In pursuit of open science, open access is not enough | Science

“After decades of debate on the feasibility of open access (OA) to scientific publications, we may be nearing a tipping point. A number of recent developments, such as Plan S, suggest that OA upon publication could become the default in the sciences within the next several years. Despite uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of OA models, many publishers who had been reluctant to abandon the subscription business model are showing openness to OA (1). Although more OA can mean more immediate, global access to scholarship, there remains a need for practical, sustainable models, for careful analysis of the consequences of business model choices, and for “caution in responding to passionate calls for a ‘default to open’” (2). Of particular concern for the academic community, as subscription revenues decline in the transition to OA and some publishers prioritize other sources of revenue, is the growing ownership of data analytics, hosting, and portal services by large scholarly publishers. This may enhance publishers’ ability to lock in institutional customers through combined offerings that condition open access to journals upon purchase of other services. Even if such “bundled” arrangements have a near-term benefit of increasing openly licensed scholarship, they may run counter to long-term interests of the academic community by reducing competition and the diversity of service offerings. The healthy functioning of the academic community, including fair terms and conditions from commercial partners, requires that the global marketplace for data analytics and knowledge infrastructure be kept open to real competition.”

 

In pursuit of open science, open access is not enough | Science

“After decades of debate on the feasibility of open access (OA) to scientific publications, we may be nearing a tipping point. A number of recent developments, such as Plan S, suggest that OA upon publication could become the default in the sciences within the next several years. Despite uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of OA models, many publishers who had been reluctant to abandon the subscription business model are showing openness to OA (1). Although more OA can mean more immediate, global access to scholarship, there remains a need for practical, sustainable models, for careful analysis of the consequences of business model choices, and for “caution in responding to passionate calls for a ‘default to open’” (2). Of particular concern for the academic community, as subscription revenues decline in the transition to OA and some publishers prioritize other sources of revenue, is the growing ownership of data analytics, hosting, and portal services by large scholarly publishers. This may enhance publishers’ ability to lock in institutional customers through combined offerings that condition open access to journals upon purchase of other services. Even if such “bundled” arrangements have a near-term benefit of increasing openly licensed scholarship, they may run counter to long-term interests of the academic community by reducing competition and the diversity of service offerings. The healthy functioning of the academic community, including fair terms and conditions from commercial partners, requires that the global marketplace for data analytics and knowledge infrastructure be kept open to real competition.”

 

The Impact of Big Deal Breaks on Library Consortia: An Exploratory Case Study: The Serials Librarian: Vol 0, No 0

Abstract:  This study examines the impact of Big Deal breaks on statewide resource sharing. An analysis within VIVA (Virginia’s academic library consortium) for Big Deal publishers showed significant lending of one publisher with low levels of statewide holdings. A closer examination of an individual institution with the most recent cancellations of this publisher’s content showed high levels of fulfillment from lending partners outside the consortium. As more groups cancel Big Deals, consideration for alternative access will be increasingly important, and understanding the resource sharing environment should inform a cooperative approach to journal acquisitions in order to minimize negative impacts on researchers.

 

The OLH Open Consortial Offer

“Our offer to those joining [OLH] as a bloc would be as follows:

For 10 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/10th of 1 membership at the highest fee of the group.

For 15 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/15th of 2 memberships at the highest fee of the group.

For 20 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/20th of 3 memberships at the highest fee of the group.

For 25 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/25th of 4 memberships at the highest fee of the group.

For 30 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/30th of 5 memberships at the highest fee of the group.

The offer continues to scale as outlined above based on the size of your consortium….”

Data Summit in Paris | LERU

“The international Research Data Rights Summit was held at Sorbonne University on Monday, 27 January. This initiative brought together nine major networks of research-intensive universities from major regions of the world. It was an opportunity to sign the “Sorbonne Declaration” on the rights of research data. This text strongly affirms the willingness of universities to share their data while firmly calling on governments to adopt a clear legal framework to regulate this sharing and to provide the means to put it in place. …”

Sorbonne declaration on research data rights

Signed by nine major university consortia. 

(The file is an image scan that doesn’t support cutting and pasting. Otherwise, this description would be longer and more useful.)

The declaration is undated, but was officially released on January 27, 2020.

 

Sorbonne declaration on research data rights

Signed by nine major university consortia. 

(The file is an image scan that doesn’t support cutting and pasting. Otherwise, this description would be longer and more useful.)

The declaration is undated, but was officially released on January 27, 2020.

 

University networks sign “Sorbonne Declaration” on research data rights – ERA Portal Austria

“A number of networks of research-intensive universities signed a declaration at the Research Data Rights Summit at Sorbonne University, Paris, on 27 January 2020. The so-called “Sorbonne Declaration” on research data rights affirms the commitment of the signatory universities to opening up  research data and demanding a clear legal framework to regulate this sharing and to provide the means to put it in place. 

The declaration was signed by nine networks representing more than 160 of the main research-intensive universities in the world. It addresses the international scientific community as well as research funding bodies and governments. According to the signatories, research data rights are an essential issue for the quality and transparency of research, as well as a crucial economic issue, as this data is funded largely by public moneyworldwide. The objective is therefore to make these data accessible in order to accelerate scientific discoveries and economic development.”

University networks sign “Sorbonne Declaration” on research data rights – ERA Portal Austria

“A number of networks of research-intensive universities signed a declaration at the Research Data Rights Summit at Sorbonne University, Paris, on 27 January 2020. The so-called “Sorbonne Declaration” on research data rights affirms the commitment of the signatory universities to opening up  research data and demanding a clear legal framework to regulate this sharing and to provide the means to put it in place. 

The declaration was signed by nine networks representing more than 160 of the main research-intensive universities in the world. It addresses the international scientific community as well as research funding bodies and governments. According to the signatories, research data rights are an essential issue for the quality and transparency of research, as well as a crucial economic issue, as this data is funded largely by public moneyworldwide. The objective is therefore to make these data accessible in order to accelerate scientific discoveries and economic development.”

The OLH Open Consortial Offer

“The Open Library of Humanities welcomes expressions of interest from consortia, societies, networks and scholarly projects interested in joining the OLH as a bloc.

We believe that an open offer is advantageous for three reasons:

It is a collective and affordable expression of support for and commitment to scholarly open access.

It can be deployed as a cost-effective alternative to paying APCs for group publications, redirecting scholarly funds towards the creation of new research at the direct/indirect cost of production.

The mechanism of this offer allows larger partners in a group or consortium to support their peers, with each member paying according to their ability and benefiting according to their needs.

We also believe that it is crucial for collective actors to be aware of their options, and of the benefits of acting together in solidarity. The alternative is the prisoner’s dilemma scenario familiar to universities negotiating with legacy publishers. We know that we are all stronger when discussion is frank and transparent. 

First, how does the offer work? The OLH subsidy is banded based on the nationality of a joining institution. The banding also accounts for the relative size of the institution at a national level: for example, the cost for a large institution in the US is USD $2123 per annum, whereas the fee for a smaller US institution is USD $681 per annum….”