Category: Open Access

“Scholarly Publishing in the New Era of Scarcity 2010-2025”

Michael Jensen, Director of Strategic Web Communications at National Academies Press, has made a digital video of his presentation "Scholarly Publishing in the New Era of Scarcity 2010-2025" available on YouTube (part 1 and part 2).

Here's an excerpt from the abstract:

[Jensen] posits "an inconvenient truth" for scholarly publishers, and advocates that they restructure their business model toward a new environmentally friendly and economically efficient digital-primary, open-access (OA) model, including seeking support and partnership from their home universities and institutions, due to the urgency of environmental and economic collapse foreseen in the next ten years. Speech given at the Association of American University Presses Annual Meeting in Philadelphia, June 20, 2009.

The Association for Computing Machinery and Open Access

In "Open, Closed, or Cloven Access?," Moshe Y. Vardi, editor of Communications of the ACM, discusses the Association for Computing Machinery’s position on open access.

Here's an excerpt:

As for ACM's stand on the open-access issue, I'd describe it as "cloven," somewhere between open and closed. (In topology, a cloven set is one that is both open and closed.) ACM does charge a price for its publications, but this price is very reasonable. (If you do not believe me, ask your librarian.) ACM's modest publication revenues first go to cover ACM's publication costs that go beyond print costs to include the cost of online distribution and preservation, and then to support the rest of ACM activities. To me, this is a very important point. The "profits" do not go to some corporate owners; they are used to support the activities of the association, and the association is us, the readers, authors, reviewers, and editors of ACM publications. Furthermore, ACM operates as a democratic association. If you believe that ACM should change its publishing business model, then you should lobby for this position. . . .

Just remember, "free" is not a sound business model.

Peter Suber to “Step Back” from Blogging on Open Access News

Peter Suber will "step back from systematic daily blogging" on Open Access News so that he can focus on his new job at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

The open access movement owes a huge debt of gratitude to Peter and to Gavin Baker (who joined OAN on February 03, 2008) for their incredible work on OAN, which passed 15,000 posts on September 29, 2008. Unless you have done it, it's difficult to appreciate how time-consuming doing this kind of high-volume news and commentary blogging is, which involves a considerable amount of effort to identify, filter, summarize, and comment on relevant and timely news items. OAN is not just an excellent current news source—it's an important advocacy platform and the best historical chronicle of the open access movement that exists.

Here's an excerpt from "Housekeeping":

Today I step back from systematic daily blogging in order to free up time for my new position at the Berkman Center. 

The blog itself will continue and Gavin will continue at something like his current pace.  I will continue my daily crawl for OA-related news.  I'll continue to tag what I find for the OA tracking project (OATP).  I'll continue to write the monthly SPARC Open Access Newsletter (SOAN).  I'll continue to work full-time for OA. 

I'll even continue to blog, though only sporadically.  Open Access News (OAN) will be smaller and more selective than in the past.  I cannot assure you that the news it covers will be the most important subset.  (That presupposes that Gavin and I will be on top of all new developments and in a position to pick the most important.)  I'll blog what I notice, what moves me, and what I have time for, with the accent on the third criterion.  It should be a eclectic bunch.  I know that I'll notice a lot of important news, thanks to OATP, and I know that I'll be moved to blog a lot of it.  But because of my new projects, even the most important news will be important news that I only have time to tag, not to blog.

For a comprehensive source of OA news, subscribe to the OATP feed, which is available by RSS, email, and a blog-like web page with the most recent items displayed first.  The OATP feed has been more comprehensive than this blog since April and it grows more comprehensive and useful every day.  To help the cause, please join OATP as a tagger and help select new items for inclusion in the feed.  For more details, see the OATP home page or my SOAN article about it from May 2009. 

Stuart Shieber on “University Open-Access Policies as Mandates”

In "University Open-Access Policies as Mandates," Stuart M. Shieber, Director of Harvard's Office for Scholarly Communication, discusses the difference between university open access policies and university open access mandates and whether it matters.

Here's an excerpt:

Try the following thought experiment. Suppose a policy on faculty were established that granted to the university a license in faculty articles but did not explicitly provide for a waiver of the license. Now imagine that a faculty member has an article accepted by a highly prestigious journal that does not allow for author distribution and will not accept an amendment of its copyright transfer policy. Perhaps the author is a junior faculty member soon up for tenure, whose promotion case will be considerably weakened without the publication in question. The author might naturally want to have the license waived even though no waiver is explicitly provided for. The faculty member is likely to storm into the dean’s office, howling about the unconscionable practice of taking rights even when it harms the faculty member. Is the university going to distribute the article anyway against the express wishes of the faculty member? Be serious. The dean says "Fine, we won’t make use of the license for this article." Voilà, a waiver. So much for university rights retention mandates.

