Open access-publicering og Plan Speed

From Google’s English:  Open access means that scientific articles that are quality assured in peer review and included in a scientific journal must be able to be read and distributed without financial, technical or legal restrictions. Since 2018, Denmark has had a national strategy for open access to ensure that we get the maximum effect from the research via free access to research-based knowledge. From 2025, the goal is to promote unhindered, digital access to all peer-reviewed research articles from Danish research institutions – with a maximum of 12 months delay, what we today call green open …

[Only part of the abstract is OA.]

Open access is the new normal: it makes more ways to value research | Campus Morning Mail

“Academics have been eagerly assigning copyright to their most precious research findings to private companies for years, in exchange for the opportunity to be published in well-known journals. This has resulted in most research being locked away behind paywalls.

Many research funders now require the work that they support to be published open access, with one group of funders pushing harder than most under an agreement called Plan S. But policing the open access requirements of grant funding has been technically challenging; and individual researchers remain under pressure to publish in high-prestige journals. As a result, progress has been patchy and copyright in research articles continues to be signed over to paywalled journals.

This month, Plan S funders announced that they will require that authors retain the copyright in publications that result from Plan S funded research. This means that authors no longer have the right to sign over copyright in their research outputs to a journal when they publish. It removes one of the last barriers for funders to require that the research they fund must be made open access  immediately upon publication….”

Plan S Rights Retention Publisher webinar

“cOAlition S are organising a number of webinars to highlight the Rights Retention Strategy ( and to answer any questions you may have about this initiative.

The target audience for these webinars is publishers and journal editors. Separate sessions will be organised for researchers and university administrators. If you would like to attend one of the publisher webinars, please complete the form below. Your registration will be confirmed by email along with the videoconferencing call details….”

Bourguignon back at the European Research Council, and ready to ‘jump into budget battle’ | Science|Business

“Bourguignon was ERC president from January 2014 until December 2019. His successor was nanobiologist Mauro Ferrari, whose tenure lasted for three months before a very noisy departure.

The sense around the ERC in recent months was of a ship beginning to drift without a captain. Only yesterday, the former EU director general for research and innovation, Robert-Jan Smits, criticised the agency for a lack of “strategic leadership”.

It has been a hard, unpredictable year for the agency, which had to face down criticism from Ferrari for its handling of the COVID-19 crisis, but also, in the past week, from advocates of open access to scientific research papers, who were dismayed at the agency for pulling its support for an open access initiative….”

Det europeiske forskingsrådet (ERC) trekker støtte til Plan S

“The ERC, together with funders of research throughout Europe, has been behind the demand for open publication of research which is laid down in the so-called Plan S.

Now the collaboration is abruptly over.

In recent months, the ERC’s Scientific Council has “intensified the internal debate and reached a unanimous decision”, the press release states, and the result is that they will end their cooperation with Coalition S and work on the introduction of Plan S.

The Norwegian climate researcher Eystein Jansen, who is a professor at the University of Bergen, is a member of the Scientific Medical Council and has been involved in the unanimous decision. He tells Khrono that the decision has been made after thorough assessments….

Director of the Research Council, John-Arne Røttingen, is one of the leading figures in the international work on Plan S.

– The decision in the ERC comes as a big surprise, and the timing is strange, says Røttingen.

– When we established Plan S, we got the Scientific Council of the ERC on the team, and they played an important role in shaping the plan and the implementation plan.

He assures that the decision in the ERC will not affect the changes in financing terms that are planned to be introduced from 1.1. 2021. Since the EU Commission is allocating the money to the ERC’s budget, Røttingen believes that the ERC’s change of course will not put a stop to the plans for open publication as set out in Plan S.

– It is the EU Commission that set the framework for all project funding that is provided. The commission has wholeheartedly assured that they support Plan S and the implementation plan, says Røttingen….”

European Research Council’s rejection of open access scheme ‘a slap in the face’, says Plan S architect | Science|Business

“The decision by the governing body of the European Research Council (ERC) to pull support for the radical open access initiative Plan S, is a “slap in the face” to all those who support the scheme, said its creator.

Robert-Jan Smits, the European Commission’s former director general for research and innovation, and also one of the founding fathers of the ERC, said the COVID-19 crisis “has shown the importance of making the results of publicly funded research immediately available” and not locked behind expensive paywalls with embargo periods….”

IARLA Supports cOAlition S Rights Retention Strategy – IARLA

“IARLA, representing the research libraries of Australia and New Zealand, Canada, Europe, United Kingdom, and the United States, would like to express support for the new cOAlition S Rights Retention Strategy. Under the strategy, participating funders will “require that a Creative Commons Attribution licence (CC BY) is applied to all Author Accepted Manuscripts (AAMs) or Versions of Record (VoR) reporting original research, supported in whole or in part by their funding.

 The cOAlition S funders want to effect a critical shift in the licensing landscape that would ensure that authors are able to publish in their journal of choice while also making their work openly accessible. The strategy overrides the rights transfer requirements that many publishers require as a condition of publishing in their journals.

Research libraries are committed to universal access to scholarly outputs, and believe that COVID-19 has clearly highlighted the inherent value of immediate openness within the scientific process. This cOAlition S strategy strengthens the repository-based route and signals the continued importance of a robust network of open repositories as a viable means to provide access to global scholarship. …”

The ERC and Plan S: an open letter | by George Walkden | Jul, 2020 | Medium

“I was dismayed to read your press release of 20th July announcing that you are withdrawing your support from cOAlition S and Plan S. I was even more dismayed to see that you rationalized this based on the needs of “young researchers who represent the future of European science and innovation”, arguing that the unavailability of APC funding for hybrid journals under Plan S is detrimental to early career researchers. As a young researcher and ERC Starting Grant awardee myself, I would like to take this opportunity to state categorically that I do not recognize this argument as valid.

The harm that hybrid journals cause to the ecosystem of scholarly publishing is well known. In particular, through “double dipping” — charging subscription fees at the same time as full APCs for Open Access articles — publishers of such journals are able to appropriate a far greater quantity of public funds than would otherwise be possible. Pinfield et al. (2015) demonstrate empirically, in a UK context, that double dipping is not merely a theoretical issue, but a genuine problem; they also show that hybrid journals charge on average vastly higher APCs than fully Gold Open Access journals, strongly suggesting that funding Open Access publication in hybrid journals represents bad value for money….”

European Research Council pulls support for radical open access plan | Science|Business

“Dramatic U-turn by Europe’s premier research agency casts doubt on feasibility of scheme to make scientific papers free to read as soon as they are published….The governing body of the European Research Council (ERC) has dealt a severe blow to radical open access initiative Plan S, announcing it is withdrawing support for the scheme….”

Help us get to know the open access journals and platforms that are free of charge for readers and authors

Scroll down to read this message in French, German, Italian, Spanish, or Portuguese. We are pleased to invite you to fill in a survey dedicated to gaining in-depth understanding of open access journals that…