Plan S: What strategy now for the Global South?

“Since the 2002 Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) the OA movement has had many successes, many surprises, and many disappointments. OA initiatives have also often had unintended consequences and the movement has been beset with disagreement, divisiveness, and confusion. In that sense, the noise and rancour surrounding Plan S is nothing new, although the discord is perceptibly greater. What seems clear is that Plan S raises challenging questions for those in the Global South. 1 And even if Plan S fails to win sufficient support to achieve its objectives, ongoing efforts in Europe to trigger a “global flip” to open access, and the way in which open content is likely to be monetised by commercial publishers, both suggest that the South needs to develop its own (alternative) strategy….”

India’s science adviser backs bold plan to tear down journal paywalls | Science|Business

“The Indian government’s principal science adviser says the country is joining Plan S, a bold initiative launched last year by a group of European funders to ensure that, by 2020, taxpayer-funded research results are made immediately open.

Krishnaswamy VijayRaghavan, a molecular biologist who has been advising prime minister Narendra Modi’s government for almost a year, outlined the benefits of Plan S in a series of tweets on Tuesday.

“Access, dissemination [and] use of knowledge should be free; allowing all to build on research funded by the Indian government,” VijayRaghavan wrote.

His support gives fresh momentum to the controversial Plan S, which has received backing from the European Research Council and 13 national funding bodies, including agencies in France, the Netherlands and the UK. The two large philanthropic funders, Wellcome Trust and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, are also on board.

Others around the world are considering whether to join the scheme that is simultaneously hailed for knocking down paywalls and criticised as an attack on academic freedom.

China’s National Science Library, its National Science and Technology Library and the Natural Science Foundation of China, have all voiced strong support for Plan S. The National Science and Technology Council of Zambia has recently joined, and backers of the plan hope others will follow….”

Six Concerns Over India Joining the Plan S Coalition for Science Journals

On February 12, K. VijayRaghavan, the principal scientific advisor to the Government of India, announced that India would join a global consortium of countries attempting to standardise the way their scientists publish their papers, such that the papers are freely available to the public….

With India set to join the Plan S coalition, this means the Government of India, through the Ministry of Finance and the Department of Science and Technology (DST), will pay to have Indian scientists’ papers published in OA journals. In turn, everyone in the world will be able to access publicly funded research from India, and vice versa….”

Blacklisting or Whitelisting? Deterring Faculty in Developing Countries from Publishing in Substandard Journals

Abstract:  A thriving black-market economy of scam scholarly publishing, typically referred to as ‘predatory publishing,’ threatens the quality of scientific literature globally. The scammers publish research with minimal or no peer review and are motivated by article processing charges and not the advancement of scholarship. Authors involved in this scam are either duped or willingly taking advantage of the low rejection rates and quick publication process. Geographic analysis of the origin of predatory journal articles indicates that they predominantly come from developing countries. Consequently, most universities in developing countries operate blacklists of deceptive journals to deter faculty from submitting to predatory publishers. The present article discusses blacklisting and, conversely, whitelisting of legitimate journals as options of deterrence. Specifically, the article provides a critical evaluation of the two approaches by explaining how they work and comparing their pros and cons to inform a decision about which is the better deterrent.

Kenya seeks to set up open data in agriculture, nutrition – Xinhua |

Kenyan researchers have formed a team to spearhead establishment of open data to generate information and services for smallholder farmers in agriculture and nutrition.

“Open data will provide advice and warning to farmers to enable them take precautions and avoid making unnecessary losses,” said Joseph Mureithi, deputy director general in charge of livestock at Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO), during the launch of the team in Nairobi on Wednesday.

Mureithi noted that making data more open, easily available and accessible accelerates innovation and generates economic and social benefits….”

IGDORE – Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education

Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education (IGDORE) is an independent research institute dedicated to improve the quality of science, science education, and quality of life for scientists, students and their families. We’re committed to open scientific practices, free (libre) and open science, and a healthy and global science and higher education. We aim to protect whistleblowers in science and to educate and train affiliated and external scientists and students on best scientific practices.

Scientists who adhere to open scientific practices can become affiliated with IGDORE. We currently have 37 affiliated researchers whose work spans over 15 scientific disciplines (e.g. astronomy; biology; chemistry; computer science; education; electrical engineering; law; materials science; medicine; metascience; paleontology; physics; psychology; sociology). Our location independence allows affiliated scientists to reside anywhere in the world: our scientists reside in no less than 17 countries (Australia; Belgium; Brazil; Canada; Croatia; Denmark; Finland; France; India; Indonesia; Luxembourg; Netherlands; South Africa; Sweden; Turkey; United Kingdom; United States)….”

Taking Stock of the Feedback on Plan S Implementation Guidance – The Scholarly Kitchen

“I thought it might be useful to share some of the themes that I have observed emerging across the feedback documents. These are impressionistic and not a systematic analysis….

Theme 1: Clear support for the transition to open access and the goals of Plan S….

Theme 2: Concern that the implementation guidance reflects models that work for STEM but will negatively impact HSS scholars….

Theme 3: The technical requirements for publication, repository, and other platforms are poorly thought out….

Theme 4: The predicted effects on small, independent, and society publishers raise concerns for the viability of these publishers….

Theme 5: Setting a fair and reasonable APC sounds fair and reasonable but it is also likely impossible….

Theme 6: Scholars and organizations in the Global South object to being told what they want….

Theme 7: The timelines are not feasible….”

Hindawi’s response to Plan S: be the catalyst for change you deserve to be | About Hindawi

“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….”

Asia Open Access Meeting Dhaka 2019

“The Asia Open Access (OA) meeting will provide an opportunity to learn about global trends, share information across Asian countries, and help with local strategies for increasing the adoption of OA in Bangladesh. We will also present the results of the Next Generation Repositories initiative at Confederation of Open Access repositories (COAR), and work with participants to develop a strategy for their adoption across the region.

The meeting will be organized by the Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) in Dhaka, Bangladesh in Collaboration with Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)….”

Plan S and Open Access in Latin America: Interview with Dominique Babini

“Open Access publishing is more widespread in Latin America than in any other region of the world, and continues to grow. We sat down with CLACSO’s Open Access Advisor Dominique Babini to find out why….”