“Open Access Policy for University Of Kansas Scholarship”

The "Open Access Policy for University Of Kansas Scholarship" is now available.

Here's an excerpt :

Each faculty member grants to KU permission to make scholarly articles to which he or she made substantial intellectual contributions publicly available in the KU open access institutional repository, and to exercise the copyright in those articles. In legal terms, the permission granted by each faculty member is a nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to each of his or her scholarly articles, in any medium, and to authorize others to do the same, provided that the articles are not sold for a profit. This license in no way interferes with the rights of the KU faculty author as the copyright holder of the work. The policy will apply to all scholarly articles authored or co-authored while a faculty member of KU. Faculty will be afforded an opt out opportunity. Faculty governance in consultation with the Provost's office will develop the details of the policy which will be submitted for approval by the Faculty Senate.

In "More on the U. Kansas OA Policy,"Gavin Bakerr comments:

A Web version of the text of the University of Kansas' new OA policy confirms what I'd suspected in my last post: that the policy as passed doesn't contain an OA mandate. It commits the university to OA, gives the university permission to provide OA to its faculty's research via the IR, and establishes a task force to work out the details—including the details of how the manuscripts will get into the IR.

Open Access—What Are the Economic Benefits? A Comparison of the United Kingdom, Netherlands and Denmark

The Knowledge Exchange has released Open Access—What Are the Economic Benefits? A Comparison of the United Kingdom, Netherlands and Denmark.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

In June 2009 a study was completed that had been commissioned by Knowledge Exchange and written by Professor John Houghton, Victoria University, Australia. This report on the study was titled: "Open Access—What are the economic benefits? A comparison of the United Kingdom, Netherlands and Denmark." This report was based on the findings of studies in which John Houghton had modelled the costs and benefits of Open Access in three countries. These studies had been undertaken in the UK by JISC, in the Netherlands by SURF and in Denmark by DEFF.

In the three national studies the costs and benefits of scholarly communication were compared based on three different publication models. The modelling revealed that the greatest advantage would be offered by the Open Access model, which means that the research institution or the party financing the research pays for publication and the article is then freely accessible.

Adopting this model could lead to annual savings of around EUR 70 million in Denmark, EUR 133 million in The Netherlands and EUR 480 in the UK. The report concludes that the advantages would not just be in the long term; in the transitional phase too, more open access to research results would have positive effects. In this case the benefits would also outweigh the costs.

Alliance for Taxpayer Access Call to Action about Federal Research Public Access Act

The Alliance for Taxpayer Access has issued a call to action about the Federal Research Public Access Act of 2009 (S 1373).

Here's an excerpt:

On June 25, Senators Lieberman (I-CT) and Cornyn (R-TX) introduced the Federal Research Public Access Act (S.1373), a bill that would ensure free, timely, online access to the published results of research funded by eleven U.S. federal agencies. S.1373 would require those agencies with annual extramural research budgets of $100 million or more to provide the public with online access to research manuscripts stemming from such funding no later than six months after publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The bill gives individual agencies flexibility in choosing the location of the digital repository to house this content, as long as the repositories meet conditions for interoperability and public accessibility, and have provisions for long-term archiving.

The bill specifically covers unclassified research funded by agencies including: Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Science Foundation.

S. 1373 reflects the growing trend among funding agencies—and college and university campuses—to leverage their investment in the conduct of research by maximizing the dissemination of results. It follows the successful path forged by the NIH’s Public Access Policy, as well as by private funders like the Wellcome Trust, and universities such as Harvard and MIT.

Detailed information about the Federal Research Public Access Act is available at http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/frpaa.

All supporters of public access—universities and colleges, researchers, libraries, campus administrators, patient advocates, publishers, consumers, individuals, and others—are asked to ACT NOW to support this bill. Here’s how:

  • Contact Congress now to express your organization's support for public access to taxpayer-funded research and for this bill. Act now through the ATA Legislative Action Center.
  • Contact Congress now to express your individual support for public access to taxpayer-funded research and for this bill.
  • Send thanks to the Bill's sponsors—Senators Lieberman and Cornyn.
  • Issue a public statement of support from your organization and share it widely with members, colleagues, and the media. Send a copy to sparc [at] arl [dot] org to be featured on the FRPAA Web site.
  • Share news about this bill with friends and colleagues.
  • Post the "I support taxpayer access" banner on your Web site.

