Heading for 100% Open access: NWO and ZonMw on the right track, but further steps are needed

“In 2018, 68% of the publications resulting from NWO funding were Open access. The percentage for ZonMw was 60%. These are the findings of an analysis published today by the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS). NWO and ZonMw are aiming for 100% Open access. Achieving this target will require an extra effort and further steps.

On behalf of NWO and ZonMw, CWTS analysed how many NWO and ZonMw publications were Open access between 2015 and 2018. The CWTS also looked at the different types of Open access (gold, green, hybrid, etc.). Since 2009, NWO has been committed to ensure all publications resulting from NWO funding are made available in Open access. In 2015, NWO made further agreements on this with the State Secretary at the time, Sander Dekker. CWTS used the bibliographic database Web of Science and Unpaywall for its analysis….”

‘Open Access Books’ call: Make your book openly accessible | NWO

Open access to scholarly articles has become the norm. A recent study shows that 60% to 70% of the articles funded by NWO are freely available in Open access. The transition to Open access for academic books is lagging behind though.

NWO wants to step up its efforts to make the academic books that result from its funding Open access as well. That is why NWO will make 500,000 euros a year available for the Open access publication of books from 1 June 2020 onwards. Applications for this ‘Open Access Books’ call for proposals can be submitted throughout the year as long as the budget lasts.

Open Access Books is a continuous call, initially until 2022. The total budget is 500,000 euros per year with a limit of 10,000 euros per publication.

Open access: how COVID-19 will change the way research findings are shared | News | Wellcome

“During the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers and publishers have pulled together to publish their outputs at an unprecedented rate. So, how have they responded? And how will this change research culture and the way findings are disseminated in future? …

Subscription publishers have stepped up to respond to this global emergency by removing paywalls and allowing content to be reused. But this has also shone a spotlight on the shortcomings of the traditional scholarly publishing system, which is not fit for purpose in the 21st century.   

A business model in which 75% of the research literature is only accessible to paying subscribers(opens in a new tab) is unacceptable, especially as much of that research has been funded by the public purse….”

The view from Salford: perspectives on scholarly communications from a research-informed university

Abstract:  This article presents a range of perspectives on the current state of the scholarly communications sector through the lens of a research-informed university, beginning with a short overview of research at the University of Salford and followed by our assessment of what we feel is working, and indeed not working, with the current system. Based on this, we assess what we feel are the current barriers to change and both how these can be overcome and what we are doing to overcome them. Finally, we provide some commentary on what we feel is the changing open access paradigm and where all this should take us next.

 

The commercial model of academic publishing underscoring Plan S weakens the existing open access ecosystem in Latin America | Impact of Social Sciences

Health emergencies such as those we face today reveal the importance of opening scientific knowledge; something that not-for-profit open access publishing has permanently and organically allowed for a long time. The expansion of Plan S, a research funder led initiative to promote a global transition to open access to scholarly research, to Latin America has led to significant debate about how the policy will impact the existing system of non-commercial open access publication in Latin America. Responding to earlier posts on this subject, Eduardo Aguado López and Arianna Becerril García argue that introducing Article Processing Charges, whereby academics or their funders pay to publish open access, will inherently degrade existing non-profit forms of open access publishing that have existed in Latin America for over three decade

cOAlition S announces price transparency requirements | Plan S

Adhering to Plan’s S key principle of transparent pricing, cOAlition S publishes today its guidance on implementing price transparency when Open Access (OA) publication fees are applied. Specifically, cOAlition S announces that from July 1st, 2022 only publishers who provide data in line with one of the two endorsed price and service transparency frameworks will be eligible to receive OA publications funds from cOAlition S members. This covers funder contributions to any model of financing open access publications including, but not limited to, non-APC journals or platforms, article processing charges (APCs), transformative agreements, and transformative journals.

Open-access science funders announce price transparency rules for publishers | Science | AAAS

Science journals will have to disclose the costs of publishing articles in order for them to be paid for by a coalition of research funders pushing for open access. The price transparency rules, which will take effect in July 2022, were announced today by cOAlition S, a group of 22 international organizations, European national research agencies, and foundations. In 2018, cOAlition S launched a scheme called Plan S that will require grantees’ work, beginning in January 2021, to be open access, meaning it can be read immediately upon publication, free of charge. One route to accomplish this is for authors to pay journals a fee for each article published this way.

Price and Service Transparency Frameworks | Plan S

“A draft pricing and service framework, developed by Information Power, was published in January 2020 and to help validate this – and ensure that the information sought could be provided – ten publishers (Annual Reviews, Brill, The Company of Biologists, EMBO, European Respiratory Society, F1000 Research, Hindawi, Institute of Physics Publishing, PLOS, and Springer Nature) participated in a pilot. Based on the outcomes of this – and informed by workshops and discussions – the framework has been updated and endorsed by the cOAlition S leadership. It consists of a data collection spreadsheet, an implementation guide, and recommendations.

Independent of this work, the Fair Open Access Alliance (FOAA) developed a Publication Services and Fees framework which, to date, has been implemented by Frontiers, MIT Press, Copernicus and MPDI.

Both frameworks have been endorsed by cOAlition S….”

PubMed Central archiving: a major milestone for a scholarly journal

“There are concerns that authors in developing countries and those lacking research funds are disadvantaged by Plan S and cut out of quality gold open-access journals.3 The latter, however, is largely compensated by the availability of platinum open-access journals, such as the MJR, where publishing and archiving charges are covered by professional societies, easing the authors’ and readers’ financial burden.4…”

Plan S: Taking stock of the current situation and new developments

“The OpenAIRE Policy and Legal Task Force is organising a webinar focusing on recent developments around Plan S. In particular, the webinar will cover the mapping exercise of a national Plan S compliant OA Policy in Ireland. We will also discuss new developments in Plan S, and we will offer practical advice to national stakeholders in complying with Plan S provisions.

OpenAIRE is happy to welcome as guest speakers Niamh Brennan and Johan Rooryck….”