Wellcome updates open access policy to align with cOAlition S | Wellcome

“Following a large consultation, we have updated our open access (OA) policy so it now aligns with Plan S. The changes will apply from 1 January 2021. …

These are the key changes to our OA policy.  

 

  • All Wellcome-funded research articles must be made freely available through PubMed Central (PMC) and Europe PMC at the time of publication. We previously allowed a six-month embargo period. This change will make sure that the peer-reviewed version is freely available to everyone at the time of publication.
  • All articles must be published under a Creative Commons attribution licence (CC-BY), unless we have agreed, as an exception, to allow publication under a CC-BY-ND licence. We previously only required a CC-BY licence when an article processing charge (APC) was paid. This change will make sure that others – including commercial entities and AI/text-data mining services – can reuse our funded research to discover new knowledge.
  • Authors or their institutions must retain copyright for their research articles and hold the rights necessary to make a version of the article immediately available under a compliant open licence.
  • We will no longer cover the cost of OA publishing in subscription journals (‘hybrid OA’), outside of a transformative arrangement. We previously supported this model, but no longer believe that it supports a transition to full OA.  
  • Where there is a significant public health benefit to preprints being shared widely and rapidly, such as a disease outbreak, these preprints must be published:
    • before peer review
    • on an approved platform that supports immediate publication of the complete manuscript
    • under a CC-BY licence.

    This is a new requirement which will make sure that important research findings are shared as soon possible and before peer review.

  • Wellcome-funded organisations must sign or publicly commit to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment(opens in a new tab) (DORA), or an equivalent. We may ask organisations to show that they’re complying with this as part of our organisation audits. This is a new requirement to encourage organisations to consider the intrinsic merit of the work when making promotion and tenure decisions, not just the title of the journal or publisher….”

Should funders driving for universal open access in research be obliged to ensure freedom of publication for all? | The BMJ

Large funders are moving to enforce open access to their research.1 The Wellcome Trust’s open access policy will change on 1 January 2020 to fund only article processing charges (APCs) in fully open access journals, deliberately not funding open access charges in hybrid journals.2 The aim of this change is to support a transition to a fully open access world. This policy is driven by the aim of transitioning journals to become open access rather than simply making their own research available to a greater audience. Journals may choose to chase the funder’s APC money, becoming fully open access, but this will be at the cost of barring their journal to authors who do not have funding to pay the increasing numbers of APCs that will be required.

A significant APC will shift the decision whether to publish a potential article from the journal editor and peer reviewers to the purse holders of the APC funds, who could deny it getting that far. This is more benign in the case of Wellcome, which does not deduct APCs from individual grants, but it may in the short term reduce the range of journals available to authors. However, in the case of commercially funded research or in institutions with more limited money, decisions by APC fundholders could stifle academic results.

Given that the Wellcome’s open access policy aims to shift the landscape of scientific publishing, journals becoming fully open access to meet these new requirements could charge a tiered social pricing structure in which research from funders requiring fully open access journals (rather than just for their own research) are charged a premium. This premium could be used to fund the APCs in that journal of researchers who have little or no recourse to other APC funding. This would reduce potential publication bias based on funding, as well as creating an environment of open access for all.”

Why should the public be involved in science? | ORION Open Science

” “For research to be really impactful, the public has to be involved. They need to understand the research and we need to help to connect the research to what people care about,” says Imran Khan, Head of Public Engagement at Wellcome Trust in the UK, one of the world’s largest research funders. But do the public wish to be involved in science? The German and Swedish Science Barometers, the EU-project ORION Open Science European public attitudes survey and the Wellcome Trust Global Monitor have all asked this question….

After the presentations, the participants discussed in smaller groups why and how the public should be involved in science. They then shared their thoughts both orally and by using an online tool. According to the workshop participants, the public should be involved in science because: 

  • Science will have an impact on their lives.
  • We need the views of the public.
  • Knowledge gives insights and increases trust. It’s a base for democracy.
  • It can improve quality and broaden perspectives.
  • They pay for it!

But how can we interest the public to get involved? Some suggestions from the participants in the workshop included:

  • Must depart from their own interest and relevance.
  • The wow effect – science is fun!
  • Create arenas for connection between researchers and the public.
  • Show how research affects society and how you can contribute.
  • Make participating fun and giving….”

 

Calling all Wellcome Early Career Researchers… – Wellcome Open Research BlogWellcome Open Research Blog

Last year when our Advisory Board met, there came a point in the meeting where everyone agreed that the board would be enhanced with an injection of individuals who could best represent the many Early Career Researchers (ECRs) supported by Wellcome. It was there and then we made the decision that WOR would create a new, separate board to be run exclusively by ECRs to provide an active voice for researchers building their careers in academia.

Our goal is to create an energetic, diverse, and creative group of researchers that can help guide us to tackle the challenges of publishing as an ECR. If you are passionate about improving the quality of the early-career researcher publishing experience – and want to help shape how we develop the Wellcome Open Research (WOR) platform – please consider joining us!…”

Search is on for new steward to deliver Plan S open access, as Smits bows out

“Robert-Jan Smits finished his one year mandate as the European Commission’s open access envoy last week and will be replaced for now by Robert [Kiley], head of open research at the Wellcome Trust, until a long-term coordinator for the Plan S open access initiative is appointed.

Smits, who is leaving the Commission to become president of the Eindhoven University of Technology, says there is a shortlist of two candidates to take over the position on a permanent basis….”

Departure of Special Envoy for Open Access and Plan S Architect, Robert-Jan Smits

“Robert-Jan Smits, the European Commission’s Special Envoy for Open Access and one of the main architects of Plan S, finishes his mandate on 28 February. Robert Kiley of the Wellcome Trust is to act as interim coordinator of cOAlition S….

Robert Kiley, Head of Open Research at the Wellcome Trust, will act as cOAlition S coordinator until a new Plan S ‘Champion’ is appointed….”

Plan S advice for learned societies | Research Information

“Wellcome, in partnership with UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and the Association of Learned & Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP), have engaged Information Power to explore a range of potential strategies and business models through which learned societies can transition to an open access landscape and adapt to Plan S. 

As the number of researchers covered by Plan S-compliant funding increases it will, in time, put pressure on the business models of many learned societies, which rely on hybrid journal publishing to cover their publishing costs, and to generate revenue for other important activities they undertake such as hosting meetings/conferences and awarding fellowships and other grants. 

Robert Kiley, head of open research at Wellcome said: ‘Wellcome and UKRI recognise the value learned societies play in supporting researchers and contributing to a vibrant research ecosystem. We are keen for them to be successful in transition to OA in line with Plan S.  We are delighted to partner with ALPSP to explore – via the team at Information Power – a diverse array of potential strategies and business models through which learned societies can adapt and thrive to this changing landscape.’

The team – including Alicia Wise, Lorraine Estelle, and Hazel Woodward at Information Power, plus additional expert Yvonne Campfens – will document and develop a range of transition approaches and business models for Learned Society publishers to consider.  These will be developed in dialogue with society publishers, libraries and consortia, funders, society members, and society publishing partners. …”

Wellcome Open Research, the future of scholarly communication? | Impact of Social Sciences

“In this blog, Robert Kiley and Michael Markie, discuss the ambition behind creating Wellcome Open Research, an innovative funder led publishing platform, and assess the success of the platform over its first two years. Going on to imagine a future, in which all research is published using the principles behind Wellcome Open Research, they suggest the potential benefits such a publishing system would have for research and research assessment….”