“We have fought to see Open Access policy enacted for well over a decade, and it’s important to let the White House know that there is deep support for this policy from our community. We hope you will sign this letter to the President along with other patient advocacy groups expressing our strong support for such a policy.
The U.S. government funds more than $60 billion in scientific research each year on behalf of the public. Making sure that the results of this research are readily accessible to all people will speed the pace of scientific discovery, spur innovation, provide fuel for the creation of new jobs across a broad spectrum of the economy – and, importantly, will give patients and their families hope of finding cures to rare and currently untreatable diseases.
We’ve made slow but steady progress towards our goal getting this information into the hands of the public as quickly as possible, starting with a policy requiring all NIH-funded research articles to be made available within one year of publication, and successfully expanding that policy (via legislation and White House memorandums) to cover all federally funded scientific research.
We now have the opportunity to once and for eliminate the current 12 month embargo period and allow the public to have immediate access to not only articles reporting on taxpayer funded research, but also the underlying data supporting those articles.
An immediate open access policy would also bring the U.S. in line with other nations around the world that are increasingly adopting immediate Open Access policies. Last year, more than a dozen national research funders across Europe introduced “Plan S” to make all scientific works freely available as soon as they are published. Support for Open Access has also grown among private research funders, with foundations requiring immediate open access to articles and data. …”
“The Initiative for Science in Europe (ISE) is an independent platform of European Learned Societies and Research Organizations operating within different disciplines and across sectors. ISE supports all fields of science at a European level, involves researchers in the design and implementation of European science policies, and advocates strong independent scientific advice in European policy making. ISE has been instrumental in promoting disruptive excellence-based funding programmes for scientific research such as the ERC….
ISE was created in 2004; it played an central role in the creation of the European Research Council. Since 2006, it has been active in promoting the European scientific community’s views on the framework programmes and their budgets, open access, scientific advice and several other issues.”
“The American Sociological Association has signed a letter that profoundly betrays the public interest and goes against the values that many of us in the scholarly community embrace.
The letter to President Trump, signed by dozes of academic societies, voices opposition to a rumored federal policy change that would require federally funded research be made freely available upon publication, rather than according to the currently mandated 12-month embargo — which ASA similarly, bitterly, opposed in 2012. ASA has not said who made the decision to sign this letter. All I know is that, as a member of the Committee on Publications, I wasn’t consulted or notified. I don’t know what the ASA rules are for issuing such statements in our name, but this one is disgraceful.
The argument is that ASA would not be able to make money selling research generated by federal funding if it were required to be distributed for free. And because ASA would suffer, science and the public interest would suffer. Like when Trump says getting Ukraine to help him win re-election is by definition in the American interest — what helps ASA is what’s good for science….
So I posted a letter expressing opposition to the ASA letter. If you are a sociologist, I hope you will consider sharing and signing it. We got 100 signatures on the first day, but it will probably take more for ASA to care. To share the letter, you can use this link: https://forms.gle/ecvYk3hUmEh2jrETA. …”
Abstract. INTRODUCTION The rapidly changing scholarly communication ecosystem is placing a growing premium on research data and scholarship that is openly available. It also places a growing pressure on universities and research organizations to expand their publishing infrastructures and related services. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM To embrace the change and meet local demands, University of Houston (UH) Libraries formed a cross-departmental open access implementation team in 2017 to expand our open access repository services to accommodate a broad range of research products beyond electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs). The result of this effort was the Cougar Research Open Access Repositories (Cougar ROAR), a rebranded and expanded portal to the UH Institutional Repository, and the UH Dataverse, which disseminates the full range of scholarly outputs generated at the University of Houston. This article describes the team’s phased activities, including internal preparation, a campus pilot, rebranding, and a robust outreach program. It also details the team’s specific tasks, such as building the Cougar ROAR portal, developing ROAR policies and guidelines, enhancing institutional repository functionality, conducting campus promotional activities, and piloting and scaling a campus-wide open access program. NEXT STEPS Based on the pilot project findings and the resulting recommendations, the team outlined key next steps for sustainability of the UH Libraries’ open access services: continuation of the campus CV service, establishment of campus-wide OA policy, further promotion of Cougar ROAR and assessment of OA programs and services, and investment in long-term storage and preservation of scholarly output in Cougar ROAR.
