The brand new Open Press Tilburg University published its first three books today! The electronic versions of these books are freely and openly available for students, researchers and others.
The Open Press TiU is part of the Open Science Action Plan of Tilburg University. The press aims to accelerate Open Access in scholarly book publishing. We believe that every student or researcher should be able to get access to scholarly information, and that every scholar should be able to publish high quality Open Access books, essays and textbooks.
“ODISSEI (Open Data Infrastructure for Social Science and Economic Innovations) is the national research infrastructure for the social sciences in the Netherlands. ODISSEI brings together researchers with the necessary data, expertise and resources to conduct ground-breaking research and embrace the computational turn in social enquiry….”
“The differing percentages of OA can be explained by several factors: different stakeholders use different definitions of OA, different data sources, and different inclusion and exclusion criteria. But the precise nature of these differences is not always obvious to the casual reader.
In the next paragraphs we will look into the reports produced by three different monitors of institutional OA, namely, CWTS Leiden Ranking, the national monitoring in The Netherlands, and Leiden University Libraries’ own monitoring.
The EU Open Science Monitor also monitors trends for open access to publications but because it does so only at a country level and not at an individual institution level, we have not included it in our comparison, however, the EU Monitor’s methodological note (including the annexes) explains their choice of sources.
We will end this blog post with a conclusion and our principles and recommendations….”
From Google’s English: “For years, institutions and scientists have launched great maneuvers to switch to open access. If open science progresses, we remain far from the objectives and the budgets devoted to scientific publications explode.
In mid-June, the University of California signed an open access agreement with one of the five multinational publishing companies, Springer-Nature. It follows in particular those signed in May by the Dutch and Swiss universities with the other behemoth in the sector, Elsevier. The MIT announced a few days earlier to end negotiations with Elsevier for a new subscription contract to its scientific journals, putting forward ” the principles of open access ” to justify itself.
Since 2010, the balance of power between the open science movement and the major scientific publishers could appear completely reversed. That year, MIT felt compelled to actively collaborate (while pretending to take a neutral stance) in the investigation against its young student Aaron Swartz….”
“Elsevier has negotiated a new deal with VSNU, a consortia of Dutch Universities. This new type of deal combines content with data analytics in a novel way. Signing the deal represents an insidious precedent for the academic community, and we’re following the impacts….”
“In summary, the deal boils down to Elsevier offering Dutch (corresponding) authors open access publishing options in nearly all of its scientific journals. However, a number of journals from the Cell and Lancet families have been excluded from the deal, for now. Additionally, both sides agreed to work towards the creation of infrastructure for research data and information, and to enter into ‘open science’ projects. All of this comes at a price of € 16.4 million per year.
Going by headlines in the national newspapers, one would get the impression that the Dutch are making a giant step forward on the path to open access and open science. But is this really the case? ScienceGuide asked experts and (co)negotiators and scrutinized the fine print of the contract. As it turns out, parties have agreed on very specific definitions of open access and open science, with vague articles in the agreement to underpin them. Agreements that are at odds with earlier statements on open science and on rewards and recognition….
However, due to the ‘unique’ nature of the contract, no true comparison can be made with other agreements. Not only because various Elsevier tools and platforms are also included in the contract, but especially because of the arrangements around what has become known as ‘Professional Services’. The market value of the ‘open science’ component is, after all, unknown….”
“In December, SPARC assessed an institutional agreement that a Dutch national academic consortia and Elsevier were in the process of negotiating. At the time, we were responding to leaks in the press, which were largely confirmed by the subsequent release of the terms of a framework agreement between the Dutch consortia and the publisher. Last week, the parties announced the official terms of the agreement.
As a quick recap, we originally noted five concerns:
Danger of linking publishing and data contracts into a “Bigger Deal”
A deal structure inhibiting competition in data analytics services
The implications of the resulting reduced competition on customer leverage
The creation of a monopoly (or quasi-monopoly) on data analytics resulting in the loss of diversity in academic assessment
The risks that the deal’s structure, if replicated, would pose to the overall health of the scholarly publishing ecosystem
While some new details have emerged since SPARC released our initial analysis, none of them materially change our conclusions….”
“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:
“We present a guide on sharing Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data, with a focus on The Netherlands. The guide is meant as a help for researchers to know what they can share and where, and where they can find information or support. This is the persistent record of the flowchart. More information about the project can be found here: Github repository….”
“A partnership that aims to deliver a new way of working for science has been forged between the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU), the Netherlands Federation of University Medical Centres (NFU), the Dutch Research Council (NWO) and Elsevier. The partnership includes publishing and reading services for Dutch research institutions. As a result, 95 percent of Dutch articles can be made immediately open access. The agreement also covers access to all Elsevier content.
What’s significant about this agreement is that the parties involved worked in partnership to carefully develop a collaboration that will shape new open science services in the Netherlands. The country has a notable heritage in higher education spanning hundreds of years. The QS World University Rankings 2019 includes 13 universities in the Netherlands, all within the world’s top 350 and seven in the top 150 — a testament to the strong international reputation of Dutch institutions. To help the country remain at the forefront of research in the decades to come, this partnership includes the development of open science services related to research intelligence and scholarly communication, making it the first such agreement of its kind. Open Science aims to make science more open, reproducible, inclusive and collaborative….”