“Concerns have been raised over a new publishing deal between Wiley and a German consortium of 700 research institutes, libraries and universities.
The deal, which is being described as the first country-wide agreement in a leading research nation, was announced at the APE conference in Berlin, Germany in January but the details have only recently been made public. The deal is described as ‘publish and read’, a system that is seen by some as a move towards open access….
Commentators have pointed out that the deal protects German researchers from ‘double-dipping’ – they will no longer have to subscribe to Wiley’s journals as well as paying to publish in them – but there have also been complaints that researchers in the Netherlands are paying a significantly lower fee (1,600 euros) to publish with Wiley.
Jon Tennant, founder of the Open Science MOOC, tweeted: ‘I find it impossible to see this as a success in any way. Public funds are being directly converted into private profits. This is absurd. The per-article cost is more than buying a brand new MacBook pro. For publishing a paper. Zero goes to authors, zero to reviewers.’ “
“The VSNU endorses the objectives of and has been actively involved in the developments on Open Science as stated in the National Plan Open Science (NPOS). Open Science aims to bring about a fundamental improvement of science by making the scientific process transparent and ensuring that research output is widely available. The social impact of science can in turn be strengthened through greater involvement in and accessibility of scientific output, including articles and research data. …
In addition to supporting the objectives of Plan S, the VSNU also recognises the concerns among scientists in particular. Before Plan S can make the desired contribution to our Open Access ambitions, these concerns must be properly addressed:
Enough time must be allowed for the transition: for instance, an additional round of transformative deals based on the scheduled evaluation in 2023.
The quality of the scientific publications is crucial. It must be clear to researchers which journals are reliable, while other initiatives such as platforms and repositories must have a clear and transparent review process.
The independence of science continues to be guaranteed.
Publishing is and will remain affordable for all, and costs will be transparent.
Scientists have sufficient options for publishing their articles.
There is adequate consideration for the position of young or ‘early career’ researchers in particular.
Open Science and Open Access are given attention within the system of scholarly recognition and remuneration. This area will require commitment from scientists, but especially from managers and administrators. …”
“This eZine gives readers the opportunity to contribute their views on how to achieve the goal of 100% open access. You can contribute by responding to the polling questions given for the various topics.
Major steps still need to be taken to further strengthen the link between science and society. In the year ahead, the VSNU will be bringing together various themes such as valuing and rewarding academics, open science and open access. Not only do we expect this development from ourselves, but also from the parties we work with. International ‘alignment’ is therefore very important if we are to achieve the desired disruptive effect regarding the transparency of science which is paid for with public funds. We are eager to see what we can achieve in this area and look forward to the resulting social impact….”
“In February 2017, in order to implement the European agreements in the Netherlands, the National Open Science Plan was presented by ten parties including KNAW, NWO/ZonMw and VSNU/UKB. One of the main ambitions of this plan is to achieve 100% open access publication by 2020: i.e. scientific publications (articles, (sections of) books, reports) paid for by the government will be directly accessible to anyone, anywhere in the world, for consultation and reuse from 2020 onwards.
The VSNU/UKB is the driving force behind this main ambition, which means that it has the task of initiating joint policies and then ensuring coordination between the key players in the field. Together with the parties which are most closely involved, agreements have been reached for the coming period (2018 – 2020). This is still taking place under the auspices of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. In the coalition agreement and the 2018 Higher Vocational Education Sector Agreement, it is specified that open access and open science are the norm for scientific research.
The Open access roadmap 2018-2020 eZine focuses on the five pillars of the plan. In this version, we provide background information about the progress and developments for each pillar. You can also give your opinion on the next steps to be taken….”
“Project Deal, a consortium of libraries, universities, and research institutes in Germany, has unveiled an unprecedented deal with a major journal publisher—Wiley—that is drawing close scrutiny from advocates of open access to scientific papers….
Now, the numbers are out. Germany will pay Wiley €2750 for each paper published in one of the publisher’s so-called hybrid journals, which contain both paywalled and free papers. The contract anticipates researchers will publish about 9500 such papers per year, at a cost of €26 million. In addition, researchers will get a 20% discount on the price of publishing in Wiley journals that are already open access.
