Open Access: Will the Paywalls Come Tumbling Down? | European Heart Journal | Oxford Academic

“The drive to make publicly-funded research freely available to all interested parties has been gathering momentum over recent years with support from academics and funders and backing from the European Commission. Although there is a broad agreement that open access is best for everyone, methods of dismantling paywalls and ending systems of subscription are an ongoing subject of debate….”

Open Access: Will the Paywalls Come Tumbling Down? | European Heart Journal | Oxford Academic

“The drive to make publicly-funded research freely available to all interested parties has been gathering momentum over recent years with support from academics and funders and backing from the European Commission. Although there is a broad agreement that open access is best for everyone, methods of dismantling paywalls and ending systems of subscription are an ongoing subject of debate….”

Report and Toolkit to Support Learned Society Publishers Transition to Immediate Open Access | Plan S

“cOAlition S aims to work with publishers, societies, consortia, and other stakeholders to accelerate the transition to Open Access. One of the current priorities is to develop clearer approaches to transformative arrangements towards full and immediate Open Access. Today an independent report and toolkit are launched to do just this.

This work was commissioned by Wellcome and UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) – two UK members of cOAlition S – in partnership with the Association of Learned & Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP). Information Power were appointed to lead the project.

The resulting report and toolkit are designed to help support learned society publishers to accelerate their transition to Open Access, and enter into transformative agreements that unlock a multi-year transitional pathway compliant with Plan S for hybrid Open Access titles. All outputs are available under a CC-BY licence at: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4561397 …”

Society Publishers Accelerating Open Access and Plan S – Final Project Report

The final project report from the Society Publishers Accelerating Open access and Plan S (SPA-OPS) project. The report presents the results of work to identify and assess a range of potential models through which learned societies could successfully transition to the requirements of Plans S. Based on the research undertaken, the report sets out recommendations for learned society publishers and other stakeholders committed to supporting them in making this transition. This work was conducted by Alicia Wise and Lorraine Estelle of Information Power. The SPA-OPS project was commissioned by Wellcome, UKRI, and the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP).

Plan S, Core Open Access Publishing Standards & Scholastica

Scholastica has released a Product Roadmap detailing new features to help journals comply with Plan S and sustainably meet core publishing standards. The roadmap page also includes answers to Plan S FAQs and a resources section to help publishers stay caught up on Plan S developments and work through the implementation guidelines.

Open and Shut?: The Open Access Interviews: Edith Hall

“Why is open access so contentious? In large part, I think, because although OA began as a bottom-up revolution it was never widely embraced by researchers. However, OA advocates managed to persuade governments, funders and institutions that their colleagues should be compelled to embrace open access. This has seen a series of ever more stringent OA mandates being imposed on researchers, increasing the bureaucratic burden on them (amongst other things).

Monographs are a particularly contested area because of their length, their narrative form, and the licensing issues that this raises.

 

It has not helped that OA advocates promised open access would reduce the costs of scholarly communication. In reality, costs have risen.

 

This last point is particularly troublesome in the UK context as OA policies have been introduced without providing the necessary funding to support them. As a result, researchers can discover that they have been mandated to make their work open access but cannot afford to pay the article-processing charge (APC) needed if they want to satisfy the government’s preference for gold OA.

 

This has been a challenge even for researchers at wealthy and prestigious institutions. Last year, for instance, Oxford University library had to inform faculty that its OA fund had been exhausted and so they should delay submitting to journals until it had been replenished. 

 

At the same time, the bureaucracy surrounding OA compliance has become so complex that universities have had to recruit legions of support staff to interpret and manage the escalating number of policies (some of which have proved contradictory). Indeed, such is the complexity now that even specialist support staff can struggle to decode the rules.

 

In short, the UK OA policy environment is far too complex, and it is seriously underfunded. For researchers, this is frustrating and depressing….”

Automatic Permissions Checker

“These tools aim to make permission checking faster, easier, and clearer so that you can unlock the power of mediated deposit and more easily manage your repository. In this prototype, powered by open, community-editable, machine-readable data, we allow librarians to do permission checking on 100s of articles or journals in seconds and, for each one, to receive embargos, completed deposit statements, metadata, open access availability, and more. We cover 20,000 journals, 250 publishers, 80 university policies, several funders, and even authors’ negotiated contracts or waivers. We hope to get your feedback as we move from prototypes, to full APIs and tools for authors….”

Roles and jobs in the open research scholarly communications environment: analysing job descriptions to predict future trends

Abstract:  During the past two-decades academic libraries updated current staff job responsibilities or created brand new roles.  This allowed them to adapt to scholarly communication developments and consequently enabled them to offer efficient services to their users. The global calls for openly accessible research results has shifted the institutional, national and international focus and their constant evolvement has required the creation of new research positions in academic libraries. This study reports on the findings of an analysis of job descriptions in the open research services as advertised by UK academic libraries.

METHOD: From March 2015 to March 2017, job advertisements relating to open access, repositories and research data management were collected.

RESULTS: The analysis of the data showed that the primary responsibilities of the open research support staff were: to ensure and facilitate compliance with funders’ open access policies, maintain the tools that enable compliance, create reports and collect statistics that measure compliance rates and commit to continuous liaising activities with research stakeholders.

DISCUSSION: It is clear that the open research services is a complex environment, requiring a variety of general and subject specific skill sets, while often a role may involve more than one area of expertise.

CONCLUSION: The results of this study could benefit prospective employees and universities that wish to embed open research skills in their curriculum.

Science Foundation Ireland’s 2018 Annual Report highlights 43% increase in research funding from industry to €46 million – Irish Tech News

“At the end of 2018, 45% of SFI-funded original and review articles were open access, bringing us closer to our goal of achieving full and immediate open access for all SFI-funded research publications by 2021. This increased access allows the societal and economic benefits of our funded research to go further. As we build on this continued growth and look to 2019 and beyond, Science Foundation Ireland’s new strategy for 2020-2025will aim to empower our research community, focusing on the areas where we can bring the most value.”

A cohort study of how faculty in LIS schools perceive and engage with open-access publishing – Wilhelm Peekhaus,

Abstract:  This article presents results from a survey of faculty in North American Library and Information Studies (LIS) schools about their attitudes towards and experience with open-access publishing. As a follow-up to a similar survey conducted in 2013, the article also outlines the differences in beliefs about and engagement with open access that have occurred between 2013 and 2018. Although faculty in LIS schools are proponents of free access to research, journal publication choices remain informed by traditional considerations such as prestige and impact factor. Engagement with open access has increased significantly, while perceptions of open access have remained relatively stable between 2013 and 2018. Nonetheless, those faculty who have published in an open-access journal or are more knowledgeable about open access tend to be more convinced about the quality of open-access publications and less apprehensive about open-access publishing than those who have no publishing experience with open-access journals or who are less knowledgeable about various open-access modalities. Willingness to comply with gold open-access mandates has increased significantly since 2013.