A presentation by Paul Peters (CEO of Hindawi and President of OASPA) at the Berlin 13 meeting, March 2017.
“This webinar on Open Access publishing lead by Dr. Maha Bali (American University in Cairo) and Associate Professor Laura Czierniewicz (University of Cape Town, South Africa) took place 20 September 2016 as a part of the one week seminar: Publishing in the Open: Exploring pathways for open access publishing….”
“I will be speaking at the IFLA Satellite Meeting for the program Libraries as Publishers: Building a Global Community. It will take place August 10-12, 2016, in Ann Arbor, Michigan and is sponsored by the IFLA Section on Acquisition and Collection Development, along with Serials and Other Continuing Resources. Here is the proposal: How can (or should) institutional repositories, disciplinary websites, data warehouses, and other open access repositories form part of a larger strategy for library publishing? In the age of linked data and the semantic web, open access repositories might seem to be the first step toward solving a much larger problem, namely, creating a research management infrastructure that helps to assess the impact, productivity, and use of resources online. Yet, the answer to how library publishing units should accomplish linking research management practices and open access publishing mechanisms remains elusive. There are two ways of trying to achieve the solution. First, libraries need to implement new pieces of infrastructure that help to manage research. Examples might include commercial products like Symplectic Elements – http://symplectic.co.uk/, profiling systems like VIVO – http://vivoweb.org/ , research ID systems like ORCID – http://orcid.org/, or discoverability services like SHARE – www.share-research.org. Second, and, more important, however, are the open access policies that govern research management on campus. Mandates like those at Harvard and MIT are often catalysts for creation of infrastructure, and universities may need to create new policies in order to facilitate better research management …”
“After a month of intense conversations and negotiations, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) will bring the ‘Fair Access to Science and Technology Research (FASTR) Act’ up for mark-up on Wednesday, July 29th. The language that will be considered is an amended version of FASTR, officially known as the ‘Johnson-Carper Substitute Amendment,’ which was officially filed by the HSGAC leadership late on Friday afternoon, per committee rules. There are two major changes from the original bill language to be particularly aware of. Specifically, the amendment Replaces the six month embargo period with ‘no later than 12 months, but preferably sooner’ as anticipated; and Provides a mechanism for stakeholders to petition federal agencies to ‘adjust’ the embargo period if the12 months does not serve ‘the public, industries, and the scientific community.’ We understand that these modifications were made in order accomplish a number of things: Satisfy the requirement of a number of Members of HSGAC that the language more closely track that of the OSTP Directive; Meet the preference of the major U.S. higher education associations for a maximum 12 month embargo; Ensure that, for the first time, a number of scientific societies will drop their opposition for the bill; and Ensure that any petition process an agency may enable is focused on serving the interests of the public and the scientific community …”
“Impact is multi-dimensional, the routes by which impact occur are different across disciplines and sectors, and impact changes over time. Jane Tinkler argues that if institutions like HEFCE specify a narrow set of impact metrics, more harm than good would come to universities forced to limit their understanding of how research is making a difference. But qualitative and quantitative indicators continue to be an incredible source of learning for how impact works in each of our disciplines, locations or sectors.”
“Open access for monographs and book chapters is a relatively new area of publishing, and there are many ways of approaching it. With this in mind, a recent publication from the Wellcome Trust aims to provide some guidance for publishers to consider when developing policies and processes for open access books. The Wellcome Trust recognises that implementation around publishing monographs and book chapters open access is in flux, and invites publishers to email Cecy Marden at email@example.com with any suggestions for further guidance that would be useful to include in this document. ‘Open Access Monographs and Book Chapters: A practical guide for publishers’ is available to download as a pdf from the Wellcome Trust website.”