To celebrate Open Access Week, which starts today, we’re planning a series of posts. Despite the many years that OA has been with us, it’s still a somewhat confusing topic. It’s not always obvious what someone means when they say “open access”, and there an ever-growing suite of evolving opinions and policies from the many interested parties – funders, research institutions, publishers, and other stakeholders in scholarly communications.

To help make it easier to find out about what we, the Press, mean by “Open Access”, and what our policies are, we’ve recently revamped our OA information pages: www.cambridge.org/openaccess . There, we gather and explain our Green OA policies for journals and books, our double-dipping policy for journals, and all the other information commonly needed by authors, librarians and others.

But aside from the considered, adopted positions explained in those information pages, we have an ongoing internal dialogue about how we can best continue to develop our Open Access activities. Fundamentally, OA is an important strategic growth area for the Press. We have 17 wholly OA journals, and 11 OA books, and we’re working to substantially develop that list. We also have a goal to be ever more transparent about issues that challenge us, and we’re starting to surface more of our internal debate about how we can best to drive forward our Open Access publishing, as you’ll see in another post from me this week on our news blog .