okumak: Bir siyasi proje olarak piyasa ekonomisi (pp. 163–186). İletişim Yayınları.
  21. Joseph, H. (2013). The open access movement grows up: taking stock of a revolution. PLoS Biol 11(10), e1001686, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001686
  22. Lewis, D. W. (2012). The inevitability of open access. College & Research Libraries, 73(5), 493-506. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl-299
  23. Linebaugh, P. (2008), The Magna Carta manifest: Liberties and commons for all. University of California Press. May, C., & Sell, S. K. (2006). Intellectual property rights: A critical history. Lynne Reinner Publishers.
  24. Pélissier, M. (2021). Cultural commons in the digital ecosystem. John Wiley & Sons.
  25. Poynder, R. (2012). Suber: Leader of a leaderless revolution. Information Today. https://www.infotoday.com/it/jul11/Suber-Leader-of-a-Leaderless-Revolution.shtml
  26. Swartz, A. (2008). Guerilla Open Access Manifesto. https://archive.org/details/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/mode/1up
  27. Tenopir, C., Dalton, E. D., Christian, L., Jones, M. K., McCabe, M., Smith, M., & Fish, A. (2017). Imagining a gold open access future: Attitudes, behaviors, and funding scenarios among authors of academic scholarship. College and Research Libraries, 78(6), 824-844. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.6.824
  28. The Cost of Knowledge. (2012). The Cost of Knowledge. http://thecostofknowledge.com/ Thompson, E. (1993). Customs in common. Penguin Books.
  29. Tilly, C. (2008). Contentious performances. Cambridge University Press.
  30. University of California Office of Scholarly Communication. (2019). UC and Elsevier. https://osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/2019/03/uc-and-elsevier-march-2019/
  31. Uysal, A. (2017). Sokakta siyaset. Türkiye'de protesto eylemleri, protestocular ve polis. İletişim Yayınları.
  32. Wildman, W. J., Bulbulia, J., Sosis, R., & Schjoedt, U. (2019). Is the open access movement about to get real? Religion, Brain & Behavior, 9(2), 105–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2019.1595073
  33. Willinsky, J. (2006). The access principle: The case for open access to research and scholarship. MIT Press.
  34. Wittel, A. (2018). Higher education as a gift and as a commons. tripleC 16(1), 194-213.
  35. Yalçıntaş, A. (2018). Bırakınız kopyalasınlar, bırakınız paylaşsınlar: Dijitalleşme ve internet çağında fikri mülkiyet ilişkileri (1st ed.). Open Science Framework.
  36. Zhong, C. (2009). Development of institutional repositories in Chinese universities and the open access movement in China. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Electronic Publishing (pp. 527–534). https://elpub.architexturez.net/doc/oai-elpub-id-97-elpub2009