Plan S may ‘consolidate power of big publishers’, academy warns | Times Higher Education (THE)

Speaking at London Book Fair, James Rivington, head of publications at the British Academy which funds humanities and social science research, said many journals run by learned societies may struggle to adapt to Plan S rules (which come into effect in January 2020) and may seek commercial alliances to survive….”

Plan S may ‘consolidate power of big publishers’, academy warns | Times Higher Education (THE)

Speaking at London Book Fair, James Rivington, head of publications at the British Academy which funds humanities and social science research, said many journals run by learned societies may struggle to adapt to Plan S rules (which come into effect in January 2020) and may seek commercial alliances to survive….”

Traditional scientific publishers have repeatedly undermined moves towards open access | Evidence & Reason

I recently read a profile of Alexandra Elbakyan and her pirate library, Sci-Hub. Sci-Hub provides free access to a huge number of scientific papers which would otherwise be locked away behind paywalls and only available if you paid a huge fee. The traditional scientific publishers are not happy with that, have sued her several times and continually try to take down her site. I think, given the current realities in science, that Sci-Hub is necessary until the publication process can be reformed.

I have a colleague with whom I talk about publication practices in science and that sort of thing and, while we generally agree, we do differ on our attitudes to traditional publishers. He has often said that he doesn’t want to drive them out of business and would like to work together with them to solve the problems. I have generally maintained that they are antiquated relics from the print age who serve no real purpose, add little to no value to the scientific enterprise and oppose necessary reforms in science. …

One of their more ridiculous complaints is that they need more time. Springer Nature suggested a phased transition approach would help. This is blatant stalling. They cannot seriously suggest that they have not had time to think about these issues and come up with a plan. They seemed similarly unprepared when the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation said all the research they funded had to published as open access in the beginning of 2017 and discussions around open access have been ongoing for many years!…”

Plan S: HighWire whitepaper explores the options publishers are considering – Highwire Press

When we launched HighWire back in 1995, the Internet was transforming the way academic research content was developed, hosted and communicated. It was an exciting time. The rapidly accelerating digital era brought published content to international research communities in an instant. This was access like never before….

Plan S has invigorated the most active debate since the proposal of “ebiomed” and PubMed Central about 20 years ago. How will publishers achieve Open Access compliance? What are the main questions and concerns publishers and journals have? And what could genuine solutions be, based on what we currently know? …

Bringing the HighWire community together over the course of 4 months, we were able to identify and explore 14 implementation options for publishers and how they could deliver against the ten principles as set out by cOAlition S. This whitepaper summarizes the findings and details the 4 most preferred options….”

 

Plan S: HighWire whitepaper explores the options publishers are considering – Highwire Press

When we launched HighWire back in 1995, the Internet was transforming the way academic research content was developed, hosted and communicated. It was an exciting time. The rapidly accelerating digital era brought published content to international research communities in an instant. This was access like never before….

Plan S has invigorated the most active debate since the proposal of “ebiomed” and PubMed Central about 20 years ago. How will publishers achieve Open Access compliance? What are the main questions and concerns publishers and journals have? And what could genuine solutions be, based on what we currently know? …

Bringing the HighWire community together over the course of 4 months, we were able to identify and explore 14 implementation options for publishers and how they could deliver against the ten principles as set out by cOAlition S. This whitepaper summarizes the findings and details the 4 most preferred options….”

 

Search is on for new steward to deliver Plan S open access, as Smits bows out

“Robert-Jan Smits finished his one year mandate as the European Commission’s open access envoy last week and will be replaced for now by Robert [Kiley], head of open research at the Wellcome Trust, until a long-term coordinator for the Plan S open access initiative is appointed.

Smits, who is leaving the Commission to become president of the Eindhoven University of Technology, says there is a shortlist of two candidates to take over the position on a permanent basis….”

bjoern.brembs.blog » How publishers keep fooling academics

“Time and time again, academic publishers have managed to create the impression that publishing incurs a lot of costs which justify the outrageous prices they charge, be that US$11M p.a. for an Elsevier Big Deal subscription or an article processing charge (APC) of US$5,200 for a Nature Communications article.

This week, again, an academic publisher, SpringerNature, reaffirmed its readers that they have huge costs that necessitate the price they charge. This time, the publisher repeated their testimony from 2004 that “they have high internal costs” that amount to €10,000-30,000 per published article….

This means that what the publishers are referring to isn’t their costs for publishing at all, it is the price that they charge the public for all of their services.

It is well established that the cost of making an article public with all the bells and whistles that come with an academic article is between US$/€200-500. This is the item one would reasonably call “publication costs”. Because they are so low, this item cannot be the main reason for the price of a typical Nature branded article. SpringerNature performs additional services, some of which are somewhat related to the publication process, other not so much….”

Springer Nature pledges support for Plan S | Research Information

Springer Nature is specifically calling on cOAlition S funders to:

  • Commit to undertake research to demonstrate the benefits of OA and the promotion of it to increase author and other funder take-up;
  • Commit to make transformative deals, such as Publish and Read deals, a key part of Plan S given their proven ability to drive growth in OA and within these deals and to remove its requirement for publishers to commit to ‘flip’ hybrid journals to OA in the near future;
  • Rethink more broadly its opposition to hybrid journals at a time when many academic disciplines and many geographic regions are not yet fully supportive of Gold OA;  
  • Remove the requirement to provide APC discounts for middle income countries such as China which is the largest publisher of academic research in the world and the second largest investor in R&D;
  • Recognise that highly selective journals and those with significant levels of non-primary research content need to be treated differently; and
  • Support platforms providing early access to primary research….”

OLH Readership and Cost Reports for 2018-2019

“That said, here are the key numbers for February 13th 2018 to February 13th 2019 for the Open Library of Humanities and the journals that we publish and fund:

  • We published 443 articles.
  • These articles were uniquely downloaded 61,155 times.
  • These articles were uniquely viewed 337,237 times.
  • Taking the USD median fee level, the cost per institution per published article was £2.41.
  • Taking the USD median fee level, the cost per institution per download was £0.02.
  • Taking the USD median fee level, the cost per institution per view was £0.003….”

Wiley Contract – Projekt DEAL

“We are happy to publish here the full text of the “Publish&Read” agreement between Project DEAL and Wiley signed 15th January 2019.

The forward-looking “Publish&Read” model at the basis of the agreement delivers the benefits of open access to authors and advances the principles of open science by enabling institutions and researchers alike to make the most of the opportunities that open dissemination in our digital environment provides….”