Open Access – Page 5 – DigitalKoans

"Stronger Together: Library-led Open Access Publishing in Scotland"

The purpose of this article is to look at library-led Open Access publishing initiatives across Scotland: particularly the Scottish Confederation of University and Research Libraries (SCURL) Open Hosting Shared Service and Scottish Universities Press (SUP). . . .

In 2018, the University of Edinburgh (UoE) submitted a proposal to SCURL, pitching the creation of a new shared service that would be governed by SCURL and provided by library staff at the University of Edinburgh. The aim of this shared service was to equip member institutions with a hosting solution to fulfil their Open Access publishing activities, with the development time charged to UoE. The fee for the shared service is at cost (currently £1,400 + VAT per year), and everything is reinvested, predominantly covering technical and staffing costs. All members meet four times a year to discuss the direction and growth of the shared service, ensuring it is very much a partnership and not just led by the University of Edinburgh.

The hosting solution is fulfilled by the use of Open Journals System (OJS) and Open Monograph Press (OMP). SCURL partners get their own installation of the required open-source software, and the staff at UoE complete the initial configuration of the site and customisation of the user interface. The fee is charged per installation. So, for example, a user pays one fee for OJS and can set up as many journals as they like. . . .

To finish, the shared service launched with three members and now has eleven, with more on the way. The members are:

Glasgow Caledonian University

Heriot Watt University

Queen Margaret University

Robert Gordon University

Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh

Scottish Universities Press

Society of Antiquaries Scotland

St Andrews University

University of Edinburgh

University of Glasgow

The University of the Highlands and Islands

https://tinyurl.com/2vy7wp94

"The FAIR Assessment Conundrum: Reflections on Tools and Metrics"

Several tools for assessing FAIRness have been developed. Although their purpose is common, they use different assessment techniques, they are designed to work with diverse research products, and they are applied in specific scientific disciplines. It is thus inevitable that they perform the assessment using different metrics. This paper provides an overview of the actual FAIR assessment tools and metrics landscape to highlight the challenges characterising this task. In particular, 20 relevant FAIR assessment tools and 1180 relevant metrics were identified and analysed concerning (i) the tool’s distinguishing aspects and their trends, (ii) the gaps between the metric intents and the FAIR principles, (iii) the discrepancies between the declared intent of the metrics and the actual aspects assessed, including the most recurring issues, (iv) the technologies used or mentioned the most in the assessment metrics. The findings highlight (a) the distinguishing characteristics of the tools and the emergence of trends over time concerning those characteristics, (b) the identification of gaps at both metric and tool levels, (c) discrepancies observed in 345 metrics between their declared intent and the actual aspects assessed, pointing at several recurring issues, and (d) the variety in the technology used for the assessments, the majority of which can be ascribed to linked data solutions. This work also highlights some open issues that FAIR assessment still needs to address.

https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2024-033

Paywall: "Does Research Funding, Open Access Availability, and Collaboration in Research Influence Citation Impact? An Analysis of Neurotechnology Research"

The United States Department of Health and Human Services remains at the top by contributing funding to 7.46% of research papers in the field of Neurotechnology research. Statistical tests confirmed significant correlations between research funding, collaboration, and research availability mode with citation impact. Positive correlations were identified between research funding and collaboration, while open access availability showed a negative correlation with citation impact.

https://doi.org/10.1080/15424065.2024.2350377

2024 State of Open Infrastructure Report

In this inaugural report, we dive deep into the characteristics of open infrastructure powering research and scholarship and what (we believe) sets them apart from their competitors. We take a closer look at the governing bodies and decision-makers behind the technologies your community relies on. We share the latest data and analysis of over US$415M in grant funding powering open infrastructures and research surrounding them, and bring you the latest infrastructure and policy developments in regions such as Latin America, Africa, and the European Union. We highlight success stories and the key trends in the adoption of open infrastructure. We share the latest on trends we’re tracking, such as the global movement towards Diamond Open Access and the underlying infrastructure needs, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the intersection with open research, and "digital sovereignty" and its impact on research across borders.

https://tinyurl.com/ycxs547k

"The Global Lens: Highlighting National Nuances in Researchers’ Attitudes to Open Data"

This report investigates the variations seen in researcher’s attitudes towards open data across Ethiopia, Japan and the United States, using responses from the State of Open Data surveys. Highlighting: what open data is and its importance towards global scientific advancement, outlining methods that were used, outward context and overall suggestions towards policy makers.

