The right to share in Open Access

“It can be difficult for researchers to understand what are their author rights, what articles they can archive in Open Access… Fortunately, political decisions are taken across Europe to strongly authorize free dissemination of knowledge. In Belgium, Wallonia-Brussels Federation has presented a decree in order to authorize the Open Access deposit of publicly funded research. Moreover, the federal government plans to propose a bill in this regard in 2018. The preliminary draft decree defining an Open access policy for publicly funded scientific publications in Wallonia-Brussels Federation (FWB) has passed second reading by the FWB government. This preliminary draft decree proposed by the Minister of Higher Education, Scientific Research and Media Jean-Claude Marcourt is intended to allow scientific publications of publicly funded research to be freely shared and disseminated. This takes place in the context of the Open Science movement promoted by the FWB.”

The right to share in Open Access

“It can be difficult for researchers to understand what are their author rights, what articles they can archive in Open Access… Fortunately, political decisions are taken across Europe to strongly authorize free dissemination of knowledge. In Belgium, Wallonia-Brussels Federation has presented a decree in order to authorize the Open Access deposit of publicly funded research. Moreover, the federal government plans to propose a bill in this regard in 2018. The preliminary draft decree defining an Open access policy for publicly funded scientific publications in Wallonia-Brussels Federation (FWB) has passed second reading by the FWB government. This preliminary draft decree proposed by the Minister of Higher Education, Scientific Research and Media Jean-Claude Marcourt is intended to allow scientific publications of publicly funded research to be freely shared and disseminated. This takes place in the context of the Open Science movement promoted by the FWB.”

REF 2021 Decisions on staff and outputs

“37. Evidence gathered through a recent survey on open access (OA) shows that, for over 80 per cent of outputs in the scope of the policy, either the outputs met the REF policy requirements in the first year (1 April 2016 to 1 April 2017), or an exception to the policy requirement is known to have applied. This reflects significant progress toward the policy intent to increase substantially the proportion of research that is made available open access in the UK.

38. The funding bodies have carefully considered the evidence gathered in the survey relating to the policy’s deposit requirements. We wish to continue building on the progress achieved to date and to maintain the momentum towards developing new tools to implement deposit as soon after the point of acceptance as possible. We therefore confirm the implementation of the REF OA policy as previously set out. The policy will require outputs to be deposited as soon after the point of acceptance as possible, and no later than three months after this date (as given in the acceptance letter or email from the publication to the author) from 1 April 2018.

39. Taking account of some of the practical concerns raised through the survey in relation to deposit on acceptance, we will introduce a deposit exception in to the policy from 1 April 2018. This exception will allow outputs unable to meet this deposit timescale, to remain compliant if they are deposited up to three months after the date of publication. The exception will read: ‘The output was not deposited within three months of acceptance date, but was deposited within three months of the earliest date of publication.’ This exception will remain in place for the rest of the REF 2021 publication period.

40. Further detail on the evidence assessed to make this decision is based at Annex B. The REF OA policy has been updated to include the additional exception. A full report of the UKwide survey on the delivery of funders’ open access policies will be published early in 2018….”

Closing the divide: Subject librarians and scholarly communication librarians can work together to reach common goals | Middleton | College & Research Libraries News

“Over the past year, I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about scholarly communication and the role of academic librarians, particularly subject or liaison librarians.

In July 2016, I took on a new role as the associate university librarian for research and scholarly communication at Oregon State University Libraries and Press (OSU)….In 2013, I became the associate university librarian for learning and engagement. During my years in public services, I noted that scholarly communication services at our library were being developed and provided by a small number of librarians who were not in public services, and some did not have subject assignments. I often wondered why scholarly communication was being developed outside the scope of the activities a subject librarian/liaison regularly engaged in when working with faculty….

In addition, in support of the OSU land grant heritage, I worked with community members to provide them with online access to research articles that did not require them to subscribe to a journal or to be a registered OSU faculty member or student to access them.

In 2013, when OSU faculty voted to adopt an open access mandate for our institution, I oversaw the subject librarians/liaisons who promoted the new policy in the campus departments and colleges that they represented.…”

Sharing the work of sharing Harvard’s research

“In early 2016, the Office for Scholarly Communication (OSC) launched a pilot project to recruit help from around the university to deposit faculty-authored articles in DASH, Harvard’s open-access repository. This project has the full support of the Harvard Library.  In January of this year, the project emerged from the pilot phase, and was officially renamed the Distributed DASH Deposits program, or D3. All Harvard schools have made a start with D3, and the next goal is to scale up.”

The Good News: You Can Download Hawking’s PhD For Free; The Bad News: It Took 50 Years To Make It Happen | Techdirt

“Techdirt has been writing about the (slow but steady) rise of open access for a decade. That’s as long as the Annual International Open Access Week has been running. Cambridge University came up with quite a striking way to join in the celebrations: Stephen Hawking’s PhD thesis, ‘Properties of expanding universes’, has been made freely available to anyone, anywhere in the world, after being made accessible via the University of Cambridge’s Open Access repository, Apollo. The 1966 doctoral thesis by the world’s most recognisable scientist is the most requested item in Apollo with the catalogue record alone attracting hundreds of views per month. In just the past few months, the University has received hundreds of requests from readers wishing to download Professor Hawking’s thesis in full. The idea has been quite a hit — literally, since the demand for Hawking’s thesis was so great on Monday, that it hit the Apollo server hard enough to take it offline for a while. The Guardian reported:”

Impact of Social Sciences – The next stage of SocArXiv’s development: bringing greater transparency and efficiency to the peer review process

“Almost 1,500 papers have been uploaded to SocArXiv since its launch last year. Up to now the platform has operated alongside the peer-review journal system rather than seriously disrupting it. Looking ahead to the next stage of its development, Philip Cohen considers how SocArXiv might challenge the peer review system to be more efficient and transparent, firstly by confronting the bias that leads many who benefit from the status quo to characterise mooted alternatives as extreme. The value and implications of openness at the various decision points in the system must be debated, as should potentially more disruptive innovations such as non-exclusive review and publication or crowdsourcing reviews.”

bjoern.brembs.blog » With the access issue temporarily solved, what now?

“However, despite the current success, this strategy of wining over faculty hasn’t been very effective: only a fraction of the current access is created by gold/green open access, much of it stems from sci-hub and sharing sites such as ResearchGate. In other words, as fantastic as full access to the literature that we now enjoy feels, it was brought about only to a small extent by the changed publication behavior of faculty.”