“It is unreasonable and unrealistic to expect the legacy publisher’s shareholders to voluntarily forgo their projected profits. The interests of the legacy publishers cannot co?exist with the ideals of many of us in the Open Access movement.
The way forward for Open Access, therefore, can not be guided by the legacy publishers.”
“The purpose of this document is to provide a concise analysis of where the global OER movement currently stands: what the common threads are, where the greatest opportunities and challenges lie, and how we can more effectively work together as a community. The first draft was born from a meeting of 26 OER leaders in February 2015. We then shared this document on global and regional OER lists and had in-person discussions with members of the international OER community at the 2015 Hewlett OER grantees meeting, OER15, Open Ed Global 2015, and the CC Global Summit 2015. Comments from all four meetings were integrated into this document.
Our hope is that this document will serve as a starting point for conversations about strategies for mainstreaming OER and extending its reach and impact globally. We also hope that this document, and the strategies within, will evolve as the conversation evolves to provide useful insight for both global coordination and local action….”
“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.”
“We propose that editorial boards of journals ask their current publisher to agree to the principles of Fair Open Access….We propose that if a journal’s existing publisher cannot or will not meet these conditions the editorial board give notice of resignation, and transfer the journal to a publisher meeting the conditions….”
“Entrenched viewpoints on both sides of the open access debate risk leaving authors stuck in no man’s land, argues Rob Johnson….In politics, the ‘third way’ emerged as a synthesis of right-wing economics and left-wing social policies. Perhaps it’s time for us to embrace a ‘third way to OA’ – enabling us to harness the dynamism of commercial players in the interests of opening up research findings to the world.“
“The government has established the following national guidelines to ensure all stakeholders work towards the same goal, including measures that shall support the ongoing work:
Publicly funded research articles are to be made openly available. Researchers shall examine the possibilities for publishing their articles in open access journals and choose open access journals where academically acceptable. Only in exceptional circumstances may articles that are publicly funded be published in journals that do not allow the article to be made available in an academic repository.
All publicly funded research articles must be deposited in a suitable academic repository. This shall take place at the latest on the publication date, irrespective of the publishing channel and when the article can be made openly available.
Institutions and consortia that negotiate agreements with publishers shall ensure that these agreements promote open access without increasing total costs, and that the terms and conditions are open and transparent.
Institutions that fund research projects shall contribute to cover the costs associated with open access publishing. In research performing institutions costs associated with open access publishing shall be seen as part of research budgets, just as costs associated with other key activities. Researchers and research performing institutions are encouraged via their networks to contribute to the promotion of publishing services that deliver the required quality at an appropriate price.”
“The SCA is experimenting with new ways of making our content accessible beyond the echo chamber of our discipline. As a section, we consider the accessibility of our work to be crucial aspects of public engagement and worlding anthropology, especially in contentious political moments. Our strategy centers on our efforts to make Cultural Anthropology a fully open-access journal, promote the ongoing series on our lively website, and generate buzz surrounding our social media that currently reach over 40,000 followers. All of this is made possible by a large team of student and postdoctoral contributing editors who make up the discipline’s next generation. Here, we highlight a sample of these activities in order to invite more scholars and students to the SCA.”
“EAS, in collaboration with Education Strategy Center and the Ethiopian Education and Research Network, organized a consultative workshop on ‘Assessing the Landscape of Open Access to Scholarly Publications in Ethiopia’. The Workshop, which was held on 04 August 2017, brought together key stakeholders to explore the status of open access publishing in Ethiopia with a view to inspiring a collaborative action towards creating/maintaining a sustainable open access platform.
Open access platforms that center Ethiopians can be valuable in spotlighting and promoting scholarship among Ethiopians and making scientific knowledge accessible to the public. Prof. Masresha Fetene, Executive Director of EAS, noted that despite the increasing consensus on the benefits of open access, Ethiopia has yet to fully tap into the global open access movement. Prof. Masresha further noted that while various institutions in Ethiopia have open access initiatives, most efforts remain fragmented. Therefore, assessing the landscape of open access publications in consultation with a wide-range of stakeholders is a critical step in identifying what has been done so far in Ethiopia, the challenges under and promoting an efficient and collaborative approach towards creating and sustaining an open access platform.”
“Now a new study has found that nearly half of all academic articles that users want to read are already freely available. These studies may or may not have been published in an open-access journal, but there is a legally free version available for a reader to download.
To arrive at this conclusion, researcher Heather Piwowar and her colleagues used data from a web-browser extension they had developed called Unpaywall. When users of the extension land on an academic article, it trawls the web to find if there are free versions to download from places such as pre-print services or those uploaded on university websites.
In an analysis of 100,000 papers queried by Unpaywall, Piwowar and her colleagues found that as many as 47% searched for studies that had a free-to-read version available. The study is yet to be peer-reviewed, but Ludo Waltman of Leiden University told Nature that it is ‘careful and extensive.'”
“As we move remorselessly into a world where no individual or team can hope either to read or keep track of the published research in any defined field without machine learning or AI support, primary publishing becomes less important than getting into the dataflow and thus into the workflow of scholarship . It still helps to be published in Nature or Cell , but that could take place after visibility on figshare or F1000. Get the metadata right , ensure the visibility and reputation management can commence . So the first question about the post journal world is ‘ Who keeps score and how is worth measured ?’ And then we come to the next question . If the article is simply a waystage data report , and all the other materials of scholarly communication ( blogs , presentations etc) can be tracked , and the data from an experimental sequence can be as important for reproducibility as the article , and reports of successfully repeated experiments are as important in some instances as innovation, then the scheme of Notification and communication and cross-referencing must be open , community-owned and universally available , so how does it get established ?”