Making Waves – Assessing the potential impacts of Plan S on the scholarly communications ecosystem | Impact of Social Sciences

“The potential impacts of Plan S (a funder led plan to accelerate a global flip to open access to research publications) on the wider research ecosystem are only beginning to be understood. Citing evidence from a recent report by the Institute for Scientific Information on Plan S funded research papers, Dr Martin Szomszor, outlines what the impact of the plan might be on four key aspects of scholarly communication….”

OASPA Webinar: Implementing a consortial funding model for open access publishing – OASPA

OASPA is pleased to announce the fourth webinar in our new Open Scholarship Webinar Series*, in which we are inviting a number of speakers to consider contemporary debates in open research and open access publishing….

The OASPA Open Scholarship Webinar Series is delighted to welcome three pioneers of the Consortial Funding Model of Publishing: Oya Y. Rieger (arXiv Program Director), John Willinsky (Director of the Public Knowledge Project) and Martin Paul Eve (Co-founder of the Open Library of Humanities). Come and find out how to set one up with your publishing (or scholarly communication) initiative….”

Introducing the new OJS-ORCID plugin | ORCID

The recent launch of version 3.1.2 of PKP‘s Open Journal System (OJS) marks an exciting moment — an upgraded ORCID API plugin! Journals upgrading to OJS 3.1.2 can now request authenticated iDs from both contributing authors and co-authors, and Member API users can assert published works directly to an author’s ORCID record with the author’s permission. All journals that upgrade to the latest version of OJS can benefit from the new features.

Like ORCID, OJS is an open-source, community-driven platform, which benefits from an engaged community of developer contributors. ORCID API support enabling collection of authenticated ORCID iDs was first launched in 2016 with OJS 3.0, through the work of community developers including the University of Pittsburgh. The latest additions were developed by a team of OJS community members in Germany, including Nils Weiher and Dulip Withanage of Heidelberg University (also an ORCID member through the German national consortium)….”

TRANSFORMATIVE AGREEMENTS – ESAC

Transformative agreements are those contracts negotiated between institutions (libraries, national and regional consortia) and publishers that transform the business model underlying scholarly journals from subscription to open access. As the vast majority of scholarly publishing and expenditure of any given institution tends to be concentrated in journals produced by a relatively small number of publishers, implementing transformative agreements with these publishers constitutes a high-impact strategy: many institutions and consortia find that by negotiating such agreements with fewer than 10 publishers, they can achieve immediate open access for the vast majority of their outputs.

They have a variety of configurations that reflect the diverse and fluid landscape of scholarly communication, starting with “offsetting” through to the recent “Publish & Read, or PAR” model, and more.

Agreements continue to evolve as they are increasingly adopted around the world and the body of evidence on their impact grows….”

 

TRANSFORMATIVE AGREEMENTS – ESAC

Transformative agreements are those contracts negotiated between institutions (libraries, national and regional consortia) and publishers that transform the business model underlying scholarly journals from subscription to open access. As the vast majority of scholarly publishing and expenditure of any given institution tends to be concentrated in journals produced by a relatively small number of publishers, implementing transformative agreements with these publishers constitutes a high-impact strategy: many institutions and consortia find that by negotiating such agreements with fewer than 10 publishers, they can achieve immediate open access for the vast majority of their outputs.

They have a variety of configurations that reflect the diverse and fluid landscape of scholarly communication, starting with “offsetting” through to the recent “Publish & Read, or PAR” model, and more.

Agreements continue to evolve as they are increasingly adopted around the world and the body of evidence on their impact grows….”

 

Ten myths around open scholarly publishing [PeerJ Preprints]

Abstract:  The changing world of scholarly communication and the emergence of ‘Open Science’ or ‘Open Research’ has brought to light a number of controversial and hotly-debated topics. Yet, evidence-based rational debate is regularly drowned out by misinformed or exaggerated rhetoric, which does not benefit the evolving system of scholarly communication. The aim of this article is to provide a baseline evidence framework for ten of the most contested topics, in order to help frame and move forward discussions, practices and policies. We address preprints and scooping, the practice of copyright transfer, the function of peer review, and the legitimacy of ‘global’ databases. The presented facts and data will be a powerful tool against misinformation across wider academic research, policy and practice, and may be used to inform changes within the rapidly evolving scholarly publishing system.

Towards transition strategies and business models for Society Publishers who wish to accelerate Open Access and Plan S: An initial discussion document from the Society Publishers Accelerating Open access and Plan S (SPA-OPS) project

The SPA-OPS project was commissioned by Wellcome, UKRI, and the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) to support learned society publishers successfully transition to open access (OA) and align with Plan S. Information Power Ltd was selected to undertake this work at the end of January 2019.