Open Access: Text of Federal Research Public Access Act of 2009

The text of the Federal Research Public Access Act of 2009 (S 1373) is now available.

Here's an excerpt:

SEC. 4. FEDERAL RESEARCH PUBLIC ACCESS POLICY.

(a) In General- Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, each Federal agency with extramural research expenditures of over $100,000,000 shall develop a Federal research public access policy that is consistent with and advances purposes of the Federal agency.
(b) Content- Each Federal research public access policy shall provide for—
(1) submission to the Federal agency of an electronic version of the author's final manuscript of original research papers that have been accepted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and result from research supported, in whole or in part, from funding by the Federal Government;
(2) the incorporation of all changes resulting from the peer review publication process in the manuscript described under paragraph (1);
(3) the replacement of the final manuscript with the final published version if—
(A) the publisher consents to the replacement; and
(B) the goals of the Federal agency for functionality and interoperability are retained;
(4) free online public access to such final peer-reviewed manuscripts or published versions as soon as practicable, but not later than 6 months after publication in peer-reviewed journals;
(5) production of an online bibliography of all research papers that are publicly accessible under the policy, with each entry linking to the corresponding free online full text; and
(6) long-term preservation of, and free public access to, published research findings—
(A) in a stable digital repository maintained by the Federal agency; or
(B) if consistent with the purposes of the Federal agency, in any repository meeting conditions determined favorable by the Federal agency, including free public access, interoperability, and long-term preservation.
(c) Application of Policy- Each Federal research public access policy shall—
(1) apply to—
(A) researchers employed by the Federal agency whose works remain in the public domain; and
(B) researchers funded by the Federal agency;
(2) provide that works described under paragraph (1)(A) shall be—
(A) marked as being public domain material when published; and
(B) made immediately available under subsection (b)(4); and
(3) make effective use of any law or guidance relating to the creation and reservation of a Government license that provides for the reproduction, publication, release, or other uses of a final manuscript for Federal purposes.
(d) Exclusions- Each Federal research public access policy shall not apply to—
(1) research progress reports presented at professional meetings or conferences;
(2) laboratory notes, preliminary data analyses, notes of the author, phone logs, or other information used to produce final manuscripts;
(3) classified research, research resulting in works that generate revenue or royalties for authors (such as books) or patentable discoveries, to the extent necessary to protect a copyright or patent; or
(4) authors who do not submit their work to a journal or works that are rejected by journals.
(e) Patent or Copyright Law- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect any right under the provisions of title 17 or 35, United States Code.
(f) Report-
(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than October 1, of each year, the head of each Federal agency shall submit a report on the Federal research public access policy of that agency to—
(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate;
(B) the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives;
(C) the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Representatives;
(D) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate;
(E) the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate; and
(F) any other committee of Congress of appropriate jurisdiction.
(2) CONTENT- Each report under this subsection shall include—
(A) a statement of the effectiveness of the Federal research public access policy in providing the public with free online access to papers on research funded by the Federal agency;
(B) a list of papers published in peer-reviewed journals that report on research funded by the Federal agency;
(C) a corresponding list of papers made available by the Federal agency as a result of the Federal research public access policy; and
(D) a summary of the periods of time between public availability of each paper in a journal and in the online repository of the Federal agency.
(3) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY- The Federal agency shall make the statement under paragraph (2)(A) and the lists of papers under subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) available to the public by posting such statement and lists on the website of the Federal agency.

Open Monograph Press to Launch During Second International PKP Scholarly Publishing Conference, July 8-10

According to "Library Releasing New Publishing Tool," the Public Knowledge Project will launch its new Open Monograph Press during the Second International PKP Scholarly Publishing Conference on July 8-10.

Here's an excerpt from the Open Monograph Press home page:

Open Monograph Press, a new open source publishing product under development by the Public Knowledge Project, will establish an online workspace for publishing monographs, edited volumes, and scholarly editions, while keeping an archival record of the process (compatible with the Fedora repository). . . .

The plans for OMP also include the potential for users to set up a Social Networking Incubator and Workspace system, which would enable editors to create a workspace for authors who appear to have a potential monograph project in hand, giving the author a chance to develop ideas within an invited or more open community, before moving into a formal book proposal and submission process.

