Editorial: About the possibility of Applied Vegetation Science going Gold Open Access – vegsciblog.org

“Some time ago, IAVS was put in front of quite an important decision. Two of our journals, the Journal of Vegetation Science and Applied Vegetation Science, are currently distributed under the hybrid open-access model, when readers pay, and authors publish for free (while allowing publishing also open access articles for an extra cost). However, Wiley, our publisher, asked us to transfer AVS into the Gold Open Access model (Gold OA) when readers read for free, but authors pay. Wiley argues that the transition into OA is a current trend in publishing and meets the demands of readers and funders. However, the unsaid truth also is that the publishing landscape is changing. Researchers started to use alternative (and often illegal) ways of getting paywalled papers, and the high cost of journal subscriptions lead many libraries and institutions to cancel it. This motivates publishers to transit more and more journals into the Gold OA model, which should secure their profit and in turn also the income of associations, dependent on money from journal publishing. The downside of the Gold OA model, which may not be so apparent to readers, but becomes painfully apparent to the authors, is the costly Article Processing Charge or Article Publication Charge (APC) needed to be paid upon acceptance of the paper for the publication (for AVS currently proposed at £1900 per article)….”

Editorial: About the possibility of Applied Vegetation Science going Gold Open Access – vegsciblog.org

“Some time ago, IAVS was put in front of quite an important decision. Two of our journals, the Journal of Vegetation Science and Applied Vegetation Science, are currently distributed under the hybrid open-access model, when readers pay, and authors publish for free (while allowing publishing also open access articles for an extra cost). However, Wiley, our publisher, asked us to transfer AVS into the Gold Open Access model (Gold OA) when readers read for free, but authors pay. Wiley argues that the transition into OA is a current trend in publishing and meets the demands of readers and funders. However, the unsaid truth also is that the publishing landscape is changing. Researchers started to use alternative (and often illegal) ways of getting paywalled papers, and the high cost of journal subscriptions lead many libraries and institutions to cancel it. This motivates publishers to transit more and more journals into the Gold OA model, which should secure their profit and in turn also the income of associations, dependent on money from journal publishing. The downside of the Gold OA model, which may not be so apparent to readers, but becomes painfully apparent to the authors, is the costly Article Processing Charge or Article Publication Charge (APC) needed to be paid upon acceptance of the paper for the publication (for AVS currently proposed at £1900 per article)….”

Author choices on Journal of Cell Science: how ‘open’ are we to Open Access? | Journal of Cell Science

“The Company of Biologists believes that OA is the direction of travel and that the proportion of authors selecting (and funders mandating) OA publication will grow over the coming years. We also recognise the value of OA for our readers. For these reasons, this year has seen an increased focus on OA for the Company and its journals. In addition, a coalition of 20+ (largely European) funders will be implementing new OA mandates from January 2021 under an initiative called Plan S (https://www.coalition-s.org/). Briefly, the aim of Plan S is to make all research funded by ‘cOAlition S’ members publicly available in a high-quality journal or platform under an open (CC-BY) license. We know that this will apply to a proportion of our authors so it’s important that we provide Plan S-compliant publishing options while ensuring that any changes we make do not adversely affect non-Plan S authors….”  

Author choices on Development: how ‘open’ are we to Open Access? | Development

“The Company of Biologists believes that OA is the direction of travel and that the proportion of authors selecting (and funders mandating) OA publication will grow over the coming years. We also recognise the value of OA for our readers. For these reasons, this year has seen an increased focus on OA for the Company and its journals. In addition, a coalition of 20+ (largely European) funders will be implementing new OA mandates from January 2021 under an initiative called Plan S (https://www.coalition-s.org/). Briefly, the aim of Plan S is to make all research funded by ‘cOAlition S’ members publicly available in a high-quality journal or platform under an open (CC-BY) license. We know that this will apply to a proportion of our authors so it’s important that we provide Plan S-compliant publishing options while ensuring that any changes we make do not adversely affect non-Plan S authors….”  

Author choices on JEB: how ‘open’ are we to Open Access? | Journal of Experimental Biology

“The Company of Biologists believes that OA is the direction of travel and that the proportion of authors selecting (and funders mandating) OA publication will grow over the coming years. We also recognise the value of OA for our readers. For these reasons, this year has seen an increased focus on OA for the Company and its journals. In addition, a coalition of 20+ (largely European) funders will be implementing new OA mandates from January 2021 under an initiative called Plan S (https://www.coalition-s.org/). Briefly, the aim of Plan S is to make all research funded by ‘cOAlition S’ members publicly available in a high-quality journal or platform under an open (CC-BY) license. We know that this will apply to a proportion of our authors so it’s important that we provide Plan S-compliant publishing options while ensuring that any changes we make do not adversely affect non-Plan S authors….”

