Abstract: The National Transportation Library (NTL) at the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) provides national and international access to the crucial transportation information that falls within the scope of grey literature, including the results of U.S. government funded research. Founded as an all-digital library in 1998, NTL’s collections include full-text-born digital and digitized publications, data products, and other resources. All items are in the public domain and available for reuse without restriction. Since 2016, NTL has led the implementation of the USDOT’s Official Public Access Plan issued in response to the February 22, 2013 Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies entitled Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research. This paper discusses the effect this plan has had on a grey literature library and the efforts to create and maintain a public access repository, as well as exploring relationships between repository platform, contents, and people.
“Without the slightest doubt, I think, we are all ready to let 2020 go and look forward to something different to come. In this forward-looking spirit, sharing information about the coming EU funding framework seems to be an appropriate topic for the last DARIAH Open post in 2020. As such, we are going to have a look at how Open Science is taking shape in the nascent Horizon Europe funding programme for 2021-2027, what to expect and what are the major changes compared to the previous funding programme, Horizon 2020. …
Open Access mandate is extended to long form publications such as books: Before going into details, let me highlight an important change that has the biggest significance for the SSH domains: that is, the full inclusion of monographs and other long forms of scholarship can be expected under the HE Open Access mandate.  Although many details are yet unclear (e.g. whether this will be achieved through BPCs only or also through direct investments in publicly owned publishing infrastructure), this is a big step forward , especially compared to other funders’ mandates (such as Plan S), where Open Access publishing of books is usually swept aside or saved for later due to its inherent and sometimes quite complex deviations from that of journal articles, which are still considered as the mainstream units of scholarly communication. Keeping an eye on the incremental changes this new policy might bring in the OA book landscape as well as supporting the scholarly networks around DARIAH to comply with this genuinely inclusive OA mandate are absolute priorities for us in the near future.
Immediate Open Access, no more embargos: Another change to expect in HE’s OA policy is that the 6 or 12 months embargo period of H2020 is eliminated from HE: peer-reviewed scholarly publications stemming from HE projects must be immediately made available Open Access in a trusted repository (green OA) with PID and good quality metadata coming with a CC BY (or CC BY NC / ND / NC-ND for long-form publications). In addition to the open deposition, publishing Open Access (gold or diamond OA) is highly encouraged (publication in closed or hybrid venues will not be banned, but those fees will not be eligible for reimbursement). …
Intellectual property rights stay with the authors/beneficiaries: In alignment with Plan S, beneficiaries/authors must retain the IPRs of their publications to comply with the OA mandates. (“Authors/beneficiaries must retain enough rights for open access.”) …”
In a step towards open access, the publisher of Science will start allowing some authors publishing in its high-profile subscription journals to share their accepted manuscripts openly online under liberal terms that mean anyone could reproduce or redistribute the work.
Abstract: Gender equality and Open Access (OA) are priorities within the European Research Area and cross-cutting issues in European research program H2020. Gender and openness are also key elements of responsible research and innovation. However, despite the common underlying targets of fostering an inclusive, transparent and sustainable research environment, both issues are analysed as independent topics. This paper represents a first exploration of the inter-linkages between gender and OA analysing the scientific production of researchers of the Italian National Research Council under a gender perspective integrated with the different OA publications modes. A bibliometric analysis was carried out for articles published in the period 2016–2018 and retrieved from the Web of Science. Results are presented constantly analysing CNR scientific production in relation to gender, disciplinary fields and OA publication modes. These variables are also used when analysing articles that receive financial support. Our results indicate that gender disparities in scientific production still persist particularly in STEM disciplines, while the gender gap is the closest to parity in medical and agricultural sciences. A positive dynamic toward OA publishing and women’s scientific production is shown when disciplines with well-established open practices are related to articles supported by funds. A slightly higher women’s propensity toward OA is shown when considering Gold OA, or authorships with women in the first and last article by-line position. The prevalence of Italian funded articles with women’s contributions published in Gold OA journals seems to confirm this tendency, especially if considering the weak enforcement of the Italian OA policies.
“Based on an initial landscape assessment and the work of related initiatives, FAIRsFAIR has prepared a series of recommendations for policy enhancement (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3686900) to support the realisation of a FAIR ecosystem. We invite expressions of interest from policy makers at all levels to work with us to assess their current policies against these recommendations and to consider how the policies might be adapted to better support the emergence of a FAIR ecosystem.
We are keen to work with policy makers in various settings (national, funding body, publisher, organisational, research infrastructure, repository) and at different levels of policy development and implementation….”
“Faculty members are encouraged to submit scholarly articles to the University of Arkansas for deposit in an open access institutional repository. For each article submitted to the institutional repository and subject to the license revocation exclusion set out in paragraph 3 below, each faculty member would grant non-exclusive distribution rights for the article to the University of Arkansas. This grant of non-exclusive distribution rights would transfer from the faculty member to the University of Arkansas a nonexclusive, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to the article, in any medium, provided that the article is not sold for a profit, nor that the University of Arkansas would gain any right to authorize others to do the same….”
Abstract: The European Journal of Psychotraumatology, owned by the European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS), launched as one of the first full Open Access ‘specialist’ journals in its field. Has this Open Access model worked in how the Journal has performed? With the European Journal of Psychotraumatology celebrating its ten-year anniversary we look back at the past decade of sharing our research with the world and with how the journal sits with the broader movement beyond Open Access to Open Research and we present new policies we have adopted to move the field of psychotraumatology to the next level of Open Research. While we as researchers now make our publications more often freely available to all, how often do we share our protocols, our statistical analysis plans, or our data? We all gain from more transparency and reproducibility, and big steps are being made in this direction. The journal’s decennial performance as well as the exciting new Open Research developments are presented in this editorial. The journal is no longer in its infancy and eager to step into the next decade of Open Research.
Abstract: Data management plans (DMPs) have increasingly been encouraged as a key component of institutional and funding body policy. Although DMPs necessarily place administrative burden on researchers, proponents claim that DMPs have myriad benefits, including enhanced research data quality, increased rates of data sharing, and institutional planning and compliance benefits.
In this article, we explore the international history of DMPs and describe institutional and funding body DMP policy. We find that economic and societal benefits from presumed increased rates of data sharing was the original driver of mandating DMPs by funding bodies. Today, 86% of UK Research Councils and 63% of US funding bodies require submission of a DMP with funding applications. Given that no major Australian funding bodies require DMP submission, it is of note that 37% of Australian universities have taken the initiative to internally mandate DMPs. Institutions both within Australia and internationally frequently promote the professional benefits of DMP use, and endorse DMPs as ‘best practice’. We analyse one such typical DMP implementation at a major Australian institution, finding that DMPs have low levels of apparent translational value. Indeed, an extensive literature review suggests there is very limited published systematic evidence that DMP use has any tangible benefit for researchers, institutions or funding bodies.
We are therefore led to question why DMPs have become the go-to tool for research data professionals and advocates of good data practice. By delineating multiple use-cases and highlighting the need for DMPs to be fit for intended purpose, we question the view that a good DMP is necessarily that which encompasses the entire data lifecycle of a project. Finally, we summarise recent developments in the DMP landscape, and note a positive shift towards evidence-based research management through more researcher-centric, educative, and integrated DMP services.