This paper presents the findings from a survey study of UK academics and their publishing behaviour. The aim of this study is to investigate academics’ attitudes towards and practice of open access (OA) publishing.
The results are based on a survey study of academics at 12 Russell Group universities, and reflect responses from over 1800 researchers. This study found that whilst most academics support the principle of making knowledge freely available to everyone, the use of OA publishing among UK academics was still limited despite relevant established OA policies.
The results suggest that there were differences in the extent of OA practice between different universities, academic disciplines, age and seniorities. Academics’ use in OA publishing was also related to their awareness of OA policy and OA repositories, their attitudes towards the importance of OA publishing and their belief in OA citation advantage.
The implications of these findings are relevant to the development of strategies for the implementation of OA policies.
URL : Who support open access publishing? Gender, discipline, seniority and other factors associated with academics’ OA practice
Alternative location : http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-017-2316-z
Author : Jane Johnson Otto
Faculty contribution to the institutional repository is a major limiting factor in the successful provision of open access to scholarship, and thus to the advancement of research productivity and progress.
Many have alluded to outreach messages through studies examining faculty concerns that underlie their reluctance to contribute, but specific open access messages demonstrated to resonate most with faculty have not been discussed with sufficient granularity.
Indeed, many faculty benefits and concerns are likely either unknown to the faculty themselves, or unspoken, so the literature’s record of faculty benefits and perceptions of open access remains incomplete at best.
DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM
At Rutgers University, we have developed a targeted message that both addresses these unspoken/unknown concerns and benefits and speaks to the promise and inevitability of open access in a changing scholarly communication landscape.
This paper details that message and its rationale, based on a critical review of the literature currently informing outreach programs, in order to provoke further discussion of specific outreach messages and the principles underlying them.
A robust scholarly communication organization, open access policy advisory board, expanded outreach, and sustained momentum will be critical to ensuring success with measurable outcomes.
Metrics used to evaluate both OA policy implementation efforts and institutional repositories should be reevaluated in light of the governing objectives of open access outreach efforts and tools. It is hoped that a reassessment of the message and the metrics will better align both with the true promise and prerequisites of open access.
URL : A Resonant Message: Aligning Scholar Values and Open Access Objectives in OA Policy Outreach to Faculty and Graduate Students
DOI : http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2152
Author : Joachim Schöpfel
The purpose of this paper is to propose a personal viewpoint on the development of document supply in the context of the recent European Union (EU) decisions on open science.
The paper provides some elements to the usual questions of service development, about business, customers, added value, environment and objectives.
The EU goal for open science is 100 per cent available research results in 2020. To meet the challenge, document supply must change, include more and other content, serve different targets groups, apply innovative technology and provide knowledge. If not, document supply will become a marginalized library service.
Basically, open science is not library-friendly, and it does not offer a solution for the actual problems of document supply. But it may provide an opportunity for document supply to become a modern service able to deal with new forms of unequal access and digital divide.
URL : http://hal.univ-lille3.fr/hal-01408443
Authors : Robert Johnson, Stephen Pinfield, Mattia Fosci
As open access (OA) publication of research outputs becomes increasingly common and is mandated by institutions and research funders, it is important to understand different aspects of the costs involved.
This paper provides an early review of administrative costs incurred by universities in making research outputs OA, either via publication in journals (“Gold” OA), involving payment of article-processing charges (APCs), or via deposit in repositories (“Green” OA).
Using data from 29 UK institutions, it finds that the administrative time, as well as the cost incurred by universities, to make an article OA using the Gold route is over 2.5 times higher than Green. Costs are then modeled at a national level using recent UK policy initiatives from Research Councils UK and the Higher Education Funding Councils’ Research Excellence Framework as case studies.
The study also demonstrates that the costs of complying with research funders’ OA policies are considerably higher than where an OA publication is left entirely to authors’ discretion.
Key target areas for future efficiencies in the business processes are identified and potential cost savings calculated. The analysis is designed to inform ongoing policy development at the institutional and national levels.
URL : Business process costs of implementing “gold” and “green” open access in institutional and national contexts
Alternative location : http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23545/full
Open Access to scholarly literature seems to dominate current discussions in the academic publishing, research funding and science policy arenas. Several international initiatives have been recently started calling for a large-scale transformation of the majority of scholarly journals from subscription model to Open Access.
Such a massive transition would indeed affect not only business models and related cash flows but might be also expected to generate new inequalities in distributing resources among different regions or research fields.
Thus, the paper at hand aims to serve as an input statement for the upcoming discussion and to provide some background information on Open Access debates.
URL : http://eprints.rclis.org/29269/
In the first half of 2015 the European Commission launched a new funding initiative to cover the Open Access publishing costs of publications arising from finished Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) projects.
This article addresses the opportunities and challenges faced by this FP7 Post-Grant Open Access Pilot and discusses early project findings six months into this two-year initiative.
This new and wide-scoped funding initiative arrives at a timely moment when a number of Gold Open Access funds are already in place at institutions in different European countries, which offers opportunities for promoting a gradual technical alignment of Article Processing Charges (APC) management practices.
At the same time, there are rather large differences across Europe in the attitudes and researcher culture towards this emerging Gold Open Access business model which will need to be addressed within a swiftly evolving publishing landscape.
URL : The OpenAIRE2020 FP7 Post-Grant Open Access Pilot
Alternative location : http://content.iospress.com/articles/information-services-and-use/isu786
Auteur/Author : Ghislaine Chartron
Depuis 25 ans, le mouvement open access se déploie progressivement au croisement de revendications pour une circulation plus ouverte des résultats de la recherche et d’opportunités inédites introduites par l’Internet et le Web.
Les reformulations du mouvement furent nombreuses, portées par des acteurs différents, ne projetant pas les mêmes enjeux sur cette transformation. À l’appui d’une observation participante, l’article s’attache à retracer l’évolution des différentes modalités opératoires de l’open access à la fois dans une dimension diachronique et une dimension comparée pour les politiques nationales de différents pays.
Un tournant particulier semble s’amorcer, marqué par des négociations globales entre éditeurs, pouvoirs publics et financeurs de la recherche. Le contexte français est analysé, en particulier par l’intégration récente d’éléments réglementaires dans la loi Lemaire de 2016 et par les tensions croissantes avec les acteurs de l’édition nationale, majoritairement en sciences humaines et sociales.
URL : https://rfsic.revues.org/1836