This will provide author and editor with a series of tools and spaces that will allow them to see if there is a book residing within the author's article-length work, by bringing together authors and collecting pieces for engagement and response by select communities of interest or potentially by anyone interested, at the author and editor's discretion (Access Scheduler).

Papers and Presentations from EPUB 2009—Rethinking Electronic Publishing: Innovation in Communication Paradigms and Technologies

Papers and presentations from EPUB 2009—Rethinking Electronic Publishing: Innovation in Communication Paradigms and Technologies are now available.

Here's a quick selection of papers:

University of Kansas Becomes First U.S. Public University to Pass University-Wide Open Access Policy

The University of Kansas has become the first U.S. public university to pass a university-wide open access policy. (Thanks to Open Access News.)

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Under the new faculty-initiated policy approved by Chancellor Robert Hemenway, digital copies of all articles produced by the university’s professors will be housed in KU ScholarWorks, an existing digital repository for scholarly work created by KU faculty and staff in 2005. KU ScholarWorks houses more than 4,400 articles submitted in digital formats that assure their long-term preservation.

Professors will be allowed to seek a waiver but otherwise will be asked to provide electronic forms of all articles to the repository. KU’s Faculty Senate overwhelmingly endorsed the policy at a meeting earlier this year, but additional policy details, including the waiver process, will be developed by a senate task force in the coming academic year, said Faculty Senate President Lisa Wolf-Wendel, professor of education leadership and policy studies. The task force will be led by Ada Emmett, associate librarian for scholarly communications.

"Academic publishing has become increasingly commercial and unavailable to other scholars, or to the general public, in recent years," said A. Townsend Peterson, distinguished professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and curator at the Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center at KU. " This new policy offers a voluntary means of opening doors to much of KU's journal-based scholarship. This policy represents a first step towards a new means of scholarly communication, in which the entire global academic community has access to the totality of scholarship. We all can participate in the scholarly exchange that leads to new knowledge creation."

Peterson said open access policies such as KU's will bring greater visibility to the authors' work and will showcase the breadth and depth of the faculty's contributions to academic research and to the university's mission.

"Granting the university the right to deposit a copy of scholarly journal articles in an open digital repository extends the reach of the scholarship, providing the widest possible audience and increasing its possible impact," said Lorraine J. Haricombe, dean of libraries.

U.S. Dept. of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences Has Adopted Open Access Policy

In "Institute of Education Sciences Has an Open Access Policy," Stuart Shieber reports that the U.S Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences has an open access policy.

Here's an excerpt from a recent EIES grant announcement, which was listed in the Federal Register on March 23, 2009:

Recipients of awards are expected to publish or otherwise make publicly available the results of the work supported through this program. Institute-funded investigators should submit final, peer-reviewed manuscripts resulting from research supported in whole or in part by the Institute to the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC, http://eric.ed.gov) upon acceptance for publication. An author's final manuscript is defined as the final version accepted for journal publication, and includes all graphics and supplemental materials that are associated with the article. The Institute will make the manuscript available to the public through ERIC no later than 12 months after the official date of publication. Institutions and investigators are responsible for ensuring that any publishing or copyright agreements concerning submitted articles fully comply with this requirement.

Open Access Bill: Senators Cornyn and Lieberman Re-Introduce Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA)

U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) re-introduced the Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA) today. (Thanks to Open Access News.)

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Their legislation, the Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA), would require every federal department and agency with an annual extramural research budget of $100 million or more to make their research available to the public within six months of publication.

"Our legislation would give the American people greater access to the important scientific research they help fund, which will accelerate scientific discovery and innovation, while also making sure that funding is being spent appropriately to ensure taxpayers are receiving a return on their research investments and they are not having to pay twice for the same research – once to conduct it, and a second time to read it. I will continue to advocate for greater transparency measures across all of our governmental departments and agencies, and I urge our Senate colleagues to support this legislation," said Sen. Cornyn.

"The United States has some of the best and brightest researchers," said Lieberman. "I continue to be impressed by their ideas and feel strongly that the American public should have access to what they discover. The internet makes it possible to provide public access to federally funded research and I am pleased to lead the effort to make this information more accessible."

Background:

Sens. Cornyn and Lieberman first introduced this legislation in the 109th Congress. In 2008, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) implemented their public access policy. It is estimated that approximately 80,000 papers are published each year from NIH funds.

