Oxford University Press and National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences agree first Read & Publish deal in China | Journals | Oxford Academic

“Oxford University Press (OUP) and the National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences (NSLC) are pleased to announce a landmark new Read & Publish agreement, the first of its kind in Mainland China. 

Covering 26 of the institutions of CAS, the three-year deal is the first of its kind in China. It provides complete access to OUP’s prestigious journals collection for participating institutions and over the course of the deal will mean that an increasing amount of the research outputs produced by participating CAS researchers is published open access.  …”

CNKI free services during COVID-19 and OA long-term practice | Sustaining the Knowledge Commons / Soutenir les savoirs communs

Abstract:  Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), initiated in 1999 by Tsinghua University and Tsinghua Tongfang Co., Ltd., is both the largest institutional repository in China and a near-monopoly provider of for-pay academic databases with a higher profit margin than Elsevier or Wiley, among other services. With promotion and support from the government, CNKI keeps developing its track towards open access [1]. CNKI offers free access to millions of documents ranging from dissertations and academic articles to popular and party journals. The COAA, Chinese Open Access Aggregator, launched in 2019, makes available more than 10,000 open access journals, although foreign scholars may find it difficult to benefit from this due to the language. CNKI has played an important role in making works on COVID-19 freely available, as well as in expanding access to subscribers at home during lock-down.

 

Chinese state censorship of COVID-19 research represents a looming crisis for academic publishers | Impact of Social Sciences

“Issues of censorship surrounding the publication of scholarly research in China have been prominent since a series of press reports and publisher statements revealed that works had been removed from circulation that were deemed sensitive by Chinese buyers. As George Cooper observes, evidence that Chinese authorities are conducting pre-publication vetting of COVID-19 related research, raises new challenges for publishers seeking to distribute open access research papers on this subject, as there is little ground for publishers to remove these papers from their platforms. As publisher commitments to openness collide with their obligations to operate within the legal frameworks of the countries they operate in, it is argued that COVID-19 presages an overdue discussion on the limits of openness in publishing….

It remains to be seen whether Open Access articles will escape these restrictions, as they’re disseminated freely and therefore not subject to laws, in China, restricting the sale of publications. But equally, state authorities such as the General Administration of Press and Publications could threaten publishers, as they have before, with a ban on the import of their entire output in China, unless suitable amendments are made to their Chinese-language platforms. An unexplored consequence of forcing publishers to comply with censorship demands in the case of Open Access research is that the less censorious route – refusing to make amendments to the content of journals, prompting importers to remove journals from circulation instead – would not be available. Publishers would be confronted with a binary choice: remove ‘sensitive’ Open Access articles from their Chinese platforms, or risk huge losses of revenues and access for their entire published output….”

Chinese state censorship of COVID-19 research represents a looming crisis for academic publishers | Impact of Social Sciences

“Issues of censorship surrounding the publication of scholarly research in China have been prominent since a series of press reports and publisher statements revealed that works had been removed from circulation that were deemed sensitive by Chinese buyers. As George Cooper observes, evidence that Chinese authorities are conducting pre-publication vetting of COVID-19 related research, raises new challenges for publishers seeking to distribute open access research papers on this subject, as there is little ground for publishers to remove these papers from their platforms. As publisher commitments to openness collide with their obligations to operate within the legal frameworks of the countries they operate in, it is argued that COVID-19 presages an overdue discussion on the limits of openness in publishing….

It remains to be seen whether Open Access articles will escape these restrictions, as they’re disseminated freely and therefore not subject to laws, in China, restricting the sale of publications. But equally, state authorities such as the General Administration of Press and Publications could threaten publishers, as they have before, with a ban on the import of their entire output in China, unless suitable amendments are made to their Chinese-language platforms. An unexplored consequence of forcing publishers to comply with censorship demands in the case of Open Access research is that the less censorious route – refusing to make amendments to the content of journals, prompting importers to remove journals from circulation instead – would not be available. Publishers would be confronted with a binary choice: remove ‘sensitive’ Open Access articles from their Chinese platforms, or risk huge losses of revenues and access for their entire published output….”

Proposal for OA Publishing of Research Papers on Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia in CNKI

“At present, China is courageously fighting against the COVID-19. Driven by the expectations of the whole country and even the whole world, Chinese medical talents have urgently launched all-round research on issues such as disease prevention and control, pathology, clinical diagnosis and treatment, and the development of new drugs, sparing no effort to make key technology breakthroughs as soon as possible and to completely defeat the epidemic. As the researches move on, more and more new achievements will be made in the near future. The research is not only a particularly important project but also a severe challenge for the medical circle of China and the world. Therefore, it is urgently necessary to publish the latest domestic and foreign research achievements as soon as possible and to provide timely, comprehensive and systematic knowledge services to the public and the professionals both at home and abroad, which is also a major responsibility of Chinese academic journals on medicine and health and relevant online platforms and also provides an important opportunity for China’s development of world-class research journals.

After deliberation, the Chinese Medical Association Publishing House, the Chinese Preventive Medicine Association, Chinese Medical Doctor Association, China Association of Chinese Medicine, Chinese Medical Association, and China Academic Journals (CD Edition) Electronic Publishing House Co., Ltd. jointly advocate to mobilize the journals affiliated to these associations and the outstanding academic journals on medicine and health across China, especially the journals that have already started online-first publishing in China National Knowledge Infrastructure ?CNKI?, for immediate action. In particular, great efforts will be made to focus on the research on COVID-19 as a major topic, to organize open access?OA? publishing of high-quality and high-level research achievements in CNKI, to apply research achievements to the fight against the epidemic as soon as possible, and to facilitate the wide spread of research achievements across China and the world. The cost for open access publication and related services will be completely covered by CNKI….”

