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

A multi-institutional model for advancing open access journals and reclaiming the scholarly record

“Numerous factors contributed to the development of the journal Communications in Information Literacy (CIL), which began publication in 2007. Countering the monopolistic and exclusionary practices of commercial journal publishers was a leading concern. The co-founders were motivated by the possibilities of what was then an awakening open research environment to create a truly open access journal, filling a gap in the literature, and helping the library field to commence with reclaiming control of its scholarly record. There were many challenges to this undertaking; among them was the lack of institutional capacity to host or support a library publishing initiative. Accordingly, CIL was developed on the open source platform, Online Journal Systems (OJS), and it was maintained on a commercial web host. The journal grew and flourished under this model for ten years, but continued expansion of CIL and the increasing challenges of maintaining the journal on OJS prompted an exploration of alternative open access publishing options. This led to discussions, negotiations, and ultimately, a partnership with Portland State University. In 2017, CIL migrated from OJS and a commercial web host to Portland State’s Digital Commons (bepress) publishing platform, PDXScholar.

The presenters will provide brief overviews of CIL and PDXScholar, and they will detail the challenges and ultimate successes of this multi-institutional model for advancing open access journals and reclaiming control of the scholarly record. They will highlight the content migration process from OJS to PDXScholar, post-migration actions to correct metadata, the introduction of functioning DOIs, and coordinating with both free web and commercial indexers to assure proper access to the newly-moved journal. The presenters will also discuss the practicalities and the policy implications of this move, particularly in light of Elsevier’s acquisition of bepress. Finally, the presenters will advance their partnership as an exemplar of transformational publishing and as a viable, sustainable model for scholars in other fields to emulate….”

A multi-institutional model for advancing open access journals and reclaiming the scholarly record

“Numerous factors contributed to the development of the journal Communications in Information Literacy (CIL), which began publication in 2007. Countering the monopolistic and exclusionary practices of commercial journal publishers was a leading concern. The co-founders were motivated by the possibilities of what was then an awakening open research environment to create a truly open access journal, filling a gap in the literature, and helping the library field to commence with reclaiming control of its scholarly record. There were many challenges to this undertaking; among them was the lack of institutional capacity to host or support a library publishing initiative. Accordingly, CIL was developed on the open source platform, Online Journal Systems (OJS), and it was maintained on a commercial web host. The journal grew and flourished under this model for ten years, but continued expansion of CIL and the increasing challenges of maintaining the journal on OJS prompted an exploration of alternative open access publishing options. This led to discussions, negotiations, and ultimately, a partnership with Portland State University. In 2017, CIL migrated from OJS and a commercial web host to Portland State’s Digital Commons (bepress) publishing platform, PDXScholar.

The presenters will provide brief overviews of CIL and PDXScholar, and they will detail the challenges and ultimate successes of this multi-institutional model for advancing open access journals and reclaiming control of the scholarly record. They will highlight the content migration process from OJS to PDXScholar, post-migration actions to correct metadata, the introduction of functioning DOIs, and coordinating with both free web and commercial indexers to assure proper access to the newly-moved journal. The presenters will also discuss the practicalities and the policy implications of this move, particularly in light of Elsevier’s acquisition of bepress. Finally, the presenters will advance their partnership as an exemplar of transformational publishing and as a viable, sustainable model for scholars in other fields to emulate….”

In pursuit of open science, open access is not enough | Science

“After decades of debate on the feasibility of open access (OA) to scientific publications, we may be nearing a tipping point. A number of recent developments, such as Plan S, suggest that OA upon publication could become the default in the sciences within the next several years. Despite uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of OA models, many publishers who had been reluctant to abandon the subscription business model are showing openness to OA (1). Although more OA can mean more immediate, global access to scholarship, there remains a need for practical, sustainable models, for careful analysis of the consequences of business model choices, and for “caution in responding to passionate calls for a ‘default to open’” (2). Of particular concern for the academic community, as subscription revenues decline in the transition to OA and some publishers prioritize other sources of revenue, is the growing ownership of data analytics, hosting, and portal services by large scholarly publishers. This may enhance publishers’ ability to lock in institutional customers through combined offerings that condition open access to journals upon purchase of other services. Even if such “bundled” arrangements have a near-term benefit of increasing openly licensed scholarship, they may run counter to long-term interests of the academic community by reducing competition and the diversity of service offerings. The healthy functioning of the academic community, including fair terms and conditions from commercial partners, requires that the global marketplace for data analytics and knowledge infrastructure be kept open to real competition.”