This project will, we hope, be useful to a broad array of learned society publishers around the world. The focus of this work, however, is on learned society publishers serving UK researchers and in disciplines relevant to UKRI and Wellcome funding areas. We are aware of related initiatives in other parts of the world and aim to share information with and to learn from these.

Wellcome and UKRI – and indeed other funders – recognise the value learned societies play in supporting researchers and contributing to a vibrant research ecosystem.  They wish to explore a range of potential strategies and business models through which learned societies could adapt and thrive under Plan S.

The SPA-OPS project is structured in the following way:

1. A short background study to identify the key issues learned societies face in the light of Plan S 

 2. A discussion document which assesses options for how learned society publishers could transition to OA and develop Plan S-compliant business models

3. Engagement with learned societies to discuss these options, identify any gaps and omissions, and determine which models are more/less credible for different types of learned society  

 4. Two pilots – ideally one in life sciences and one in humanities or social sciences – with society publishers to look at their publication costs and revenue model, to explore whether any of the alternative publishing options might be viable, and to understand what would be needed in practice to implement 

5. A summary report will be produced with recommendations on how learned society publishers can embrace the opportunities which arise from transitioning to OA and aligning with Plan S, whilst remaining financially sustainable

This paper contains the first two outputs from the SPA OPS project. The short background study to identify key issues learned societies face in the light of Plan S can be found in section 3 of this paper. Options through which learned society publishers could transition to OA and develop Plan-S compliant business models can be found in section 4 of this paper….”

The Role of Preprints in Journal Publishing

“The increase in preprint use, along with scholars publicly coming together to endorse preprints, such as those at the 2016 ASAPbio meeting, is forcing journal publishers to address the place of preprints in the publishing landscape. Despite “preprint” sounding like something reserved for pre-publication, “preprint” servers and published journals don’t have to be as separate as their names suggest. Many journals are now allowing and even encouraging scholars to publish preprint versions of their works in addition to formal articles to make their research Green OA. Authors can link their preprint articles to the DOI of the formal published version to connect the two. Going a step further, some journals are even pioneering preprint publishing models, wherein they host final articles on preprint servers in order to make research fully open access….”

News & Views: Open Access Charges – A Market Slowly Maturing – Delta Think

Over the last few years changes in numbers of journals have been less pronounced. Our samples suggest that for the major publishers, on average:

  • The number of hybrid journals has continued to increase, typically by a low single-digit percent.
  • Amongst the largest publishers, the number of fully OA journals has decreased (again by a low single-digit percent), while mid-sized publishers increased their numbers of fully OA journals.
  • This appears to be due to changes in line up of publishers’ portfolios (e.g., transfers) rather than fully OA “flipping” to hybrid.

Prices Show No Dramatic Changes

  • Maximum APCs this year have fallen slightly to $5,200 from $5,300 for non-discounted, CC BY charges. With one exception last year, this maximum has not changed over the last four years, so the top end of the market appears to be holding steady.
  • Business model is no predictor the highest prices, with both hybrid and fully OA journals asking the highest prices in different market segments.
  • At the lower end of the market, fully OA journal APCs are less expensive than hybrid, and falling. In this segment, hybrid journal APCs have increased.
  • Overall average hybrid APCs are largely holding steady and saw only the smallest of increases (less than 1%) over the last few years.
  • Contrast this with fully OA average APCs, which have been rising slowly but surely: up around 10% over the last four years and up by around 4% in the last year or so….”

News & Views: Open Access Charges – A Market Slowly Maturing – Delta Think

Over the last few years changes in numbers of journals have been less pronounced. Our samples suggest that for the major publishers, on average:

  • The number of hybrid journals has continued to increase, typically by a low single-digit percent.
  • Amongst the largest publishers, the number of fully OA journals has decreased (again by a low single-digit percent), while mid-sized publishers increased their numbers of fully OA journals.
  • This appears to be due to changes in line up of publishers’ portfolios (e.g., transfers) rather than fully OA “flipping” to hybrid.

Prices Show No Dramatic Changes

  • Maximum APCs this year have fallen slightly to $5,200 from $5,300 for non-discounted, CC BY charges. With one exception last year, this maximum has not changed over the last four years, so the top end of the market appears to be holding steady.
  • Business model is no predictor the highest prices, with both hybrid and fully OA journals asking the highest prices in different market segments.
  • At the lower end of the market, fully OA journal APCs are less expensive than hybrid, and falling. In this segment, hybrid journal APCs have increased.
  • Overall average hybrid APCs are largely holding steady and saw only the smallest of increases (less than 1%) over the last few years.
  • Contrast this with fully OA average APCs, which have been rising slowly but surely: up around 10% over the last four years and up by around 4% in the last year or so….”