Seven Years; It's Time for a Change

Copyright, Contract and Access to Knowledge: A Comparative Analysis

Anneliese Taylor Libraries Take on Policy: Support for Open Access and Open Data The growth of open access (OA) journal publishing has exploded in the last decade. The number of full, immediate OA articles went from 2% to 11% of all articles published between 2000 and 2011. When hybrid and embargoed open access articles are included in the count, the 2011 total jumps to 17% across all disciplines. And looking at biomedical journals specifically, 36% of articles published were OA 1 . Alongside this impressive growth in what’s commonly referred to as gold open access publishing has been a multi-pronged effort to expand access to published articles through “green” open access. Green OA is the process of depositing a version of a published article in an open access repository, whether that be an institutional repository (IR) or a disciplinary repository, or even placing articles on an openly accessible web site. “Self-archiving” is frequently used interchangeably with green OA. It does not require authors to pay an article processing charge as many gold OA models do. Many publishers have a history of allowing authors to self-archive a version of their article. The version is typically the accepted author’s manuscript, incorporating changes from the peer-review process, but before the publisher has copyedited, formatted, and branded the manuscript for final publication. A very few publishers allow the final, published version to be uploaded via self-archiving. There may or may not be a delay period after publication before the manuscript can be made accessible. Open access policies passed at the institutional level or by research funders are an attempt to broaden public access on a larger scale. The potential to open up access via a formalized policy is significant, but not without some effort. The next sections will highlight health sciences libraries and their roles with green OA policies in the United States. NIH Public Access Policy The single largest influencer on the growth of green OA articles in the health sciences to date is the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy, passed in 2008. This policy requires peer- reviewed scholarly articles published by NIH-funded researchers to be submitted to PubMed Central (PMC). The articles are made publicly available no later than twelve months after the official publication date. 2 PMC is NIH’s freely accessible, full text article repository, with close to 3 million articles currently deposited. NIH Policy manuscripts are about 10% of this amount. The rest of the content comes from publishers that voluntarily deposit their articles, usually after a publication delay. Many health sciences (HS) libraries got involved in 2008 or earlier with support for researchers at their academy needing to comply with the policy. Efforts range from offering workshops and individual consultations to notifying authors which of their articles are non-compliant and what steps to take to make them compliant. There are a number of excellent NIH Policy LibGuides (e.g. Duke University and University of Washington) and video tutorials (e.g. New York University and Harvard University) created by librarians to assist researchers. An informal survey in 2013 of Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries (AAHSL) member involvement in supporting the Policy indicated a high level of activity amongst health sciences libraries. Of the 25 responses, all but four were actively involved with a support role. It’s remarkable that HS

FTC Sues OMICS: Claims Open Access Academic Publisher Scams Academics

Competition in the managed care industry has intensified as the industry has reached maturity. The current competitive environment of the industry and an increasing industry-wide ephasis on cost containment have resulted in declining profits, lower levels of member satisfaction, and increasing member disenrollment. Many health maintenance organizations (HMOs) have begun to reorient their approach to competitive advantage in the industry by offering theiry members open access to specialits. HMO executives believe that open access will reduce the degree of differentiation achieved by free-for-service (FFS) plans and thereby will allow HMOs to attract additional employers and members away from FFS plans and to improve overall member retention. Unfortunately, there is no empirical evidence to support this assumption. This study is the first empirical test of the strategic importance of member autonomy and open access in a managed care environment. The study expands the model of consumer satisfaction with a health care system proposed by Luft 1981 and tested by Mummalaneni and Gopalakrishna 1997 and incorporates Porter's 1980 theory of competition in mature industries. The model utilized in this study assesses the relative importance of autonomy in selecting specialists (open access), service convenience, value/pricing, and HMO resources on member satisfaction with care and intentions to remain with the HMO. Results show that all four factors significantly influence satisfaction and that subsequently, satisfaction influences intentions to remain enrolled in the plan. In addition, the importance of autonomy is demonstrated by significant direct and indirect paths to intentions to remain in the plan.

