President Trump’s Science Advisor and Government Science Leaders from Around the World call on Publishers to make all COVID-19-Related Research Publically Available

“Today, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and Member of President Trump’s Coronavirus Task Force, Dr. Kelvin Droegemeier, and government science leaders including science ministers and chief science advisors from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, and the United Kingdom are asking publishers to make all COVID-19-related research and data immediately available to the public. …”

President’s Science Advisor Leads Conf. Call with Government Science Leaders on COVID-19 | U.S. Embassy & Consulate in the Republic of Korea

“Today, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr. Kelvin Droegemeier, and Member of President’s Trump Task Force on Coronavirus, again led convening government science leaders including science ministers and chief advisors from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, Republic of Korea, and the United Kingdom to share information on integrating science into the COVID-19 response. Following the first call last week, we’ll continue ongoing scientific diplomacy weekly…..

Participants overwhelmingly supported efforts to make immediately available COVID-19 relevant peer-reviewed publications, data, and related research in PubMed Central and/or other publicly accessible repositories….”

President’s Science Advisor Leads Conf. Call with Government Science Leaders on COVID-19 | U.S. Embassy & Consulate in the Republic of Korea

“Today, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Dr. Kelvin Droegemeier, and Member of President’s Trump Task Force on Coronavirus, again led convening government science leaders including science ministers and chief advisors from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, Republic of Korea, and the United Kingdom to share information on integrating science into the COVID-19 response. Following the first call last week, we’ll continue ongoing scientific diplomacy weekly…..

Participants overwhelmingly supported efforts to make immediately available COVID-19 relevant peer-reviewed publications, data, and related research in PubMed Central and/or other publicly accessible repositories….”

Authors Alliance Supports Immediate Access to Federally Funded Research | Authors Alliance

“Media sources report that the Trump Administration is considering a policy to make the results of federally funded research immediately available for the public to freely access and use. Current policy requires results of federally funded research be made available in pre-print form within 12 months of publication. The rumored policy would eliminate the 12-month embargo. As an organization with a mission to advance the interests of authors who want to serve the public good by sharing their creations broadly, Authors Alliance strongly supports such a policy.

Many of our members are authors who rely on taxpayer dollars to fund their research and want the results of that research to be immediately available for potential readers to readily locate and access without being turned away by paywalls. Immediate and free online availability increases their works’ visibility, helping it to reach readers and benefit the public. Absent a federal policy, many authors simply do not have the bargaining power necessary to demand from publishers the level of access they want for their research. …

 

 

A policy requiring the outputs of federally funded research be made immediately available would maximize the value of investment in research by ensuring that more readers can access research results than if the works were available through restricted means alone. For these reasons, Authors Alliance supports a policy that would ensure that the public is not made to pay both to create and to read research and would open up opportunities for others to build upon research, accelerating the pace of innovation and discovery.”

ORFG Members Join White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to Align Research Incentives — Open Research Funders Group

“On February 28, 2020, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the National Science and Technology Council Rigor and Integrity in Research Subcommittee, and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) Roundtable on Aligning Incentives for Open Science held a joint meeting on aligning incentives in support of research integrity, reproducibility, and openness. The meeting including perspectives from a number of Open Research Funders Group members, including the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Arnold Ventures, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the James S. McDonnell Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Wellcome Trust.

Points of consensus from the meeting, as reported by OSTP, include the following:

– Research has its widest impact and is most trustworthy when its methodology and analysis are well-designed and the interpretation and reporting of results are clearly and transparently articulated.

– As stakeholders in the research endeavor, Federal agencies, academic institutions, philanthropic organizations, and publishers should work to ensure that the performance and reporting of the research that we fund, support, and communicate is consistent with this view of impact.

– The consistency and impact of research would be maximized by aligning our credit and reward systems, such as hiring and tenure and promotion processes, with rigorous, transparent, and open research practices.

– Federal agencies, academic institutions, philanthropic organizations, and publishers could enhance research rigor, integrity, openness, and transparency by actively aligning these systems and striving to coordinate policies and procedures….”

The Cornoavirus (COVID-19) outbreak highlights serious deficiencies in scholarly communication | Impact of Social Sciences

“As research and government responses to the COVID-19 outbreak escalate in the face of a global public health crisis, Vincent Larivière, Fei Shu and Cassidy R. Sugimoto reflect on efforts to make research on this subject more widely available. Arguing that a narrow focus on research published in high ranking journals predominantly in English has impeded research efforts, they suggest that the renewed emphasis on carrying out open research on the virus presents an opportunity to reassess how research and scholarly communication systems serve the public good….

