From Google’s English: “In view of the importance of open access (OA), the project investigates the question of how the publication output of German universities has changed in the direction of open access and what role disciplinary and organizational factors play in taking up OA. The aim is to describe the state of development of OA publishing for all universities in Germany and to develop empirical explanatory models. The collaborative partners work cooperatively on the following questions: While SUB Göttingen develops novel OA detection sources such as Unpaywall Data for bibliometric analyzes, the I²SoS subproject investigates determinants of OA publication behavior.
The project is scientifically-reflective-oriented in its aims and thus differs from initiatives aimed at the infrastructural implementation of Open Access (OA). The research design identifies three workspaces that are processed across all locations: 1) University OA publication profiles, 2) Determinants of university OA profiles, 3) Results assurance by means of guided expert interviews. The quantitative data basis is provided by the data infrastructure of the Competence Center Bibliometrics (section Web of Science) and novel OA detection sources. The explanatory models are also based on established data sources of science research and university reporting.
The project aims to improve understanding of current change processes of the scientific publishing system. It therefore addresses current challenges in the areas of scientific literacy and social participation in the scientific cognitive process. The results, including the data and analytical routines, are prepared for specific target groups and, if legally possible, published under an open license….”
From Google’s English: “We are a data infrastructure for the social science community in Austria and offer a variety of research support services, especially data archiving and data recovery support. We make social science data accessible and reusable, for science and society.”
From Google’s English: “Most open access journals not only allow readers to read published content free of charge, but authors can also publish it free of charge. Other open access journals are financed by article fees, which authors pay when a journal adopts its text for publication. Typically, these fees are negotiable, and only scientists from economically disadvantaged regions can apply for reduced payments.
The procedure is somewhat different with the Surgery Journal of the Thieme publishing house: It pursues with Pay What You Want a payment model, which is known among other things from the catering trade and in which the customers determine, which price they for a offer or a service pay are ready….”
From Google’s English: “It is just after 10:30 in the morning when Jeffrey MacKie-Mason seeks the approval of the whole world. “Is Sweden in?”, Asks the economics professor from the California Berkeley University and turns to the left to Astrid Söderbergh Widding, President of the University of Stockholm. “Sweden is here,” she replies. MacKie-Mason nods in satisfaction. Gradually, he goes through all sitting on the podium participants. China, the Netherlands, South Africa, Japan, European research funding agencies and universities are also involved. The small show should convey a message: We, the science, stand together and want open access. The recipient of the message is Ron Mobed, CEO of Elsevier, the world’s largest science publisher, smiling cheerfully at the lectern. MacKie-Mason turns to Mobed:
It’s the big question of the open access movement. Are publishers serious when they say they too are working to make free access to knowledge the worldwide standard? To come closer to an answer, the initiative “OA2020”, coordinated by the Max Planck Society, has for the first time the three largest publishers for the 14th time this past Tuesday . Berlin Open Access Conference invited to its convention center. In 2003 the first conference took place here. In the Goethe Hall, where Mobed is now asking the questions, the participants then signed the “Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Scientific Knowledge”, the manifesto of the Open Access movement….”
Prof. Dr. Heinz Fassmann, Federal Minister for Education, Science and Research of the Republic of Austria endorses Plan S and answers some questions about it.
“Critics argue that in the case of an open access obligation, publishers could no longer perform the quality reviews to the same extent – how do you see that?
I can not understand this argument. In any case, I have no empirical evidence for it. Quality assurance is always carried out by scientists without any remuneration. Either the subscribing author or the author of the article pays an Article Processing Charge for publication. I do not see a financial problem there. But one thing is the peer review, which, however, is not related to the cash flow, but to the number of experts who have to evaluate an increasing number of publications. With such divergent quantitative developments, qualitative problems can arise. Incidents from the past have shown that. There are, however, indications that quality assurance in OA journals sometimes works better than with classic journals. Incidentally, the question of quality not only arises with the submissions, but also with the publishers. Therefore, initiatives are to be welcomed that try to introduce quality criteria here as well. One of these is the Directory of Open Access Journals….”
From Google’s English: Abstract: The cultural sector is the same as any other social Areas affected by digital transformation and needs to reorganize itself to keep up with the rapid developments digital technologies and their interconnectedness. The special with regard to the cultural area exists in that the target audience is very heterogeneous, whereas digital offers due to their specific needs only meet fewer users. Do not want cultural heritage facilities lose touch with the general public that they give to the audience cultural policy claim to ensure the data underlying the digital offers and Infrastructures can be designed to be accessible at any time which address one as well as the other audience layer, with In other words, they have to meet heterogeneous needs can. If cultural heritage institutions fail to the exclusionary effects that contradict their social mission in the digital space, that will be Potential for Enabling Cultural Participation in Large Parts remain undeveloped, even if they are in constant competition for ever newer and more attractive digital offers maybe can exist (cutting edge). Prerequisite for the sustainable digital opening of the cultural sector is that this, without having to reinvent oneself, it starts to think digitally and the principles of Open Access, Open Data and Open Science integrated into the cultural business.
From Google’s English: ” “Plan S” is the strongest announcement to date of publicly funded research funding; and that, taken alone, is quite a feat. This does not change the fact that in all the excitement two questions remain unanswered, which should be discussed, when we talk about the future of academic publishing and its role for the sciences: which organizational and legal form is most appropriate to efficiently service those services Provide necessary for the adequate circulation of scientific research results? And which bibliometric indicators and procedures can we trust to make good science policy decisions?”
From Google’s English: “An alliance of eleven national science funds passed “Plan S” last week, where the S stands for “Science”, “Shock” or “Speed”. The plan obliges recipients to make their articles available to interested researchers and laymen immediately and openly to interested researchers and lay people as of 1 January 2020 – otherwise they face severe sanctions.
The fund group behind Plan S includes research funding from France, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom. They all belong to the scientific umbrella organization Science Europe, founded in Brussels, and invest more than CHF 8.5 billion in research projects each year. With Plan S they demand from the beneficiaries that they publish their study results in the direct (“golden”) way in open access journals….”
From Google’s English: “The goal of the DEAL project is to conclude nationwide license agreements for the entire portfolio of electronic journals (e-journals) of major science publishers from the 2017 license year. It seeks a significant change from the current status quo in negotiation, content and pricing . The effects of a consortium agreement at federal level are intended to provide financial relief to individual institutions and to improve access to scientific literature for science on a broad and sustainable level. At the same time, an open access component is to be implemented….”