Declaration on Access to Research Data from Public Funding

THE GOVERNMENTS of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, China, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Russian Federation, the Slovak Republic, the Republic of South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States: …

DECLARE THEIR COMMITMENT TO:

Work towards the establishment of access regimes for digital research data from public funding in accordance with the following objectives and principles: …”

OECD Principles and Guidelines for Access to Research Data from Public Funding

The attached Principles and Guidelines are meant to apply to research data that are gathered using public funds for the purposes of producing publicly accessible knowledge. The nature of “public funding” of research varies significantly from one country to the next, as do existing data access policies and practices at the national, disciplinary and institutional levels. These differences call for a flexible approach in developing data access arrangements. The balance between the costs of improved access to research data and the benefits that result from such access will need to be judged by individual national governments and their research communities.” 

Sharing Publication-Related Data and Materials: Responsibilities of Authorship in the Life Sciences | The National Academies Press

“Biologists communicate to the research community and document their scientific accomplishments by publishing in scholarly journals. This report explores the responsibilities of authors to share data, software, and materials related to their publications. In addition to describing the principles that support community standards for sharing different kinds of data and materials, the report makes recommendations for ways to facilitate sharing in the future.”

News – Open Insights: What’s to Be Done? Thoughts on Moving the Open Access Conversation Forward

“Stephen Buranyi’s piece from last summer “Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?” (short answer: yes) and Jon Tennant’s “Scholarly publishing is broken. Here’s how to fix it” are timely reminders that the open access movement matters to us as a society, that it is a movement that involves fighting against forces with priorities very different from our own, and that–in addition to reminders about what’s at stake in this battle–we need practical, actionable advice to get us where we want to go.”

Impact of Social Sciences – A variety of strategies and funding approaches are required to accelerate the transition to open access. But in all, authors are key

“More than two decades of work towards liberating scholarly publishing from paywalled constraints has left many within the scholarly community exploring ways to accelerate the transition to open access. Not all institutions or author communities will agree upon which strategies or funding approaches to undertake, and nor do they need to. But whichever strategy is pursued, having university faculty lead the charge represents the most effective way forward. Rachael G. Samberg, Richard A. Schneider, Ivy Anderson and Jeff MacKie-Mason share the University of California’s range of open access policy and advocacy materials, and highlight some potential next steps that may be of use to faculty and author communities.”

Foundations for Open Scholarship Strategy Development

“This document aims to agree on a broad, international strategy for the implementation of open scholarship that meets the needs of different national and regional communities but works globally.

Scholarly research can be an inspirational process for advancing our collective knowledge to the benefit of all humankind. However, current research practices often struggle with a range of tensions and conflicts as it adapts to a largely digital system. What is broadly termed as Open Scholarship is an attempt to realign modern research practices with this ideal. We do not propose a definition of Open Scholarship, but recognise that it is a holistic term that encompasses many disciplines, practices, and principles, sometimes also referred to as Open Science or Open Research. We choose the term Open Scholarship to be more inclusive of these other terms.

The purpose of this document is to provide a concise analysis of where the global Open Scholarship movement currently stands: what the common threads and strengths are, where the greatest opportunities and challenges lie, and how we can more effectively work together as a global community to recognise the top strategic priorities. This document was inspired by the Foundations for OER Strategy Developmentand work in the FORCE11 Scholarly Commons Working Group, and developed by an open contribution working group.

Our hope is that this document will serve as a foundational resource for continuing discussions and initiatives about implementing effective strategies to help streamline the integration of Open Scholarship practices into a modern, digital research culture. Through this, we hope to extend the reach and impact of Open Scholarship into a global context, making sure that it is truly open for all. We also hope that this document will evolve as the conversations around Open Scholarship progress, and help to provide useful insight for both global co-ordination and local action. We believe this is a step forward in making Open Scholarship the norm.

Ultimately, we expect the impact of widespread adoption of Open Scholarship to be diverse. We expect novel research practices to increase the pace of innovation, and therefore stimulate critical industries around the world. We could also expect to see an increase in public trust of science, as transparency becomes more normative. As such, we expect interest in Open Scholarship to increase at multiple levels, due to its inherent influence on society and global economics….”

EC Expert Group on Turning FAIR Data into Reality – CODATA

“The European Commission’s Expert Group on FAIR Data, chaired by Simon Hodson, CODATA Executive Director, published the interim report ‘Turning FAIR Data into Reality’ and the interim ‘FAIR Data Action Plan’ on 11 June 2018 at the Second EOSC Summit in Brussels….”

Rebus Projects – Marking OER Courses: Best Practices and Case Studies

“The “Texas Toolkit for OER Course Markings (a living guide)” is a living document that can help colleges and universities develop and implement processes to share information with students about courses that use open education resources (OER). This project expands the toolkit to include case studies representing a variety of approaches to OER course markings, brief stories from the perspectives of various stakeholders, and a more robust analysis of stakeholders, options, and barriers. Items slated for further exploration include platform specs, talking points for stakeholder groups, graphic illustrations and flow charts, communication opportunities and roadblocks, branding considerations, and impact….”