  • Require every researcher with an annual extramural research budget of $100 million or more, whether funded totally or partially by a government department or agency, to submit an electronic copy of the final manuscript that has been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
  • Ensure that the manuscript is preserved in a stable digital repository maintained by that agency or in another suitable repository that permits free public access, interoperability, and long-term preservation.
  • Require that each taxpayer-funded manuscript be made available to the public online and without cost, no later than six months after the article has been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

See also "Taxpayer Alliance Applauds Bill to Broaden Access to Federal Research Results."

Hindawi’s Open Access Journals’ Impact Factor Up over 27%

Hindawi's open access journals' average impact factor is up over 27% in the last year.

Here's an excerpt from the press release on liblicense-l:

Hindawi Publishing Corporation is pleased to announce that it has seen very strong growth in the Impact Factors of its journals in the recently released 2008 Journal Citation Report published by Thomson Scientific. This most recent Journal Citation Report shows the average Impact Factor of Hindawi's journals increasing by more than 27% over the past year, with two of Hindawi's largest journals, EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing and Mathematical Problems in Engineering, rising by 70% and 45% respectively. . . .

In addition to the 14 journals that were included in the 2007 Journal Citation Report, three of Hindawi's journals received Impact Factors for the first time this year: Clinical and Developmental Immunology, EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, and Journal of Nanomaterials.

“Publisher ‘Threat’ to Open Access”

In "Publisher 'Threat' to Open Access," Zoë Corbyn of Times Higher Education reports that in the UK:

Elsevier is thought to be mooting a new idea that could undermine universities' own open-access repositories. It would see Elsevier take over the job of archiving papers and making them available more widely as PDF files. . . .

Shira Tabachnikoff, director of corporate communications at Elsevier, confirmed that preliminary discussions had taken place with some institutions but would not go into detail on their nature.

Enabling Open Scholarship Organization Launched

Professor Bernard Rentier, Rector of the University of Lige, and Dr. Alma Swan of Key Perspectives have launched Enabling Open Scholarship.

Here's an excerpt from the 6/11/09 American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum announcement:

Enabling Open Scholarship (EOS) is a membership organisation for universities and research institutions. The organisation is a forum for raising and discussing issues around the mission of modern universities, particularly with regard to the creation, dissemination and preservation of research findings.

Anyone who is interested in enrolling their institution as a member, or in attending an EOS meeting or briefing session, is invited to email the convenor of the group, Dr Alma Swan . . .

Contact information for Dr. Swan can be found on the Key Perspectives Contact Us page.

“Not Served on a Silver Platter! Access to Online Mathematics Information in Africa”

Anders Wandahl has self-archived "Not Served on a Silver Platter! Access to Online Mathematics Information in Africa" in arXiv.org.

Here's an excerpt:

The "truly free" resources listed in the table [e.g., open access journals] above are free to anyone and anywhere. Resources provided by other programmes and initiatives, which are described below [e.g., HINARI], are also free to end-users in all or most African countries. However, there is an importance difference between these two groups of resources. The second group requires some sort of authentication before the user is allowed access. . . .

In order for the IP number control system to work smoothly, the public IP number(s) should be fairly stable. In Africa, this is not always the case, since a change of the Internet Service Provider (ISP) also usually means a change of the IP number. African institutions sometimes see an advantage in negotiating terms and prices with a new Internet Service Provider now and then, in order to find a more favorable deal, but this means that the new IP numbers must be supplied to all journals and publishers before access is reestablished.

To complicate this picture a little further, there is a distinction between static and dynamic IP numbers. In general, there is a world-wide shortage of IP numbers. In order to cope with this situation, the numbers are sometimes assigned to universities and institutions in a dynamic as opposed to static way. A dynamically assigned IP number may change any time (even though they usually are pretty stable over time). A static number is assigned once and is not supposed to change as long as you have a running contract with an Internet Service Provider, which makes them better for authentication purposes. The flip-side of the coin is that static numbers are more expensive.

Scholarly Communication 101: Starting with the Basics Workshop Materials Added to Scholarly Communication Toolkit

ACRL has added materials from its Scholarly Communication 101: Starting with the Basics Workshop to its Scholarly Communication Toolkit.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) is extending the reach of the "Scholarly Communication 101: Starting with the Basics" workshop by adding related materials to its popular Scholarly Communication Toolkit. The materials—including short videos, presentations templates and handouts—were developed for the half-day workshop offered at the ACRL 14th National Conference in Seattle and traveling to five locations around the country this summer (http://www.ala.org/ala/newspresscenter/news/pressreleases2009/april2009/acrlscroadshowhosts.cfm). Now librarians can make use of these tools to enhance their own knowledge or adapt them to offer related workshops on their own campuses. The Scholarly Communication Toolkit is available online at http://www.acrl.ala.org/scholcomm/.

