This survey is part of research work on “Open Access Asia” I request to all who like support and promote open access to complete this survey. Your country inputs will be helpful for my work
If any queries contact me on – firstname.lastname@example.org
“The Census of Scholarly Communication Infrastructure is now open for completion by any/all scholarly communication resources (tools, services, platforms). We invite projects and programs, for profit and nonprofit corporations, and hosted initiatives of all kinds to contribute to this growing body of information….”
“The Second EUA Big Deals Survey Report is an updated mapping of major scholarly publishing contracts in Europe.
Conducted in 2017-2018, the report gathers data from 31 consortia covering an unprecedented 167 contracts with five major publishers: Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, Wiley and American Chemical Society. Readers will discover that the total costs reported by the participating consortia exceed one billion euros for periodicals, databases, e-books and other resources – mainly to the benefit of large, commercial scholarly publishers.
The report provides an overview of Big Deal negotiations across Europe, focusing on topics such as the organisation of negotiations, provisions on Open Access and transparency of contracts and costs. It also offers information on the consortia and focuses specifically on periodical Big Deal contracts with the five large publishers selected for this survey. Finally, the report addresses the costs of Big Deal contracts, offering conclusions and policy recommendations on the negotiation of contracts….”
“To investigate the activities and strategies already in place across LIBER’s network, we have created a survey to capture the many ways in which libraries work with OA books among the communities we serve.
We invite respondents from LIBER libraries to address questions such as:
Please submit your responses to the survey by the end of 17 May 2019….”
“This survey aims to map the landscape of open access book publishing and dissemination among LIBER libraries.
For the purposes of this survey, “OA book” means “A long, academic and peer-reviewed work on a single topic normally written by a single author, and extended to also include peer-reviewed edited collections by multiple authors” (quote from the Knowledge Exchange landscape study). This survey would like to concentrate on publications that fit within the definition from KE, which does not include PhD theses or other ‘grey’ publishing.
The results of this survey will be shared during a pre-conference workshop “Open Access books in academic libraries”, ahead of LIBER’s 2019 Annual Conference in Dublin, Ireland….”
Abstract: Recent developments in scholarly communication call for revisiting the effect open access e-theses (OAETs) have on future publishing opportunities. We investigated 23 university and commercial presses—with a focus on the arts, humanities, and social sciences—with regard to attitudes toward accepting OAETs for publication as monographs. The findings suggest that manuscripts that are revisions of OAETs are always welcome for submission or considered on a case-by-case basis by 47.8% of university presses, with a further 48.5% expressing a willingness to publish on the basis of substantial content revision.
“On Friday, Ithaka S+R released the latest cycle of our long-standing US Faculty Survey. This survey has tracked the changing research, teaching, and publishing practices of higher education faculty members on a triennial basis since 2000. Here, we highlight some of the key findings around open access that we expect will be of interest to the scholarly communication community. Notably, we find a widening disconnect between faculty attitudes, on the one hand, and reported practices, on the other, related to open access publishing….”
Abstract: The rise of library-based digital scholarly publishing creates new opportunities to meet scholars’ evolving publishing needs. This article presents findings from a national survey of humanities scholars on their attitudes toward digital publishing, the diversification of scholarly products, changing perceptions of authorship, and the desire to reach new audiences. Based on survey findings, the authors offer recommendations for how library publishers can make unique contributions to the scholarly publishing ecosystem and support the advancement of digital scholarship in the humanities by accommodating and sustaining more diverse products of digital scholarship, supporting new modes of authorship, and helping scholars reach broader audiences through interdisciplinary and open access publishing.
“Faculty have displayed a notable increase in interest for an open access publication system since the last survey cycle. Approximately 64% of respondents in 2018 indicated they would be happy to see the traditional subscription-based publication model replaced entirely by an open access system compared to 57% in 2015.
Younger faculty are more interested than their older colleagues in replacing the traditional subscription-based system with an open access one (See Figure 32). This is perhaps surprising given that older faculty place more importance on the characteristics of open access when deciding in which journals to publish (see Figure 31). Older faculty are also more likely to understand the criteria used in tenure and promotion evaluations, and are less likely than younger faculty to shape their research outputs and publication choices to match the criteria for success in tenure and promotion (see Figure 32). This suggests that older faculty, who are often more established, published, and/or tenured, may make their publications and findings open because the traditional scholarly incentives are not as relevant for them….