Free books online? Who could be against that? – The Washington Post

“IMAGINE A repository full of free books, available at the click of a button to anyone, anywhere, anytime. Whether this is a utopia, a dystopia or something in between depends on whom you ask — but thanks to the Internet Archive, it’s a reality. Now publishers are suing to stop it….

Its storehouse of scanned physical copies of books, however, is possibly illegal. And its decision amid the novel coronavirus pandemic to create a “National Emergency Library” by suspending limitations on how frequently these books can be “lent out” makes the problem worse….

And yet — the archive does appear to be serving a need. The National Emergency Library, which defends its strategy as copyright fair use, is supposed to get books to people when physical libraries are closed….

The Internet Archive’s approach is much like piracy and less like a library. The repository ought to negotiate with publishers to get more books to more people — but also more money to more authors who’ve rightfully earned it. Yet what this kerfuffle over a non-library reveals is really a library problem. The legal and business landscape lags a public that more and more is reading digitally. Publishers impose fees and conditions that they consider necessary to stay afloat and librarians consider draconian. It’s past time to catch up: The National Emergency Library isn’t really a library, but libraries are facing a bit of a national emergency.”

Academic Publishing and the Future of Open Access : Optometry and Vision Science

“Unfortunately, sanity, clarity, and insight about the future of academic publishing are hard to come by—the future is highly uncertain. If I had to say which way the momentum is shifting, it is toward open access and a more binary division between very large and small publishers, with fewer midsize publishers. That probably means there will be some additional industry consolidation and possible acquisitions. Journals affiliated with academic societies will be pressured to find sufficient subscription or other revenue to support their journals. Alternatively, author charges or some viable mix of subscription and page charge revenues will sustain them. Publishers will be increasingly pressured to serve the interests of authors as well as the interests of their funding agencies. The prospect of 38% annual profits is likely gone, and publishers will be pushed to further innovate in how they produce, distribute, and market scientific knowledge to maintain their relevance and market share. It would be interesting if scientific articles were treated like digital music. If a unifying force were capable of bringing the biggest publishing houses to the table to negotiate reasonable fees for libraries, authors, and the broader public, this could truly transform the world’s access to scientific knowledge….”

European Science Editing is in full open access now

Abstract:  I am excited to announce that with this volume European Science Editing (ESE) has shifted from the print to a fully digital open access version. The journal underwent several changes last year. First of all, our publisher, the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) was generously offered – and accepted – a new ARPHA submission system (powered by PenSoft). Together with the EASE president Pippa Smart and EASE Council, we decided to transform ESE into a fully open access online journal. After several months of planning and re-thinking our strategy, a small working group (some members of the EASE Council and of ESE’s associate editors) prepared a proposal, the main idea of which was to divide the journal in two overlapping publications: European Science Editing and EASE Digest. The former will continue to publish original articles, reviews (formerly “essays”), viewpoints, and correspondence using the fully open access ARPHA submission system (flow publishing) but will drop the other sections, namely News notes, The editor’s bookshelf, This site I like, and EASE Forum Digest). These sections, which our readers consider particularly valuable, will now be published in EASE Digest with a few selected articles from ESE. The Digest will be available to EASE members only. As the proposal was accepted by the EASE Council in September 2019, the journal’s transformation is already under way. I wish to thank Silvia Maina (This site I like), Fiona Murphy (Book reviews), Elise Langdon-Neuner (EASE-Forum Digest), Anna Maria Rossi (The Editor’s bookshelf), and James Hartley and Denys Wheatley (members of the International Advisory Board) for the great work they have done and for their cooperation.

 

A new era for research publication: Will Open Access become the norm? – Hotta – – Journal of Diabetes Investigation – Wiley Online Library

“This new challenge [Plan S] causes some concerns to us. This program is unlikely to be equivalent between Europe and the United States8). because key US federal agencies such as National Institute of Health (NIH), mandate a ‘green’ Open Access policy, whereby articles in subscription journals are automatically made available after a 12-month embargo. This policy protects the existing ‘paywalled’ subscription business model. Also, ‘Plan S’ does not allow for scientists to publish their papers in hybrid journals….

One piece of bright news, however, is that Open Access publication fees would be covered by funders or research institutions, not by individual researchers. Although our journal is already Open Access, we have some concerns regarding the publication fee being covered by either researchers or institutions….”

Given that the publishing industry is approaching a new era in which 85% or more of journals are Open Access, it is necessary for us to develop a survival strategy against this coming fierce competition….