Developing a basic understanding of scholarly communication issues should be a high priority for every librarian. Enhancing understanding of how scholars work along with the systems, tools and technology to support the evolving work of the creation, personal organization, aggregation, discovery, preservation, access and exchange of information in all formats is one of six strategic priorities for 2009-13 developed by the ACRL Board of Directors (http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/about/whatisacrl/index.cfm). The newly developed tools support this strategic priority, with a focus on new methods of scholarly publishing and communication, copyright and intellectual property and economics along with open access and openness as a principle.

Harvard Graduate School of Education Faculty Adopt Open Access Policy

The Harvard Graduate School of Education faculty have adopted an open access policy. (Thanks to Open Access News.)

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The faculty of the Harvard Graduate School of Education (HGSE) voted overwhelmingly at its last faculty meeting to allow the university to make all faculty members' scholarly articles publicly available online. The resolution makes HGSE the fourth of Harvard's 10 schools to endorse open access to faculty research publications. The Faculties of Arts and Sciences, the Harvard Law School, and the Harvard Kennedy School all passed similar policies in recent months. . . .

As a result of the resolution, HGSE faculty will now provide their scholarly articles to the Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication for deposit in an open access digital repository that is currently under development. When the repository launches later this year, the contents will be freely available to the public, unless an author chooses to embargo or block access. The policy makes rights sharing with publishers and self-archiving the default, while allowing faculty to waive Harvard's license on a case-by-case basis, at the author's discretion.

RoMEO Application Programmers’ Interface Version 2.4 Released

SHERPA has released version 2.4 of the RoMEO Application Programmers' Interface (API).

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The new version uses a totally new algorithm and is faster than earlier 1.x versions. It also supplies data for the fields that were missing in earlier versions—paid open access, and compliance with research funders' mandates. . . .

If you are using an older version of the prototype, we strongly recommend that you upgrade your application to use V.2.4 as soon as possible, because we will be discontinuing the old versions at the end of 2009. Version 2.4 is largely compatible with earlier versions. The main things that may require attention are: the new URL, handling the extra fields, and handling changes to the parameter and copyright fields.

“One Year (Almost) with the Open Access Authors Fund”

Andrew Waller has self-archived his "One Year (Almost) with the Open Access Authors Fund" presentation in E-LIS.

Here's the abstract:

This presentation described the origin of and policies and procedures relating to the Open Access Authors Fund at the University of Calgary. The activities of the Fund in its first year were presented and discussed. Other Open Access activities at the University of Calgary were also briefly discussed.

Costs and Benefits of Research Communication: The Dutch Situation

The SURFfoundation has released Costs and Benefits of Research Communication: The Dutch Situation.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

This study examines the costs and potential benefits of alternative models for scientific and scholarly publishing in the Netherlands. It is a follow-up of the Australian study 'Research Communication Costs, Emerging Opportunities and Benefits' (Houghton et al. 2006) and the UK/JISC study 'Economic Implications of Alternative Scholarly Publishing Models'. The Dutch study was commissioned by SURFfoundation and led by Professor John Houghton from the Centre of Strategic Economic Studies at Melbourne's Victoria University and Jos de Jonge and Marcia van Oploo of EIM Business & Policy Research in the Netherlands. . . .

The study Costs and Benefits of Research Communication: The Dutch Situation compares three publication models. The greatest advantage is offered by the Open Access model, which means that the research institution or the party financing the research pays for publication and the article is then freely accessible. Adopting this model could lead to an annual saving of EUR 133 million. Even if the Netherlands were the only country to adopt this publication model and continued to pay for licences to access periodicals, there would still be a saving of EUR 37 million.

Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook Launched

The Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook has been launched.

Here's an excerpt from the home page:

OASIS aims to provide an authoritative ‘sourcebook’ on Open Access, covering the concept, principles, advantages, approaches and means to achieving it. The site highlights developments and initiatives from around the world, with links to diverse additional resources and case studies. As such, it is a community-building as much as a resource building exercise. Users are encouraged to share and download the resources provided, and to modify and customize them for local use. Open Access is evolving, and we invite the growing world-wide community to take part in this exciting global movement.

Melissa Hagemann OASIS Introduction on YouTube