Ethiopia and Japan were found to display contrasting responses, with the United States often representing the middle ground. Researchers in Ethiopia show the highest familiarity with FAIR principles (36.50%), support for a national open data mandate (76.96%), and agreement with penalising non-compliance (56.74%). In contrast, Japan has the lowest familiarity with FAIR principles (10.20%), support for a national mandate (41.86%), and agreement with penalties (35.78%). The United States falls in between, with 37.60% familiarity with FAIR principles, 61.22% supporting a national mandate, and 54.09% supporting penalties.

The factors shaping these attitudes, including funding policies, research culture, and individualistic behaviours have also been examined. Recommendations suggest Ethiopia could leverage its strong support by establishing clear national policies, the United States could build on existing federal policies, and Japan may need a more gradual approach, engaging researchers in policy development.

https://tinyurl.com/45xsvc8h

"More Readers in More Places: The Benefits of Open Access for Scholarly Books"

Open access to scholarly contents has grown substantially in recent years. This includes the number of books published open access online. However, there is limited study on how usage patterns (via downloads, citations and web visibility) of these books may differ from their closed counterparts. Such information is not only important for book publishers, but also for researchers in disciplines where books are the norm. This article reports on findings from comparing samples of books published by Springer Nature to shed light on differences in usage patterns across open access and closed books. The study includes a selection of 281 open access books and a sample of 3,653 closed books (drawn from 21,059 closed books using stratified random sampling). The books are stratified by combinations of book type, discipline and year of publication to enable likewise comparisons within each stratum and to maximize statistical power of the sample. The results show higher geographic diversity of usage, higher numbers of downloads and more citations for open access books across all strata. Importantly, open access books have increased access and usage for traditionally underserved populations.

https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.558

"Editors at Philosophy & Public Affairs Resign; Will Launch New OA Journal"

We take this step because we believe that scholarly journals—including our own—serve important purposes, and that these purposes are not well-served by commercial publishing. For three decades now, academic journals have suffered from their ownership by for-profit publishers, who have exploited their monopoly position to sharply raise prices, unduly burdening subscribing libraries and shutting out other institutions and individuals from access to research. The recent rise of the author-funded "open access" model has only reinforced academic inequality, since scholars with access to fewer resources are unable to pay the fees that make their work freely accessible; it has also incentivized commercial publishers to try to publish as many articles as possible and so to pressure rigorous journals to weaken or abandon their quality controls. . . .

The new diamond journal will be published by the Open Library of Humanities.

https://tinyurl.com/42z2t83c

"Challenges and Roadblocks to Robust Metadata in the Scholarly Communications Industry"

For the scholarly communications community to extract the most value from scientific research, as well as to successfully move from subscription to open access publishing models, it is essential to have ‘clean’ metadata and a robust infrastructure to build the required workflows, processes and systems to support effective use of that metadata. The obstacles to achieving a supporting infrastructure and implementing effective workflows are many, negatively impacting every stakeholder group and every aspect of the research and publishing process.

https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.642

UC and Authors Alliance: "Outcomes, Questions, and Answers: ‘The Right to Deposit (r2d) Uniform Guidance to Ensure Author Compliance and Public Access’"

The United States Office of Management and Budget uniform guidance for grants and agreements contains the following language in 2 CFR §200.315(b):

To the extent permitted by law, the recipient or subrecipient may copyright any work that is subject to copyright and was developed, or for which ownership was acquired, The Right to Deposit (R2D)under a Federal award. The Federal agency reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use the work for Federal purposes and to authorize others to do so. This includes the right to require recipients and subrecipients to make such works available through agency-designated public access repositories.¹

This provision, the Federal purpose license, has existed in some form since at least 1976. Some federal agencies, including the Department of Energy (DOE), have already been relying on it in the implementation of their public access plans. The Federal purpose license applies upon creation of an article, overriding all subsequent terms and licenses. It provides a highly effective, non-disruptive, elegant and familiar solution for accomplishing the ends of the Nelson memo without having to rely on individual authors and institutions to protect this right or navigate differing institutional approaches. Leveraging the Federal purpose license could also provide consistency for articles and authors subject to policies from multiple granting agencies. . . .

If the Federal purpose license has already existed for a long time, and has new language clarifying that it can be used this way, does that solve the problem for authors?

