“The basic policy framework recommended in this document highlights the institution’s ability to play a central role in the stewardship of the scholarly record generated by its faculty. The framework is straightforward; campus OA policies require authors to make manuscripts available for deposit in an institution’s repository at the time they are accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Authors automatically grant the institution the right to make their manuscripts openly accessible. At the same time, authors may request a waiver, or “opt out,” of the institutional license for a given article if needed to accommodate a pressing individual circumstance….”
“The Ministry of Education and Culture of Finland promotes research information availability and open science through the Open Science and Research Initiative (ATT), which is set out for the years 2014-2017. The objective is for Finland to become one of the leading countries in openness of science and research by the year 2017 and to ensure that the possibilities of open science will be widely utilized in our society. In addition to this, the ambition is to promote the trustworthiness of science and research, support the culture of open science in the way of acting within the research community, and to increase the societal and social impressiveness of research and science.
The Open Science and Research Initiative is based on a broad-based cooperation between ministries, universities, research institutions and research funders such as the Academy of Finland and TEKES – the Finnish Funding Agency for Innovation, Finnish Social Data Archive (FSD), National Library of Finland, Federation of Finnish Learned Societies, FinnOA-the Finnish Open Acsess Working Group, CSC – IT Center for Science Ltd. As an example of higher education institutions, the University of Helsinki plays a key role in Open Acess in Finland. In the government’s decision-in-principal on the state’s renewal of research institutions and research funding, it was decided on engaging in a deeper cooperation between universities and research institutions lasting for several years….”
“The University of Iceland has established a policy on open access and encourages staff to publish articles in open access outlets, such as open access journals, digital repositories, etc. The policy applies to publications in peer-reviewed journals but not to books or book chapters.
The UI Open Access Policy was approved by the University Council on 6 February 2014 and entered into force on 1 September 2015….”
“Synopsis: New data sheds light on Indian researcher’s use of low cost journals. The Indian Government’s attack on these journals, based on Beall’s list, could adversely affect the Indian university science community.
Three weeks ago we reported that an Indian agency was using a whitelist to ban the use of unlisted journals for the purpose of evaluating researcher performance. The Agency is the University Grants Commission (UGC), which apparently plays a major role in university based Indian science. I know little about this realm, but it seems to include setting the criteria for hiring and promotion, perhaps as well as granting PhD’s.
The open-access policy of the Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati (SISSA). Undated but apparentlyput online in January 2017.
“The SISSA author is obliged to start the archiving procedure in the SISSA Digital Library when informed of the publication of his/her work by a periodical or other publisher or of its acceptance by the publisher.
The author shall directly archive the editorial version in the institutional repository or, if the editorial version cannot be made public, the author shall archive, under his/her own responsibility, the “final revised digital version” or the “post-print” of the work, complete with all the basic metadata and those linked to the context.
The author shall archive the work in the institutional repository compatibly with the rights ceded to the publisher.
On the product’s filing in the SISSA Digital Library, the author shall enter the essential information of the agreement with the publisher and/or a copy of the contract entered into or any other document that contains or refers to the contractual conditions exercised by the publisher (“transfer agreement”).
The work itself shall remain in closed access until such time as the authorisation and release for the Work’spublication in open access by the SISSA author is acquired by the SISSA.
The SISSA shall endeavour to render all products archived in the SISSA Digital Library in open access format,
consistent with the provisions of copyright law, contracts entered into with publishers and funding bodies,
and the directives of the European Community.”
The (undated) OA policy at the University of Western Cape, combining rights retention with the work-for-hire doctrine.
“WC’s intention is to strive to balance the rights and responsibilities of its researchers towards the creation of new knowledge with the desire to share and disseminate this knowledge as widely as possible in the interests of the public good. In alignment with the provisions of The Intellectual Property from Publically Financed Research Act (Act no. 51 of 2008), UWC’s Research Policy (2010) clarifies its rights as a public university with regard to intellectual property, stating that copyright for all work created by its staff and students in the course of their employment at UWC or while undertaking their studies, is assigned to UWC. While UWC readily assigns authors the right to publish scholarly work, such assignment is subject to a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, nonexclusive licence in favour of UWC to allow the use of that work for teaching and research, and to reproduce and communicate that work online for noncommercial purposes via UWC’s open access Research Repository. Where the exercise of these rights by the University is seen to depart from the stipulations of academic publishers’ copyright transfer agreements, UWC will on written request of the publishers postpone the open display of author versions of published articles for a period of twelve months. The UWC Addendum to Publication Agreement (See Annexure 1), that gives effect to this commitment on the part of the university, must be completed by all first author researchers upon acceptance of their article for publication and serves as the written notice of agreement by the publisher….”
“An increasing proportion of American universities now require submission of doctoral dissertations to open access repositories, eschewing outdated policies that required microfilming and resale by the third party, commercial distributor UMI/ProQuest (Clement 2013). This significant movement away from mandatory paywalls for American graduate scholarship highlights that the obsolete practice of dissertation microfilming and reselling — established in the pre-digital era of the the early-mid 1900’s — is no longer the “best” technology for effectively copying, preserving, and widely disseminating academic manuscripts. Moreover, housing electronic theses and dissertations in scholarly repositories affords more flexible and responsive curation of multimedia, executable, and dynamic research outputs not optimally containerized in a PDF file with static supplements. Distribution via open access networks exposes the graduate students’ works to broad audiences without the barriers of commercial paywalls, corporate copyright warnings, and outdated, one-size-fits-all file management and metadata options designed for bound paper volumes.
The ubiquity of academic scholarship on the Internet and the ready availability of rich online digital media provide superior methods to broadly disseminate and responsibly preserve dissertations. Management and discovery of dissertations via Open Access repositories, combined with unfettered global distribution via scholarly sharing networks offer much greater exposure, access to, and the potential for reuse of electronic theses and dissertations. Institution decision makers interested in reviewing the many benefits of open ETDs in Open Access repositories may find the associated reading list of interest.”
“The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities has called for significant increases in European funding through Horizon 2020 and the next Framework Programme, FP9, and improved success rates for applicants, to ensure continued applications and optimal impact….The guild supports the work on ‘open innovation’ including the creation of the European Innovation Council to coordinate the open, radical and disruptive innovation driven by universities, industry and entrepreneurs, although it wants the funding to come from additional funds, not from Horizon 2020. It also supports measures on ‘open access’. …”
“The [Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities] is a recently established network of eighteen research-intensive universities from thirteen countries across Europe….We make nine core propositions for how European funding through Horizon 2020 (H2020) and the next Framework Programme (FP9) can strengthen research and innovation: …We welcome the three Os: Open Innovation, Open Science and Open to the World and urge a focus on the ‘quick wins’, removing barriers and enhancing initiatives to collaboration….We support measures to improve Open Access, and the inclusion of the Open Access requirement (with the possibility of opt-outs) for H2020-funded research. We also support the work of the Open Science Policy Platform (OSSP) and the High-Level Expert Groups reporting into it. At the same time, we urge that: [a] Open Science can relate to national initiatives effectively, and that it builds on, rather than duplicates, relevant aspects of the ERA (notably the development, under ESFRI, of einfrastructures). [b] The requirement to publish on Open Access does not transfer resource from research and innovation to the publishing industry. The Commission needs to have an active coordinating role in bringing publishers and universities together to agree optimal ways of ensuring Access. [c] There is an active engagement with national university representations and research councils to consider questions around (i) career advancement and recognition for researchers engaged in Open Science; (ii) research parameters; and (iii) challenges to achieve research integrity, including the reproducibility of research results….”