SCOSS

“While such [OA] policy directives are essential to advancing open access, so too is an infrastructure that can support a publishing landscape steadily migrating to a state where “Open” is the default.

Many key services that now comprise the existing infrastructure, which has evolved over time, are non-commercial and far from financially secure. Some could even be described as “at risk”.

Being that many of these services are now fundamental to implementing Open Access and Open Science policies and supporting these workflows, securing them has become a growing concern of the broader OA and OS community.

The formation of the Global Sustainability Coalition for Open Science Services (SCOSS) represents a community-led effort to help maintain, and ultimately secure, vital infrastructure….

The Global Sustainability Coalition for Open Science Services (SCOSS) is a network of influential organisations committed to helping secure OA and OS infrastructure well into the future. Officially formed in early 2017, SCOSS’ purpose is to provide a new co-ordinated cost-sharing framework that will ultimately enable the broader OA and OS community to support the non-commercial services on which it depends.

SCOSS will function primarily to help identify and track, via a registry, non-commercial services essential to Open Science, and to make qualified recommendations on which of these services should be considered for funding support….”

Most of the no-fee OA journals listed in the DOAJ are published in languages other than English

“Leo Waaijers has dug some interest facts out of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and allowed me to post the results.

From Leo: The 7240 journals in the no-fee category in DOAJ has 1911 journals with Spanish full text, 1366 with Portuguese, 753 with French, and 692 with Indonesian. In percentages: 26, 19, 10, and 10. In the 2998 journal of the fee-based category these figures were respectively: 81, 76, 23, and 212; and in percentages: 3, 3, 1, and 7….”

Still true: 70% of peer-reviewed OA journals charge no APCs

“Every study since the first in 2005 has shown that a significant majority of peer-reviewed journals charge no APCs. Most have put that majority at about 70%.

I just looked up today’s numbers at the Directory of Open Access Journals, and the number is still 70%.

Total number of journals listed in DOAJ = 10,279 

No-fee = 7,193 = 69.97%

Fee-based = 2,980 = 28.99%

No info = 106 = 1.03% …”

Alternative Funding Mechanisms for APC-free Open Access Journals: results of the first call : OpenAIRE blog

“In 2016, within the FP7 Post-Grant Open Access Pilot, a sub-project focused on Alternative Funding Mechanisms for APC-free Open Access Journals was launched. Approximately one year later, we would like to share the main results of this workline with the public – as we believe these findings can be of interest for other initiatives and publishing platforms.”

Open Access Publishing in China

Following rapid development in the economy and huge investment in R&D, China is now widely recognised as one of the leading countries of the world in terms of the number of published journals and scientific articles. In 2015, there were over 10,000 journals in China, of which 4983 (49.76%) were in Science and Technology, according to the “Statistical Data of Chinese Science and Technology Papers 2015.

Can you Trust It? Using Open Access Materials in the Corporate World – Copyright Clearance Center

“How does the corporate researcher or library professional make sure that open access content is trustworthy? Here are some suggestions:’

India leads in Gold Open Access Publishing – fake or genuine? – News Service

“It is interesting to note that since the introduction of new criteria for DOAJ listing in March 2014, we have received the highest number of new applications from Open Access journal publishers in India, followed by those in Indonesia, USA, Brazil and Iran. From around 1600 new applications received from India since March 2014 only 4% were accepted, with 78% of the applications rejected for various reasons and approximately 18% still in process….”

Sting Operation Reveals Science’s Insane Fake News Problem 

“That being said, some folks I spoke to, including Beall and people in the open access community, thought it was a larger problem than open access publishing alone. The community tries to regulate itself after all, Andrew Wesolek, head of digital scholarship at Clemson, pointed out to Gizmodo. The DOAJ removed 39 of the 120 journals listed in its directory before the analysis came out in Nature today, though six of the eight journals that accepted the fake editor still remain. When I called Lars Bjørnshauge, their founder and managing director, he immediately asked to be put in touch with Pisanski so he could find out the titles of the six journals. He said the DOAJ removes journals with fake editors immediately. …”

A propos de DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journal) – Faculté de Médecine de l’université de Kinshasa

“Due to a tremendous number of requests for adding new journals to Hinari, exceeding the capacity to provide timely review and response, a discussion has taken place within our partnership about an appropriate solution.  We have agreed to change our reviewing process and criteria for including open access titles in Hinari.

The new process takes into account that there are other organizations who focus primarily on reviewing and accepting quality open access journals.  Therefore, Hinari has decided to work with the DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals and will list only journals that have been accepted for inclusion by the DOAJ….”