Compliance with the first funder open access policy in Australia

Authors : Noreen Kirkman, Gaby Haddow

Introduction

In 2012, the National Health and Medical Research Council introduced Australia’s first national open access policy for funded journal articles. This study investigated the extent of compliance during the first two full years of the mandate.

Method

The funding acknowledgment fields in Web of Science facilitated the identification of the population of funded articles. Google Scholar, the Directory of Open Access Journals, publishers’ Websites, Trove, and Australian institutional repositories were the sources of data about open access.

Analysis

Quantitative analysis performed on the records of 3,190 articles and 1,137 journal titles enabled the calculation of descriptive statistics to present the characteristics of the sample.

Results

Over two-thirds (67.3%) of the articles were open access: 56.24% in journals and 11.06% in repositories. Hybrid open access comprised 25.58%, with 20.85% in fully open access journals and 8.75% in delayed open access journals.

Author accepted manuscripts in Australian institutional repositories (7.24%) and PubMed Central (3.82%) contributed to overall compliance but represented a small proportion of the non-open access articles.

Conclusions

As the first comprehensive study to measure compliance with Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council Open Access Policy, this study found a relatively high level of open access in journals alongside a low level of author accepted manuscripts in repositories.

Recommendations include better guidelines, procedures, and programs for grant recipients and a coordinated approach aimed at improving institutional repository deposit rates to achieve higher levels of open access and increased compliance with funder mandates.

URL : http://www.informationr.net/ir/25-2/paper857.html

Scholarly Management Publication and Open Access Funding Mandates: a Review of Publisher Policies

Author : Jessica Lange

The open access movement has been growing steadily over the past twenty years. Recently, many national funding agencies in North America have been requiring recipients of grant-funding to make their articles open access.

On the surface this produces a potential conflict for management researchers; management faculty members are expected to publish in prestigious journals but the discipline views open access journals as being of lower quality (Hahn & Wyatt, 2014, p.98).

As such, the question arises if it is it possible for management researchers to comply with open access policies while still publishing in highly-ranked journals?

This article will compare publishing policies from top management journals to funding agencies’ open access requirements in order to determine which journals meet these conditions.

Journals will be drawn from several established journal lists such as the University of Texas at Dallas (UTD) 24, the Financial Times (FT) Research Rankings, and Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science Journal Citation Reports.

Results show that 80% of journals in the sample set are compatible with open access funding mandates. Of the journals which are compatible, 48% require an APC and 52% permit self-archiving in an acceptable time-frame.

In addition to discussing open access publishing opportunities in management, this article will highlight opportunities for management librarians to develop their services and act as resources for faculty navigating this new framework.

URL : Scholarly Management Publication and Open Access Funding Mandates: a Review of Publisher Policies

Alternative location : http://ticker.mcgill.ca/article/view/19