Free Access to Featured Collections on COVID-19

“COVID-19 has attracted widespread attention from experts, scholars and the public since its outbreak in December, 2019. In order to provide more information about this epidemic and relevant knowledge on disease protection, diagnosis and treatment, CNKI has cooperated with domestic publishers to present worldwide readers the latest books and audios of fighting against COVID-19 through CNKI-eBooks (Intl) platform….”

Chinese government bulldozes ‘publish or perish’ mentality | Times Higher Education (THE)

“The Chinese government has signalled that it will downgrade the importance of Science Citation Index (SCI) research metrics in assessments of academics and universities and, potentially, funding decisions.

Guidelines, issued jointly by the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science and Technology in the form of a 10-point directive, discourage institutions from rewarding individuals and departments based primarily on how many articles they have in the SCI and suggest that a lack of SCI papers should not be a barrier to granting degrees or qualifications, and says that institutions should stop the practice of paying financial bonuses for publication. SCI, which is owned by Clarivate Analytics, is one of the world’s main bibliometric indexes of published research, covering thousands of the world’s top journals….”

China shifts from reliance on international publications

“After years of pushing Chinese researchers to publish in prestigious international journals, China’s Ministry of Education and Ministry of Science and Technology have jointly released a document aimed at reducing “excessive reliance” on Science Citation Index (SCI) papers for academic promotions, job offers and allocation of research funding.

The change is likely to lead to a drop in international publications, which in recent years saw China rise swiftly to become second in the world for research papers published in international journals, behind only the United States.

The shift away from international publishing could also see some Chinese universities fall in global higher education rankings, which rely strongly on international publication citations, experts say….

Moving away from international research publication was first announced by President Xi Jinping during a national education conference in 2018, when he said academic standards in higher education institutions could not be led significantly by Western ideas or standards, and stressed that China should have its own academic standards and norms, not bound by international norms….

Universities should not list publishing SCI papers as a requirement for students to get doctoral degrees, it added….”

New Chinese Policy Could Reshape Global STM Publishing – The Scholarly Kitchen

“Over the past month, my Chinese social media feeds have been flooded with news, discussions, and research papers about the COVID-19 virus. But earlier this week, all my contacts in the academic community were discussing two government documents.

The first one is called “Some Suggestions on Standardizing the Use of SCI Paper Indexes in Higher Educational Institutes and Establishing Correct Evaluation Orientation”, and the second one is “Some Measures to Eliminate the Bad Orientation of “Papers Only” in Science and Technology Evaluation (Trial)”. Essentially these two documents mark an effort to largely reform the research and higher education evaluation systems in China. The first document is a set of guidelines and the second, marked as a “trial”, contains many detailed regulations. Here are the key takeaways from these policy documents, which could  potentially shift the landscape of global STM publishing, since China is now the world’s largest producer of scientific articles….

Currently, researchers, research teams, and organizations are required to supply lists of papers published in their applications for government grants and their reports on the results of those grants. Research papers have been a primary measuring stick used to determine funding and career advancement. Key considerations have been the quantity of papers produced, publishing those papers in journals listed in the Science Citation Index (SCI), and publishing in journals with high Journal Impact Factor (JIF) scores. Institutions in China have tailored their practices to meet these criteria, putting pressure on researchers to publish as many papers as possible.

The new policy states that publication of papers will only be used as a main evaluation indicator for basic science and technology research, and not for applied research and technological development. This removes the publication burden from clinicians and engineers and others working in more applied areas.

For the basic researchers, a “representative works” system will be used. Under this system, only a limited number of a researcher’s or an institution’s most important papers count. No less than one third of the representative papers must be published in domestic Chinese journals. The quantity of papers published and the JIFs of the journals that the representative works appear in are not going to be used as a measurement for performance or research ability….”

New Chinese Policy Could Reshape Global STM Publishing – The Scholarly Kitchen

“Over the past month, my Chinese social media feeds have been flooded with news, discussions, and research papers about the COVID-19 virus. But earlier this week, all my contacts in the academic community were discussing two government documents.

The first one is called “Some Suggestions on Standardizing the Use of SCI Paper Indexes in Higher Educational Institutes and Establishing Correct Evaluation Orientation”, and the second one is “Some Measures to Eliminate the Bad Orientation of “Papers Only” in Science and Technology Evaluation (Trial)”. Essentially these two documents mark an effort to largely reform the research and higher education evaluation systems in China. The first document is a set of guidelines and the second, marked as a “trial”, contains many detailed regulations. Here are the key takeaways from these policy documents, which could  potentially shift the landscape of global STM publishing, since China is now the world’s largest producer of scientific articles….

Currently, researchers, research teams, and organizations are required to supply lists of papers published in their applications for government grants and their reports on the results of those grants. Research papers have been a primary measuring stick used to determine funding and career advancement. Key considerations have been the quantity of papers produced, publishing those papers in journals listed in the Science Citation Index (SCI), and publishing in journals with high Journal Impact Factor (JIF) scores. Institutions in China have tailored their practices to meet these criteria, putting pressure on researchers to publish as many papers as possible.

The new policy states that publication of papers will only be used as a main evaluation indicator for basic science and technology research, and not for applied research and technological development. This removes the publication burden from clinicians and engineers and others working in more applied areas.

For the basic researchers, a “representative works” system will be used. Under this system, only a limited number of a researcher’s or an institution’s most important papers count. No less than one third of the representative papers must be published in domestic Chinese journals. The quantity of papers published and the JIFs of the journals that the representative works appear in are not going to be used as a measurement for performance or research ability….”