With news that the United States may be considering a shift in their national open access policy, the Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) reaffirms its support for the sharing of research outputs as widely and quickly as possible. The ORFG, a partnership of 16 philanthropies with assets in excess of $100 billion, believes that open access (along with open data and broader open science activities) benefits society by potentially accelerating the pace of discovery, reducing information-sharing gaps, encouraging innovation, and promoting reproducibility.
From a practical standpoint, open access demonstrates a tangible return on taxpayer investment. Federal funds that support research have their highest impact when the results of this labor are shared, discussed, tested, and built upon with as few restrictions as possible.
“The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) seeks an experienced advocate to lead on key priorities within the Association’s Advocacy and Public Policy agenda.
ARL is a collective of leading libraries and archives in the United States and Canada. The Association has a proven record of accomplishment in law and public policy, most notably in copyright and other forms of intellectual property; digital information access; diversity, equity, and inclusion; accessibility; privacy; and open scholarship.
This position presents a unique opportunity to work on major policy questions of the Information Age, in close collaboration with higher education and scholarly communities and with the ultimate aim of advancing the research enterprise, including equitable and enduring access to knowledge….”
“The Marie Curie Alumni Association (MCAA), a global network representing over 14,500 members at all career stages and in all areas of research, reaffirms its strong support for the modernization of scholarly publishing towards fully embracing the dissemination of knowledge without barriers (our vision and our recommendations for how to get there are available via DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3246728).
One of the goals of the MCAA is to help “enhance the flow of knowledge across different countries, sectors of the economy, and scientific disciplines”. While some scholarly publishers are helping to lead much-needed change in this area, some other publishers still lag behind. Specifically, we note that barriers – such as embargo periods for the sharing of peer-reviewed journal articles – directly impede the flow of knowledge and we encourage all efforts towards the complete abolishment of such embargo periods which restricts researchers from sharing their findings.
We noted with dismay the group of scholarly publishers who with a December 18th statement came out in support of barriers to knowledge dissemination (such as embargo periods). For researchers to thrive and for scholarly knowledge to fully benefit all of society (including doctors, patient groups, public officials, NGOs, small businesses, entrepreneurs, etc.), barriers to the flow of knowledge must be removed. Disappointingly, the letter from the publishers also rehashes several old myths which have been repeatedly debunked by many scholars (one good example among many is Publications 2019, 7, 34). For example, the statement “going below the current 12 month embargo would make it very difficult for most American publishers to invest in publishing these articles” disregards the fact that many thriving publishers and journals already today allow researchers to share the findings contained in their peer-reviewed articles without restrictions and embargo (extensive discussion, examples and sources available in DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3246728).
We urgently call upon the publishers that still force barriers on the flow of knowledge, to modernize and join the numerous publishers that already today allow and encourage researchers to share their research findings without embargoes and restrictions….”
“Putting aside the fact that [a recent Richard Poynder] article covers a lot of ground without enough detail or development to substantiate its claims, my main criticism of the piece is that it fails to account for the complexity of the arguments, motivations and causes at play within open access, instead relying on a caricature of a homogenous ‘movement’ that began with and was ultimately settled by the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI). …”
Abstract: From long time open access has become important for libraries and information centres. Due to shrinking budget of libraries and continuous growth in open access journals and other information resources libraries are adopting and promoting open access. Many Libraries are moving from closed access to open access of resources. Every year nearly 10000 plus open access journals are coming in market so here librarians has to help their patrons to identify the correct journals for publish the research work and make funds available for APC charges for such journals. Librarians are supporting Open Access publishing and also playing an important role in promoting OA. But understanding importance of open access by user community is depend upon how actively that institute librarian promote OA. This paper deals about awareness of open Access among Indian Librarians Community the main aim of this study to get idea about Librarians view about open Access and various open access resources. Data is collected through online survey method from various Librarians group.