Étiquette : funding models

Catégories
EN

Collective funding models for open access books: Librarians’ experiences and barriers to participation across six European contexts

Authors : Judith Fathallah, Joe Deville, Izabella Penier, Francesca Corazza

This report seeks to understand librarians’ experiences of collective funding models for open access books, especially barriers to joining organisations like the Open Book Collective (OBC).

The OBC is one of an increasing number of organisations that are using a collective ‘Diamond’ funding model for open access, wherein libraries commit to financially support open access book publishers, and/or open infrastructure providers for a set period of time to fund their work.

The report aims to learn from differing experiences in countries with different open access policies and institutional contexts. It focuses its research on six countries in continental Europe: Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland and Sweden. The research includes interviews with 20 participants. Most are librarians, alongside a selection of publishers and open access experts.

It provides particular insight into how librarians understand collective funding models and their ability to become involved in them, within their national and institutional settings. This is supplemented by an analysis of existing research on collective funding models and a profile of each country’s current open access publishing context, based on an extensive literature review.

The report will be of interest to librarians seeking to build further capacity to support collective Diamond open access funding models within their institutions, as well as publishers, infrastructure providers and collaborative endeavours seeking to build collective support for the development of open access programmes.

URL : Collective funding models for open access books: Librarians’ experiences and barriers to participation across six European contexts

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17339946

Catégories
EN

Peer-based research funding as a model for journalism funding

Authors : Maria Latos, Frank Lobigs, Holger Wormer

Financing high-quality journalistic reporting is becoming increasingly difficult worldwide and economic pressure has intensified in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. While numerous alternative funding possibilities are discussed, ranging from membership models to government funding, they should not compromise the highest possible independence of journalism – a premise that also applies to scientific research.

Here, the state is involved in funding, but peer review models reduce funding bias. However, systematic approaches as to how established funding models in research could be transferred to journalism are lacking. We attempt such a systematic transfer using the example of the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG).

The transfer, based on an analysis of the complex DFG funding structures, was validated in 10 interviews with experts from science, journalism and foundations. Building on this, we developed a concept for a German Journalism Foundation (Deutsche Journalismus-gemeinschaft, DJG), which awards funding to journalists and cooperative projects based on a peer review process.

The funding priorities of the proposed organization range from infrastructure support to grants for investigative skills. Thus, unlike other models, it does not focus on funding specific topics in media coverage, but on areas such as innovation support, technology implementation and training. Although the model was designed for Germany, such a systematic transfer could also be tested for other countries.

URL : Peer-based research funding as a model for journalism funding

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231215662

Catégories
EN

Funding models for Open Access digital data repositories

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine funding models for Open Access (OA) digital data repositories whose costs are not wholly core funded. Whilst such repositories are free to access, they are not without significant cost to build and maintain and the lack of both full core costs and a direct funding stream through payment-for-use poses a considerable financial challenge, placing their future and the digital collections they hold at risk.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors document 14 different potential funding streams for OA digital data repositories, grouped into six classes (institutional, philanthropy, research, audience, service, volunteer), drawing on the ongoing experiences of seeking a sustainable funding for the Digital Repository of Ireland (DRI).

Findings

There is no straight forward solution to funding OA digital data repositories that are not wholly core funded, with a number of general and specific challenges facing each repository, and each funding model having strengths and weaknesses. The proposed DRI solution is the adoption of a blended approach that seeks to ameliorate cyclical effects across funding streams by generating income from a number of sources rather than overly relying on a single one, though it is still reliant on significant state core funding to be viable.

Practical implications

The detailing of potential funding streams offers practical financial solutions to other OA digital data repositories which are seeking a means to become financially sustainable in the absence of full core funding.

Originality/value

The review assesses and provides concrete advice with respect to potential funding streams in order to help repository owners address the financing conundrum they face.

URL : http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/OIR-01-2015-0031