It depends on the author’s funder. Agencies have rights in federally funded research publications, but they are not uniformly using them. Only some agencies are telling their grantees in agency guidance that the Federal purpose license covers sharing publications in agency-designated repositories. Other agencies aren’t relying on their own rights from the license, and instead advising grantees to work with their publisher and secure the rights to post their publications independently. The Federal purpose license does not help authors if they don’t know about it.

https://tinyurl.com/bdfks8pu

"Article Processing Charges Suppress the Scholarship of Doctoral Students"

The open access movement has drastically reconfigured the financial burdens of scholarly publishing. Yet, the influence of a marketized scholarly publishing system on doctoral education remains unexplored. I reflect on my own PhD candidature to illustrate how article processing charges disempower doctoral candidates. I argue that the current open access publishing model unfairly advantages candidates with personal, familial and/or institutional wealth. The inequalities imposed on doctoral students by our sectors’ current publishing habits ultimately bias who will be paid to produce and safeguard knowledge in the future. Doctoral students can no longer be ignored in debates over open access publishing.

https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2024.e124173

"WIPO Study: Research4Life Program Spikes Research Output by up to 75% in Low- and Middle-Income Countries"

A new study conducted by leading researchers from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the University of the Bundeswehr Munich and the German Economic Institute reveals that free or low-cost online access to scientific publications — as provided by Research4Life programs — results in a surge in scientific output, particularly in health sciences, by up to 75% in low- and middle-income countries. . . .

Research institutions in the Caribbean, Central Asia, Europe, and Latin America saw their academic paper output increase by 80-100%. In terms of clinical trials, program participation was most impactful for East Asia, the Pacific, the Middle East, and North Africa, with trial activity rising by up to 35%.

Report

https://tinyurl.com/vjpfub7u

"The Road to Sustainability: Examining Key Drivers in Open Access Diamond Journal Publishing"

Despite the rising interest in open access (OA) diamond journals as a scholarly journal publishing model, their sustainability remains a pressing concern. Using the Open Access Diamond Journals Study (OADJS) Dataset, we examined the characteristics and factors of OA diamond journal publishing that are associated with high sustainability. From 1335 journals, 476 journals with low sustainability and 438 journals with high sustainability were selected and compared. Our analysis revealed that factors such as the region and official language of the publishing country and the discipline, ownership, and financial status of the journal were significantly associated with sustainability. Journals owned by government or national agencies, those with financial stability, and those promoting open practices like unrestricted text and data mining are more likely to be sustainable. This study also discusses the implications of these findings for the future of scholarly publishing and the open science movement. Ultimately, we emphasize the need for national and international support to enhance the sustainability of OA diamond journals and propose that a collective approach involving policymakers, funding agencies, and journal administrators is crucial for fostering a sustainable open access ecosystem.

https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1611

"MIT Press releases Direct to Open (D2O) Impact Report"

The MIT Press announces the release of a report on its Direct to Open (D2O) program detailing the impact that it has had in its first three years. Launched in 2021, D2O is a sustainable framework for open access monographs that shifts publishing from a solely market-based, purchase model where individuals and libraries buy single eBooks, to a collaborative, library-supported open access model. . . .

To date, D2O has funded 240 books: 159 in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS), and 81 in Science, Technology, Engineering, Art/Design, and Mathematics (STEAM). The data show that, on average, open access HSS books in the program are used 3.75 times more and receive 21% more citations than their paywalled counterparts. Open access books in STEAM fields are used 2.67 times more and receive 15% more citations than their non-open counterparts, on average. . . .

At a time when average print runs for academic monographs are often in the low hundreds, books in the D2O program are reaching larger audiences online than ever before—averaging 3,061 downloads per title and bringing important scholarship to international audiences.

https://tinyurl.com/4cwet48f

"Different Open Access Routes, Varying Societal Impacts: Evidence from the Royal Society Biological Journals"

In this article, we explore different OA routes (i.e., gold OA, hybrid OA, and bronze OA) and their varying effects on multiple types of societal impacts (i.e., social media and web) by using the case of four biological journals founded by the Royal Society. The results show that (1) gold OA is significantly and positively related to social media indicators (Twitter counts and Facebook counts), but significantly and negatively associated with web indicators (Blog counts and News counts); (2) hybrid OA has a significant and positive effect on both social media and web indicators; and (3) bronze OA is significantly and positively associated with social media indicators, but it turns to be negative albeit nonsignificant for web indicators.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05032-0

Open Access Projects in Europe: From a General Perspective to Monographs and Ebooks

The development of policies in favour of open science and the transformation of publication channels for academic literature and research produced with public funding by researchers and authors in higher education, combined with technological and financial developments in open access models for scholarly publication and the interest shown by funders for a long time in journals and articles and more recently in monographs and textbooks, continue to reshape the face of academic publication.