The Trump administration in the United States, for example, is considering an executive order that would make all federally funded studies free to read on publication. Similarly, the Plan S coalition of funders require all funded research to be published in open access journals. While many funding agencies have adopted open access policies, compliance is variable and embargoes currently limit immediate access to biomedical research. Both the potential executive order and Plan S have been opposed by many of the signatories on the Wellcome Trust statement. This is a blatant contradiction….”

Of Mythical Beasts and Zero-Embargo Mandates | Advancing Discovery | Springer Nature

“Springer Nature didn’t sign either letter [for or against the rumored Trump executive order], even though we also had our concerns about the rumored mandate. We’re very proud of the role that Springer Nature, the world’s most comprehensive Open Access publisher, has played – and continues to play – in making research more open, so we wholeheartedly agree with the end goal of immediate open access. But the means to this end has to be carefully thought out, and ultimately structured in a sustainable way. Our concerns about a potential zero-embargo mandate for subscription content from the OSTP were that it might prove counterproductive and unsustainable, by resulting in slower progress towards Gold OA and ultimately hampering the wider ‘open’ agenda – Gold OA being much more than a different business model but the doorway to open science….

Green OA, on the other hand – whether with a zero embargo or not –, is not citable or connected to the scientific record, so researchers can’t build on it. It also doesn’t provide access to the original data and so is neither replicable nor reusable, therefore limiting its usefulness for furthering academic discovery and public or commercial R&D initiatives. Moreover, it doesn’t give the general public access to many of the improvements publishers make to enhance the layout and understanding of the research, thereby making it more accessible to the lay person. And it still requires libraries and institutions to subscribe to access the version of record….”

WHITE HOUSE: Scientific research executive order on hold — Friday, February 21, 2020 — www.eenews.net

“The White House issued a notice Wednesday seeking comment on its effort to enhance public access to federally funded research. It’s an old idea creating new controversy.

White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Kelvin Droegemeier is pushing back against publishers that in December said the administration was quietly pursuing an executive order to require immediate free distribution of taxpayer funded research (Greenwire, Dec. 17, 2019).

Publishers feared the plan could upend their fee-based business model. But this week, Droegemeier formally assured them that his office is still seeking public input on the topic….”

White House Seeking Additional Input on Open Access Options | American Institute of Physics

“Since word of the potential executive order first spread late last year, OSTP has consistently declined to either confirm or deny such a policy is under review. Speaking to FYI this week, an OSTP official said the new series of stakeholder consultations was prompted by the series of letters commenting on “rumored efforts to increase public access.” The official noted the administration is holding meetings with representatives of academic institutions, libraries, commercial publishers, non-profit publishers, and research funders.

Asked if the administration ultimately plans to update the 2013 memorandum, the official replied, “Not necessarily, we continue to explore opportunities to increase public access, but we don’t necessarily have a particular mechanism [in mind], nor would we speak to any particular mechanism.” Characterizing the administration’s general stance toward open access, the official said, “This is taxpayer-funded research, and [the question is] how do we make that research more accessible so that we can increase the knowledge and innovation that comes from that research.”…

OSTP Director Kelvin Droegemeier has himself provided a few details on his views on open access in past interviews. Asked by the Times Higher Education last May about whether taxpayers should have immediate access to federally funded publications, he replied, “They maybe should — there’s all kinds of options out there being considered and discussed.”

Droegemeier has placed one firm bound on the administration’s approach, dismissing the Plan S initiative’s call for research funders to require that grantees publish in certain types of open access journals. “One of the things this government will not do is to tell researchers where they have to publish their papers. That is absolutely up to the scholar who’s doing the publication,” he told FYI in an interview last April….”

 

Federal Register :: Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code Resulting From Federally Funded Research

“OSTP, and the National Science and Technology Council’s (NSTC) Subcommittee on Open Science (SOS), are engaged in ongoing efforts to facilitate implementation and compliance with the 2013 memorandum Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research?[1] and to address recommended actions made by the Government Accountability Office in a November 2019 report.[2] OSTP and the SOS continue to explore opportunities to increase access to unclassified published research, digital scientific data, and code supported by the U.S. Government. This RFI aims to provide all interested individuals and organizations with the opportunity to provide recommendations on approaches for ensuring broad public access to the peer-reviewed scholarly publications, data, and code that result from federally funded scientific research.

Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before 11:59 p.m. ET on March 16, 2020….”