M3.5 Draft Description of FAIRsFAIR’s Transition Support Programme for Repositories | Zenodo

“FAIRsFAIR is working to better define good practice for repositories through our involvement in certification efforts that enable FAIR data. This draft document describes a proposed programme of support which will help repositories to adopt these emerging good practices. There is a focus on supporting FAIR data provision, improved handling and integration of metadata, and an increased emphasis on data stewardship to ensure data remains FAIR in the long term.

This brief description outlines some of the actions that can help repositories on their journey towards better alignment with the FAIR data principles and the support that FAIRSFAIR could provide. Please help us to shape the work FAIRsFAIR will do over the remainder of the project to develop and provide support for repositories of all types. We eagerly look for your feedback on:

the recommended actions – do these reflect your repository mission and aims? Have we missed something? 

the support that FAIRsFAIR could provide – are some of the suggested support areas more helpful for your repository than others? Is there anything missing? 

Please share your feedback with us by August 21, 2020 by adding comments to the working version using ‘Suggesting’ mode. From the feedback we receive, FAIRsFAIR will prioritise its activities to develop guidance and provide support. The prioritised plan will be shared in the final version of the support programme in October 2020 (D3.5 Transition Support Programme for Repositories). 

The working version for public comment is available at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VXgrZZi23KrahihQ5Fp_Ym4IJ79FNKCWoridTzXlHOc/edit?usp=sharing  …”

FAIRsFAIR’s Transition Support Programme for Repositories | FAIRsFAIR

“Are you looking to make your repository content more findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR)? We have published a Draft Description of FAIRsFAIR’s Transition Support Programme for Repositories and your contributions are invited.

FAIRsFAIR is working to better define good practice for repositories through our involvement in certification efforts that enable FAIR data. We have now drafted a proposed programme of transition support to help repositories adopt these emerging good practices. There is a focus on supporting FAIR data provision, improving the handling and integration of metadata, and increasing the emphasis on data stewardship to ensure data remains FAIR in the long term. 

Please help us to shape the work we will do over the remainder of the project to develop and provide support for repositories of all types. In particular we are looking for your feedback on:

the recommended actions – do these reflect your repository mission and aims? Have we missed something?

the support that FAIRsFAIR could provide – are some of the suggested support areas more helpful for your repository than others? Is there anything missing?…”

Open Science Beyond Open Access: For and with communities, A step towards the decolonization of knowledge | Zenodo

“UNESCO is launching international consultations aimed at developing a Recommendation on Open Science for adoption by member states in 2021. Its Recommendation will include a common definition, a shared set of values, and proposals for action.

At the invitation of the Canadian Commission for UNESCO, this paper aims to contribute to the consultation process by answering questions such as:

• Why and how should science be “open”? For and with whom?
• Is it simply a matter of making scientific articles and data fully available to researchers around the world at the time of publication, so they do not miss important results that could contribute to or accelerate their work?
• Could this openness also enable citizens around the world to contribute to science with their capacities and expertise, such as through citizen science or participatory action research projects?
• Does science that is truly open include a plurality of ways of knowing, including those of Indigenous cultures, Global South cultures, and other excluded, marginalized groups in the Global North?

The paper has four sections: “Open Science and the pandemic” introduces and explores different forms of openness during a crisis where science suddenly seems essential to the well-being of all. The next three sections explain the main dimensions of three forms of scientific openness: openness to publications and data, openness to society, and openness to excluded knowledges2 and epistemologies3. We conclude with policy considerations….”

UNESCO Regional Consultation on Open Science for Western Europe and North America | (smr 3513) (23 July 2020)

“Agenda

Introduction to the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science
Panel discussion on Open Science in Western Europe and North America: Key Challenges and Opportunities
Open discussion on Key messages from Western Europe and North America for the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science….”

Arcadia Fund | Our response to UKRI’s open access review consultation – Arcadia Fund

“The publisher must make efforts to advertise the existence of a freely available version on the DOI-landing page of the publisher version of the work, and in all metadata supplied in the form of MARC records, ONIX feeds, and CrossRef DOI associated metadata. The licence of the work should be clearly given on the DOI-landing page and in all forms of associated metadata that the publisher supplies be it MARC or ONIX or DOI or all. If the publisher is known to not provide adequate metadata about open access and open access licensing, then withhold all Book Publishing Charges from that publisher until they provide it. Better still, warn authors not to submit to the publisher with a ‘blacklist’ of non-compliant publishers.

Some publishers both in journals and in monographs have been doing rather sneaky things to hide the existence of a freely accessible version. See Piwowar (2018) ‘Where’s Waldo With Public Access Links’. For ‘gold’ open access works, ensure the publisher creates a link from which the entirety of the book can be downloaded as PDF (or other format e.g. EPUB) in one-click – far too many platforms break-up books into chapters with absolutely no provision of a link to download the work in its entirety – this is annoying for users….”

UKRI Open Access Consultation- University of Cambridge Response

“This is the University response to the 2020 UKRI Open Access Consultation, submitted via an online form on 27 May 2020. The response was developed based on input from across the University, including from Schools, Departments, individual researchers and Cambridge University Press and aims to represent the breadth of disciplinary perspectives across the University. The draft response was circulated for comment to the Open Research Steering Committee, the Research Policy Committee, the Library Syndicate and governance within CUP for comment prior to the development of the submitted version.”

 

Consultation on Guiding Principles on Management of Research Information and Data | Innovations in Scholarly Communication

“For the sake of transparency and to stimulate discussion we share our submitted responses to the Consultation on Guiding Principles on Management of Research Information and Data, held in June 2020 in the Netherlands by the Dutch association of universities (VSNU). Below, please find the responses by:

Jeroen Bosman orcid.org/0000-0001-5796-2727 (@jeroenbosman)
Bianca Kramer orcid.org/0000-0002-5965-6560 (@MsPhelps)
Jeroen Sondervan orcid.org/0000-0002-9866-0239 (@jeroenson)

The responses were drafted independent of each other and were submitted on 20200619….”

Re: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code Resulting From Federally Funded Research

“Authors Alliance welcomes the opportunity to respond to this request for information on Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code Resulting From Federally Funded Research.1 Authors Alliance is a nonprofit organization with the mission to advance the interests of authors who want to serve the public good by sharing their creations broadly.2 We create resources to help authors understand and enjoy their rights and promote policies that make knowledge and culture available and discoverable. We strongly support removing price and permission barriers to access the results of federally funded research because doing so: • Is consistent with most scientific authors’ wishes; • Supports learning, teaching, research, and practice; and • Creates a more hospitable environment for scientific advancement….”

Common Misconceptions About Open Access To Taxpayer-Funded Research

“The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) is reportedly considering a policy that would provide taxpayers with fast, barrier-free access to the results of scientific research that their tax dollars have funded. Such a policy is widely supported by scientists, universities, students, libraries, funders, patients advocates, and the public, as it would accelerate discovery, fuel innovation and economic growth, and improve the public good. However, we are aware of several letters circulating that raise deeply misleading concerns about the potential effects of policy. Specifically, they claim: …”