Cécile Swiatek Cassafieres, a member of the Executive Board of the Association of European Research Libraries (LIBEReurope.org), will provide a general overview of the main European trends, initiatives and projects in this area, focusing on the diamond model and its current prospects, before addressing the case of ‘books’ in open access, from the angle of monographs on the one hand, and textbooks on the other. A presentation of LIBER’s own initiatives will illustrate the Association of European Research Libraries’ support for such developments.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11149567

"Recognising Open Research Data in Research Assessment: Overview of Practices and Challenges"

The literature review aims at identifying content and key issues regarding the assessment of ORD practices nationally and internationally. It starts from the observation that research assessment needs to be reformed as they are currently biased towards scientific publications. Internationally, discussions and projects thereon have emerged. To contextualise recORD and this literature review, we first describe international and Swiss initiatives for reforming research assessment and how they include ORD recognition. The remainder of the review follows an innovative methodology as it identifies first core values in responsible research assessment, and second existing frameworks, to thirdly derive propositions to keep in mind when developing concrete ORD-specific research assessment recommendations. In a final section, the review presents further readings and useful weblinks on the recognition of ORD in research assessment.

https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.11060206

"The Prevalence of Textbook Affordability and OER Initiatives at ARL Libraries"

Textbook affordability programs and the promotion of OER are well-established priorities for many academic libraries, but few studies have examined the prevalence of such programs either in general or across institution types. This paper presents the results of a study designed to gather information about textbook affordability initiatives at university libraries that are members Association of Research Libraries. It uses information from the publicly available websites of ARL libraries in the United States to determine how many of those institutions maintain textbook affordability programs, with those figures further broken down by status (public/private) and membership in the Open Education Network. In addition, the findings reveal some notable characteristics of textbook affordability programs, including an overall lack of visibility on institutional websites, a marked variety in financial incentives, and evidence of programs that have been discontinued.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102884

Paywall: "Open Peer Review Correlates with Altmetrics but Not with Citations: Evidence from Nature Communications and PLoS One"

The analysis reveals articles subjected to OPR [Open Peer Review] have no obvious advantage in citations but a notable higher score in altmetrics. The distribution of data variation across most disciplines, displaying a statistically significant difference between OPR and non-OPR, mirrors the overall trend. Two potential explanations for the disparity in OPR’s impact on citations compared to altmetrics are proposed. The first relates to the quality heterogeneity between OPR and non-OPR research, while the second is related to the diverse authors citing and mentioning articles in distinct communities.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2024.101540

"And Never the Twain Shall Meet? Institutional Open Access Policies (IOAPs) and Review, Promotion, and Tenure (RPT)"

Introduction: Institutional open access policies (IOAPs) express an institutional commitment to making scholarly knowledge openly accessible, typically by asking academics to deposit their scholarship into an open access (OA) repository. Faculty, however, must prioritize other scholarly requirements, such as those specified in review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) processes and policies. If IOAPs are ignored or in conflict with RPT, they will not be as effective as possible. Literature Review: Despite the fact that many higher education institutions say they value scholarly research contributing to the public good, they often do not articulate that OA is a necessary component to achieve this goal. Parallelly, increasing numbers of higher education institutions have adopted an IOAP, but few of them include the policy in RPT policies. Methods: An electronic survey was disseminated to members of the Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions (COAPI) in order to quantify how many include the concept of OA and/or their IOAP in their RPT mechanisms. Results: Only four out of 28 respondents indicated that the concept of OA is integrated into RPT at their institution, and only one out of 28 reported that the IOAP is present in RPT. Discussion: Consistent with sparse examples in the literature, this study suggests that most IOAPs exist in separation from RPT, and this separation threatens the success of IOAPs. Conclusion: Faculty prioritize RPT guidelines in order to advance their careers, but these policies rarely address OA and IOAPs. More attention to the relationship between IOAPs and RPT is necessary in order to discover how they can complement one another and enhance scholarly knowledge production and exchange.

