Arcadia Fund | Our response to UKRI’s open access review consultation – Arcadia Fund

“The publisher must make efforts to advertise the existence of a freely available version on the DOI-landing page of the publisher version of the work, and in all metadata supplied in the form of MARC records, ONIX feeds, and CrossRef DOI associated metadata. The licence of the work should be clearly given on the DOI-landing page and in all forms of associated metadata that the publisher supplies be it MARC or ONIX or DOI or all. If the publisher is known to not provide adequate metadata about open access and open access licensing, then withhold all Book Publishing Charges from that publisher until they provide it. Better still, warn authors not to submit to the publisher with a ‘blacklist’ of non-compliant publishers.

Some publishers both in journals and in monographs have been doing rather sneaky things to hide the existence of a freely accessible version. See Piwowar (2018) ‘Where’s Waldo With Public Access Links’. For ‘gold’ open access works, ensure the publisher creates a link from which the entirety of the book can be downloaded as PDF (or other format e.g. EPUB) in one-click – far too many platforms break-up books into chapters with absolutely no provision of a link to download the work in its entirety – this is annoying for users….”

The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research Adopts Open Access Publication Policy | New York | curated.tncontentexchange.com

“In keeping with its core values of transparency and scientific collaboration to accelerate the development of new treatments, The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research (MJFF) is adopting a formal policy requiring that all articles resulting from work it has funded be published in a preprint repository then an open access forum….”

What HHMI Scientists Think About Scientific Publishing | HHMI.org

“HHMI works to discover and share scientific knowledge. We believe that science is a public good. Should new research be shared freely, widely, and quickly? We asked our scientists what they think….

Finding 1 – Most surveyed scientists see significant challenges with scientific publishing today and generally favor open access over subscription….

Finding 2 – The scientists are divided on whether they oppose or favor a policy requiring them to publish open access, which would restrict their publication choices….

Finding 3 – When considering a policy requiring them to publish open access, the scientists’ top concern was that trainees will find it more difficult to obtain tenure-track academic positions if they cannot publish in prestigious journals that are currently subscription-based….

Finding 4 – The majority of Group Leaders at HHMI’s Janelia Research Campus who took the survey report posting or reading preprints, with a lower proportion of HHMI Investigators and trainees doing so. Scientists are split on whether they oppose or favor a requirement to publish preprints….”

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….”

Taking action to help researchers -Gates Open Research Blog

“The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation launched it’s Open Access policy in 2015 marking a point where we joined a global effort to prioritize open access to research knowledge with aims to accelerate finding solutions to the world’s most pressing problems. The Wellcome Trust first partnered with F1000 to launch Wellcome Open Research and they shared their experience with the foundation (see the story here). Intrigued by the F1000 model, the foundation followed in Wellcome’s footsteps to launch it’s own open platform for it’s grantees. It has been one of my favourite initiatives associated with the foundation’s open access work. As a librarian, it is part of my ethos to help people access the information they need and to ensure quality information is widely available to all. …”

New MJFF Policy for Research Grantees Embraces #OpenAccess Movement | Parkinson’s Disease

“Today, in keeping with our core values of transparency and scientific collaboration to accelerate the development of new treatments, MJFF [Michael J. Fox Foundation] announced a policy requiring that grantees publish articles resulting from MJFF-funded research projects in a preprint repository then an open access forum. The Foundation will provide funding to cover the cost of open access articles resulting from MJFF grants….”

Wellcome Open Research: a summary of year 3 | Wellcome Open Research Blog

“The Wellcome Open Research (WOR) publishing platform has been fully operational for three years and in this time has grown to become the third most used venue for Wellcome-funded researchers to share their research findings. In this blog post, we provide an analysis of publishing activity on the WOR platform and preview some of the activities we have planned for 2020….

2020 will be a time of change for F1000 Research – the company who manage the WOR platform – following the sale of the company to Taylor and Francis. However, we do not believe this will have any immediate impact on WOR, and indeed are seeing this acquisition as testament that the drive for open research publishing is gathering momentum….”

Job Application for Science Program Manager, Open Science at Chan Zuckerberg Initiative

“Our mission is to support science and technology that will help make it possible to cure, prevent, or manage all diseases by the end of the century. Interdisciplinary teams of physicians, biologists, computational scientists, and engineers can expand our understanding of the human body and illness — the very science behind medicine. CZI fosters collaboration between scientists and engineers, develops tools and technologies, and builds support for basic scientific research. 

Open science—the practice of sharing data, methods, software, and results in the open in a timely and effective manner, so that other scientists have the ability to learn and build on them—is core to our vision. We believe open science is key to empowering more people to engage in research and accelerate the pace, robustness, and reproducibility of science. In order to achieve this goal, we will invest in platforms and initiatives that can shift incentives and culture in scientific communities towards early, open sharing and collaboration. 

We are supporting the scientific open source software ecosystem through a dedicated grant program (EOSS), as well as in-house software development through our software engineering and computational biology teams. We are supporting large-scale open data initiatives like the Human Cell Atlas, a global project to create a complete reference map of all the cells in the human body. We have invested in platforms like bioRxiv and Protocols.io to accelerate sharing and linking of research outputs and we are building Meta, a biomedical research discovery service.

As a Science Program Manager for Open Science, you will drive the execution of open science initiatives in the scientific communities CZI serves. You will manage and assist the development and operations of grant programs to support open science, including programs in progress, planned, or future programs to be developed. You will coordinate closely with the rest of the CZI Science team and the external community. You will be a public advocate of CZI’s mission and our priorities in open science and you will contribute to shaping our strategic directions in this area. The ideal candidate will have a strong understanding of open science practices, how open source software, open data, and collaborative platforms are used in science, and how open communities function….”

Open Research Funders Group Reaffirms Support for Open Science | Open Research Funders Group

With news that the United States may be considering a shift in their national open access policy, the Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) reaffirms its support for the sharing of research outputs as widely and quickly as possible. The ORFG, a partnership of 16 philanthropies with assets in excess of $100 billion, believes that open access (along with open data and broader open science activities) benefits society by potentially accelerating the pace of discovery, reducing information-sharing gaps, encouraging innovation, and promoting reproducibility.  

From a practical standpoint, open access demonstrates a tangible return on taxpayer investment. Federal funds that support research have their highest impact when the results of this labor are shared, discussed, tested, and built upon with as few restrictions as possible.