The deal is an important step toward more open access in scientific publishing, but the per paper fee of €2750 seems high, says Leo Waaijers, an open-access advocate and retired librarian at the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. Dutch researchers are paying Wiley just €1600 per paper under a similar deal in the Netherlands, he notes. “It’s the same process, the same product, so why the price difference?” he says….
The fact that the details of the German contract have become public is also important, Borrell-Damian says. “Contracts should be public because this is about public money spent,” she says. And if other countries sign similar deals, and the details become public, then “the whole game of price comparison may start,” Waaijers says. And that, open-access advocates say, could produce pressure for even lower publishing fees.”
“The Dutch universities will give open access an extra boost from 2019 by starting a pilot titled ‘You share, we take care’ to make publications available after six months in collaboration with researchers.
In order to achieve the Dutch ambition of 100% open access in 2020, we have made agreements with many publishers regarding open-access publishing. Currently, this is not yet possible for all types of publications or journals. That is why, starting 31 January, authors will be facilitated in making their academic works available to the general public online six months after publication through university repositories….
The Dutch Copyright Act allows for this due to Section 25fa, also known as the Taverne amendment. This amendment has been translated into a number of concrete principles and will now be implemented as a pilot by the VSNU. Pursuant to the amendment, there are a few conditions that authors must meet in order to participate in the pilot. The academic research on which the work is based must have been funded wholly or partly with Dutch public funds, and the author or co-author must have an employment contract with a Dutch institution. Furthermore, the work must not exceed a certain length. During the pilot, authors who wish to share their work online will receive additional support where necessary. …”
“The simple point that I plan to return with is this?—?alignment is the new hustle. When Plans, Programmes, and Policies align with Sustainability, Stability, and Standardization then we’ll be riding a wave into the setting sun, whistling while we work on locavore open knowledge (to fully integrate all my ridiculous metaphors.)”
“The results of publicly funded research must be freely available to all. By 2020, universities want to make all peer-reviewed articles by Dutch researchers open-access publications as standard. Following a request by the government, in 2013 the VSNU formulated a plan to achieve this goal.
‘The Dutch universities’ strategy is unique on the international stage,’ says Koen Becking, executive open-access negotiator for the VSNU and Executive Board President at Tilburg University. Together with Tim van der Hagen, Executive Board President at Delft University of Technology, and Anton Pijpers, Executive Board President at Utrecht University, he leads executive negotiations with the major publishing houses….
The Dutch approach is such a success because the universities have formed a single negotiating body and are supported by the government. In this regard, Becking refers to the government’s open-access policy, which was continued by the new government in 2017….”
Abstract: In Amsterdam, the libraries of the University of Amsterdam (UvA) and the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (AUAS) cooperate closely. In this cooperation, the differences between a research university (i.c. UvA) and a university of applied sciences (i.c. AUAS) become particularly clear when we look at the aim and implementation of open access policies. The open access plan of the AUAS removes not only financial and legal barriers, but also language barriers. This makes the research output FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) to the primary target group of the product, and more importantly, it enables interaction between the AUAS and a wide audience, consisting of researchers from other disciplines, and a wide range of professionals, enterprises, civil servants, schools and citizens. In the search for co-financing by enterprises and other stakeholders, and to fulfil their valorisation requirements, these target groups are currently becoming more important for research universities as well. Here, we show what research universities can learn from the open access policy of the AUAS.
” It is clear that the assessment criteria for researchers must change. There are other good reasons for that. Publishing in Science gets a lot of weight in the assessment of a scientist, but it is not in itself proof that a person’s research is important: there are also articles in this journal that are never or little quoted. And some fields are underrepresented.
This is one of the reasons why NWO recently issued the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA).signed. This calls for a broader assessment of a person’s contribution to science: not just on the basis of a few simple core indicators such as the h-index. It does not only have to be researched: a method can also be groundbreaking. And research data can in itself already have great value for other scientists and even for society as a whole.
NWO will adapt the instructions to its reviewers in order to give this change in the assessment criteria hands and feet….”