https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.16899

"Are Transformative Agreements Worth It? An Analysis of Open Access Publication Data at the University of Kentucky"

Open access publishing is continuing to grow as funders such as cOAlition S, National Institutes of Health, and the White House implement mandates and requirements that publicly funded research be made immediately available for public consumption. Publishers have adopted open access as a business model through transformative agreements that combine subscription and publishing fees. However, it is unclear whether these agreements are beneficial for libraries. This article discusses a project by the University of Kentucky Libraries to gather and analyze open access publication data to aid in the evaluation of transformative agreement proposals. This article also discusses how the University of Kentucky compares to peer institutions in the Southeastern Conference and other benchmark institutions regarding open access publishing output. Additionally, this article discusses downsides of transformative agreements and highlights promising alternatives.

https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.68n1.8211

"Navigating Open Access and Transformative Agreements: A Case Study of the University of Maryland"

"What should we be doing as a public institution when it comes to open access and transformative publishing agreements"” Most large US research institutions are facing this question, including the University of Maryland, College Park. This article explores this issue by looking at the University’s publishing landscape from a high level. It then dives deeper into three recent transformative agreements the University library has entered, investigating pricing, usage, and publishing data for a nonprofit society publisher, a for-profit commercial publisher, and, finally, a university press. The goal is to better understand how these agreements intersect with university-sponsored scholarship, library budgets, and the implications for the academic publishing landscape.

https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.68n1.8219

"Exploring a Read and Publish Agreement: The Three-Year Taylor & Francis Pilot"

The Ohio State University Libraries (University Libraries) entered into a three-year read and publish pilot agreement with Taylor & Francis in 2020—the first read and publish agreement for The Ohio State University and the first such deal for Taylor & Francis in the Americas. This study provides an overview of University Libraries’ motivations behind the agreement, the lessons we learned implementing and supporting the agreement, and the open access publishing outcomes of the pilot agreement that ended December 2022.

https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.68n1.8213

"DIAMAS Report Investigating the Financial Sustainability of Institutional Publishers and Service Providers"

The report shows that although institutional publishers and service providers are diverse — in terms of their missions, sizes, services they provide and tasks they perform, access to funding options and the choices they make — they face similar challenges, such as the need for more financial resources, the lack of stability and permanence in personnel and the dependence on parent organizations. Along with public national or regional funders, parent organizations, which provide significant in-kind support (personnel, services), are the main local supporters of Diamond open access (OA).

https://tinyurl.com/ypnefum2

"A Census of Institutional Repositories at Regional Public Universities"

This study reports on the implementation of institutional repositories (IRs) at regional public universities (RPUs) in the United States and its territories. The author investigated repository platform choice, operation style, and content. More than half of RPUs have implemented an IR. The author discusses how these findings align with trends in previous research and explores the unique aspects of IRs at RPUs—particularly the prevalence of student works and special collections materials. For over two decades, institutional repositories (IRs) have been used at institutions of higher education to collect, preserve, and share the scholarly works of an institution. During that same time there have been an increasing number of studies looking at who has implemented an IR, the most popular IR platforms, and type and number of objects deposited in IRs. While some studies have looked at small or teaching-focused institutions, most of these studies have focused on IR implementations at large research-focused institutions.

https://tinyurl.com/yc2fs4r2

"Developing Open Access Resource Management Principles in a Consortial Environment: A University of California Model"

In the summer of 2021, the University of California (UC) migrated to a new integrated library system, called the Systemwide Integrated Library System project (SILS), which for the first time brought all ten UC campuses, two regional storage facilities, and the California Digital Library (CDL) together into one shared library system. With new potential for increased collaboration and cooperation, SILS leadership groups identified consortial open access (OA) resource management as a key opportunity in the new system, in alignment with UC’s priorities around discovery and access to library collections, as well as UC’s commitment to open access and transforming the scholarly communication landscape. This article discusses the formation of the UC Open Access Resource Management Task Force (OARMTF), a group charged to investigate what it would mean to consortially manage OA resources. Specifically, this article focuses on the OARMTF’s work setting out principles for OA resource management, which the authors hope may serve as a useful case study for other institutions or consortia interested in developing principles around OA resource management, as well as encourage more discussion and research into best practices for consortial management of OA resources.

https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.68n1.8216