“Regular readers of News & Views know that we at Delta Think track open access journal launches as a way to monitor industry and discipline-specific trends in Open Access. There is no doubt that demand—by virtue of the proliferation of OA journals needing hosting—is increasing. But what about supply?
There are several well-established hosting platform service providers who support mixed model content portfolios (e.g., Atypon, Highwire, Ingenta, PubFactory, and Silverchair). There are also new entrants on both the commercial and not-for-profit side who have scaled their core businesses to include hosting (e.g. River Valley Technologies and SPIE).
Today, however, we’re looking at a third segment of the hosting market—platforms that have been developed specifically and exclusively for open access content. We asked three hosting platform providers —Cambridge Open Engage (from CUP), Phenom (from Hindawi Limited), and Libero (developed by eLife and supported by the Libero community)—to tell us about their evolution as an OA hosting platform and their view of the future….”
“Peer review systems have developed over time to adjust to the changing requirements of different academic journals, pushing the legacy systems to the edge of their capabilities. Most importantly, an ongoing shift towards a more open culture in scholarly communications, including Open Access and Open Data, has created new challenges by bringing to light the inherent limitations of current proprietary infrastructure.
Now, imagine a world where peer review systems were built in a way that serves the wider research community, reducing duplication of effort, increasing flexibility and editorial control without sacrificing transparency, and bringing the cost of publishing down. What would that world look like and how do we build it?
This month, a second Hindawi journal will move onto the Phenom Review system, our new peer review platform built entirely open source. Phenom Review is part of Hindawi’s collaboration with Coko utilizing their open source PubSweet framework….”
“Since joining Hindawi last autumn, I have been impressed by my colleagues’ dedication to Open Science and to supporting research communities. We are working on open publishing infrastructures to lead the Open Science publishing agenda and partnering with service providers to bring benefits to our authors around the world.
In this vein, we are pleased to announce today that we are shifting our journal model and appointing Chief Editors on a selection of titles during 2019.
The aim is to improve the way the journals support their communities and is in direct response to conversations we have had with authors and Editorial Board Members and consultations with policy makers, funding agencies, leading databases and Open Access organizations. …”
“Hindawi today announces updates to its journals’ Editorial models to more fully serve their communities and the researchers that publish within them in the era of Open Access, Open Data, Open Infrastructure and Open Science. The open access publisher will be appointing Chief Editors on some titles during 2019 to champion both their journal and Open Science practices, such as data sharing, within the wider academic community. Hindawi is committed to fostering Open Science to help researchers make their research more easy to discover, understand and reuse. To drive this forward, Chief Editors will be directly involved in leading the transition of all journals to follow Open Science practices. As well as having responsibility for the journal’s Aims and Scope and editorial mission, Chief Editors’ will ensure that published articles are in line with the journal aims and that the journal’s output represents a contribution to the specific research community it serves….”
“As Hindawi turned 20 on May 15, we wanted to reflect on how far we have come. How did an Egyptian startup break into a market dominated by centuries-old conglomerates protected by moats of prestige? …
Hindawi’s first decade was spent building a global publishing business and learning to compete with much larger companies. Our second was spent defining and promoting OA publishing models. We look forward to many more years of applying the same rigorous attention to detail to the craft of scholarly publishing, contributing to a more open and connected world….”
“Open Access, however, is the tip of the scholarly iceberg. And we want Plan S to be the catalyst for change it deserves to be – the catalyst for Open Science – which is after all just good science practiced in a way that takes advantage of the global reach and technology of our digital age. We therefore support the Coalition’s endeavours to obtain more global agreement on their plan – it cannot succeed without this. We also encourage the Coalition to take this opportunity to provide even closer alignment between the proposed timing of the flip to Open Access and the change to the way researchers are ranked and rewarded. Without coupling the change to Open Access with a parallel change in the evaluation of all research outputs, and the infrastructure to support such change, there is a risk we entrench the existing oligopoly of publishers within a cultural and financial system of scholarship that will continue to exclude the diversity, talent and innovation that science – in its broadest sense – requires to address the profound challenges facing society….”
“Consistent with our mission to drive greater openness in research, in September of this year we released a new peer review system that has been built using an open-source framework. The new platform was developed as part of our collaboration with the Collaborative Knowledge Foundation (Coko) and was the first step towards a network of open publishing infrastructure that we, Coko, and other like-minded organizations like eLife and University of California Press are developing and plan to share with the research community. An earnest commitment to openness can only be built on open scholarly infrastructure….”
“Hindawi submitted a proposal this May in response to the European Commission’s tender to launch a new publishing platform. The Commission’s aim is to build on their progressive Open Science agenda to provide an optional Open Access publishing platform for the articles of all researchers with Horizon 2020 grants. The platform will also provide incentives for researchers to adopt Open Science practices, such as publishing preprints, sharing data, and open peer review. The potential for this initiative to lead a systemic transformation in research practice and scholarly communication in Europe and more widely should not be underestimated. Here we outline our bid to the Commission and our rationale for doing so.”