Open and Shut?: Realising the BOAI vision: Peter Suber’s Advice

Peter Suber’s high-priority recommendations for advancing OA.

If funders and libraries subscribed to open access: The case of eLife, PLOS, and BioOne [PeerJ Preprints]

“Following on recent initiatives in which funders and libraries directly fund open access publishing, this study works out the economics of systematically applying this approach to three biomedical and biology publishing entities by determining the publishing costs for the funders that sponsored the research, while assigning the costs for unsponsored articles to the libraries. The study draws its data from the non-profit biomedical publishers eLife and PLOS, and the nonprofit journal aggregator BioOne, with this sample representing a mix of publishing revenue models, including funder sponsorship, article processing charges (APC), and subscription fees. This funder-library open access subscription model is proposed as an alternative to both the closed-subscription model, which funders and libraries no longer favor, and the APC open access model, which has limited scalability across scholarly publishing domains. Utilizing PubMed filtering and manual-sampling strategies, as well as publicly available publisher revenue data, the study demonstrates that in 2015, 86 percent of the articles in eLife and PLOS acknowledged funder support, as did 76 percent of the articles in the largely subscription journals of BioOne. Twelve percent of the articles identified the NIH as a funder, 8 percent identifies other U.S. government agencies. Approximately half of the articles were funded by non-U.S. government agencies, including 1 percent by Wellcome Trust and 0.5 percent by Howard Hughes Medical Institute. For 17 percent of the articles, which lacked a funder, the study demonstrates how a collection of research libraries, similar to the one currently subscribing to BioOne, could cover publishing costs. The goal of the study is to inform stakeholder considerations of open access models that can work across the disciplines by (a) providing a cost breakdown for direct funder and library support for open access publishing; (b) positing the use of publishing data-management organizations (such as Crossref and ORCID) to facilitate per article open access support; and (c) proposing ways in which such a model offers a more efficient, equitable, and scalable approach to open access than the prevailing APC model, which originated with biomedical publishing.”

Alternative Funding Mechanisms for APC-free Open Access Journals: results of the first call : OpenAIRE blog

“In 2016, within the FP7 Post-Grant Open Access Pilot, a sub-project focused on Alternative Funding Mechanisms for APC-free Open Access Journals was launched. Approximately one year later, we would like to share the main results of this workline with the public – as we believe these findings can be of interest for other initiatives and publishing platforms.”

Launch of MyScienceOpen gives researchers new ways to promote their work | STM Publishing News

“Today, we [ScienceOpen] are pleased to announce the launch of MyScienceOpen, our professional networking platform designed for the modern research environment. By leveraging the power of ORCID, MyScienceOpen is an integrated profile where academics can visualize their research impact through our enhanced author-level metrics….”

Follow-Up on NASA Providing Open Access to All Its Funded Research | Exposing PseudoAstronomy

“As a NASA grant awardee, you have the option to submit your accepted manuscript(s) to NASA’s PubSpace repository. PubSpace is available from a collaboration between the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and NASA to allow wider access to the results of federally-funded research. For the grant listed below, you may deposit any peer-reviewed manuscripts describing work supported by NASA awards that were published or accepted for publication through the NIH Manuscript Submission (NIHMS) system. At this time, this is not a Term and Condition of the grant listed below; however, you may voluntarily submit any manuscripts that were a result of the funded research from this grant.

Grant Award Information: Grant Number: ????? Proposal: ????? Technical Officer: ????? Technical Officer Email: ?????

In order to complete this process, you will need to have an ORCID ID number. Your ORCID ID number is required to align your award information to you and to allow you to log into the NIHMS system. Please follow this link to create an ORCID ID or to log in with your current ORCID ID number.”

The Importance of Opt-In | ORCID

“One of our priorities has been to reduce the effort needed for a researcher to connect their identifier to their works and affiliation information, while making it possible for organizations the researcher trusts to validate connections or to update information. To this end, we enabled some of our members, specifically those organizations that employ researchers, to use a “Member-Create” license to batch create and populate records for their researchers. These members not only signed on to our privacy policy, they also asserted that they were legally authorized to create records on behalf of their employees and/or students.  Almost 50 universities around the world have used this opt-out method to create more than 100,000 records for their researchers, and, in some cases, have added information about affiliation and publications to those records.  

In practice, this approach has raised some issues.  We initially anticipated that batch create would be a major route for ORCID record creation by employers of researchers, but to date fewer than 5% of ORCID registrations have occurred using batch create. Further, two thirds of records created in this way are currently unclaimed by, and unknown to, researchers. For ORCID benefits to accrue to an individual or the community, a researcher must use their ID; it follows that an unknown and unclaimed iD is helping neither adoption nor furthering ORCID’s mission.  Another issue is that these records were created using implicit consent from the researcher, and information that is moved between systems without an explicit “opt in”, is in conflict with some regional privacy regulations, making the batch process less useful to the community.

To address these concerns, we developed a new process, called “Create on Demand”, for our members who employ researchers.  The Create on Demand process enables the member organization to explicitly request permissions from a researcher (“opt in”) to read and write to that individual’s ORCID record. This process also improves the user experience for researchers with better information flow and fewer clicks to register. It increases the engagement of researchers, prevents the generation of unclaimed records, and reduces the likelihood that a duplicate record is created.  It supports our mission and commitment to privacy….”

UK ORCID technical and community support co-ordinator | Jisc

“Jisc is establishing a consortium agreement for UK universities to take advantage of the Open Researcher and Contribution Identifier (ORCID). This is to ensure a co-ordinated approach to ORCID implementation in the UK and to reduce to the cost of ORCID implementation, building on what has been learnt during the Jisc-ARMA ORCID pilot.


The purpose of this role is to provide technical support to research information practitioners and developers in ORCID consortium member organisations. The technical support will be dedicated to accelerating the speed with which universities can implement ORCID and to minimise the learning curve….”

1.5 Million ORCID iDs Served! | ORCID

” … While billions and billions should likely remain a statement about stars in the universe, I am very proud that ORCID has reached the earthly milestone of 1.5 million iDs served. First, I thank you, the community, for your continued interest, support, and engagement.   We now have over 300 organizational members and a similar number of member-built  identifier ‘collection points’, making it that much easier for researchers to connect their iD with their contributions.  We’ve showcased a number of these implementations on our Member Support Center. Thanks to generous support from the Helmsley Trust and the European Commission, we’ve been able to build our team to meet community demand, and now have technical and outreach staff in Asia, Latin America, North America, Africa, and Europe.  We’ve been racking up lots and lots of air miles to meet with you (five continents in as many months for me!), and the regional teams have started a series of regional workshops to bring ORCID to your area.    Our technical team has been busy, launching peer review acknowledgements and an updated API and, coming later this year, support for federated login.  We are also pleased to see the community using our record update API, and are looking forward to launches soon by CrossRef and DataCite that will automatically update ORCID records with published papers and datasets for which the author included their ORCID iD. Together, we are getting a LOT closer to seamless interoperability between research information systems, improved discoverability, and reduced reporting workload for researchers. Let’s keep reaching for the stars! “