 

In pursuit of open science, open access is not enough | Science

“After decades of debate on the feasibility of open access (OA) to scientific publications, we may be nearing a tipping point. A number of recent developments, such as Plan S, suggest that OA upon publication could become the default in the sciences within the next several years. Despite uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of OA models, many publishers who had been reluctant to abandon the subscription business model are showing openness to OA (1). Although more OA can mean more immediate, global access to scholarship, there remains a need for practical, sustainable models, for careful analysis of the consequences of business model choices, and for “caution in responding to passionate calls for a ‘default to open’” (2). Of particular concern for the academic community, as subscription revenues decline in the transition to OA and some publishers prioritize other sources of revenue, is the growing ownership of data analytics, hosting, and portal services by large scholarly publishers. This may enhance publishers’ ability to lock in institutional customers through combined offerings that condition open access to journals upon purchase of other services. Even if such “bundled” arrangements have a near-term benefit of increasing openly licensed scholarship, they may run counter to long-term interests of the academic community by reducing competition and the diversity of service offerings. The healthy functioning of the academic community, including fair terms and conditions from commercial partners, requires that the global marketplace for data analytics and knowledge infrastructure be kept open to real competition.”

 

Community Governance Explored · COPIM

“As part of our research on governance for the COPIM project, we (Sam and Janneke) are currently undertaking a landscape analysis, initially based on desk research. For this analysis we are looking at the kinds of organisational structures different projects and institutions in the scholarly communication and publishing space (ones that focus on open access publishing and open infrastructure, or whose mission is close to COPIM’s), use to govern their efforts. By examining the disparate approaches to and best practices around governance that are being employed in scholarly communication, we hope to understand how best to devise our own horizontal governance systems for the infrastructures and workflows COPIM is currently developing to support open access for books. In the next stage of our research, we will continue our exploration by additionally looking at various grassroots and activist organisations outside the scholarly communication space that are engaged in experiments with community governance that might be of interest to COPIM. We hope this will help inform our project in creating the durable organisational structures that we need for the coordination, governance and administrative support of the project’s community-owned infrastructure….”

Without stronger academic governance, Covid-19 will concentrate the corporate control of academic publishing | Impact of Social Sciences

Whilst the Covid-19 pandemic has led to a short term uptick in open research practices, both in response to the virus and the need for remote access to research and teaching materials. Samuel Moore argues that the long term impact of Covid-19 and its related economic impact will likely increase the corporate control of academic publishing. Citing the need for increased scholar led forms publishing operating outside of market interests, he suggests now is the time to rethink how scholars and research organisations can constructively engage with the governance of scholarly communication.

Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly Communications: A Call for Action | Zenodo

“Diversity is an important characteristic of any healthy ecosystem, including scholarly communications. Diversity in services and platforms, funding mechanisms, and evaluation measures will allow the scholarly communication system to accommodate the different workflows, languages, publication outputs, and research topics that support the needs and epistemic pluralism of different research communities. In addition, diversity reduces the risk of vendor lock-in, which inevitably leads to monopoly, monoculture, and high prices. 

As we transition to open access and open science, there is an opportunity to reverse this decline and foster greater diversity in scholarly communications; what the Jussieu Call refers to as bibliodiversity. Bibliodiversity, by its nature, cannot be pursued through a single, unified approach, however it does require strong coordination in order to avoid a fragmented and siloed ecosystem. Building on the principles outlined in the Jussieu Call, this paper explores the current state of diversity in scholarly communications, and issues a call for action, specifying what each community can do individually and collectively to support greater bibliodiversity in a more intentional fashion. We are calling on the community to take concerted efforts to foster bibliodiversity through several specific actions.”

Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly Communications – A Call for Action! – COAR

“We are calling on the community to make concerted efforts to develop strong, community-governed infrastructures that support diversity in scholarly communications (referred to as bibliodiversity).

Diversity is an essential characteristic of an optimal scholarly communications system. Diversity in services and platforms, funding mechanisms, and evaluation measures will allow the research communications to accommodate the different workflows, languages, publication outputs, and research topics that support the needs and epistemic pluralism of different research communities. In addition, diversity reduces the risk of vendor lock-in, which inevitably leads to monopoly, monoculture, and high prices.

We are living through unprecedented times, with a global pandemic sweeping the world, leading to illness, death, and unparalleled economic upheaval.  Although our concerns about bibliodiversity have been growing for years, the current crisis has exposed the deficiencies in a system that is increasingly homogenous and prioritizes profits over the public good….

For those who were not in favour of open access before, this global crisis should settle the debate once and for all….”

What is MEI?

“The Music Encoding Initiative (MEI) is a 21st century community-driven open-source effort to define guidelines for encoding musical documents in a machine-readable structure.

It brings together specialists from various music research communities, including technologists, librarians, historians, and theorists in a common effort to discuss and define best practices for representing a broad range of musical documents and structures. The results of these discussions are then formalized into the MEI schema, a core set of rules for recording physical and intellectual characteristics of music notation documents expressed as an eXtensible Markup Language (XML) schema. This schema is developed and maintained by the MEI Technical Team….”