board, journal staff, and publisher, and as we mark the beginning of a new calendar year, I am pleased to recount the very substantial accomplishments of Anesthesiology over the past year and to look ahead.Our vision and objective is to be the trusted and authoritative source for quality science and credible information in perioperative, critical care, and pain medicine.We place our product, watchword, and aspiration on the cover of every issue: Trusted evidence -discovery to practice.We continuously strive to increase the richness and reach of journal content and provide superior and valued service to our readers and contributors. "Numerous improvements have been made [to Anesthesiology],to aid and enhance the author and reader experience.

Objective – This study investigated researchers’ perceptions of open access publishing and the ways in which the university’s open access subvention fund could evolve to meet the campus community’s needs. Methods – In spring 2021, two librarians conducted an anonymous survey using a convenience sample to recruit participants. The survey was directly distributed to 113 University of Idaho (U of I) affiliates who had received funding from, or expressed interest in, the open access subvention fund during the previous three years (FY 2019 to FY 2021). Other U of I affiliates were also offered the opportunity to participate in the survey via a link shared in the U of I’s daily email newsletter as well across the U of I’s graduate student email list. The researchers received 42 usable survey responses. The survey included 26 closed and open-ended questions and analysis included cross-tabulations based on fund applicant status as well as respondent role. Of the 26 questions, 4 were modified from a colleague’s previous study with U of I faculty members (Gaines, 2015). Results – Survey responses showed that interest in and support for open access were common among respondents. Although a majority of respondents had published an open access journal article and would like to continue to publish open access in the future, only 17% agreed that they had departmental support to do so. Results also demonstrated that researchers were less willing to pay article processing charges (APCs) out-of-pocket and preferred for funding to come from grant budgets first, followed by Office of Research Budgets, department or college budgets, and library budgets. Respondents expressed support for many of the open access subvention fund’s current criteria and processes, but they also indicated an interest in establishing a more equitable fund distribution cycle and allowing researchers to seek pre-approval once their article was accepted for peer-review. Findings related to open access publishing perspectives built upon previous research conducted at the U of I (Gaines, 2015) and across other institutions. Conclusion – This study confirmed the importance of evaluating and assessing library programs and services to ensure that they continue to meet the needs of campus communities. Through the study results, the researchers demonstrated that respondents were interested in open access publishing and the continuation of the open access subvention fund, as well as offering the U of I an opportunity to adjust the open access subvention fund’s processes to better serve researchers. These results also highlighted the need for those involved in open access publishing support to investigate new open access advocacy and education efforts to ensure that researchers receive the philosophical and financial support they need to pursue different models of scholarly publishing.

Globalization and the internet are intrinsically linked. This obvious fact has major implications for how the publishing industry will be modified in the foreseeable future. This change may be technologically driven but there is a place for intellectual debate about the appropriate regulation of the field. This requires an examination of the commercial and moral claims of the authors or creators and the conventional publishers vis a vis those of the end users both nationally and internationally. This analysis will enable me to make an argument about the importance of open access as an appropriate governance mechanism for both protection and distribution of information in the international arena. In addition, this paper argues that in a globalized world justice and social cohesion requires commercial Multinational corporations (MNCs) to act responsibly and ethically. Most of the big publishing houses are such MNCs and if open access repositories (OARs) are to be relevant such publishing houses will have to embrace the concept. Overall, I will use the concept of corporate social responsibility to make the argument that it is logical and feasible that publishing MNCs can modify their business practices and adopt OARs.

Problem setting. One of the modern common directions for the development of the European Research Area is the introduction of a new approach to scientific research. The basis of this approach is the paradigm innovation, Open science, Open to the world. The full implementation of this paradigm within the European Research Area is possible only if the implementation of open science policy at the level of individual countries is ensured.The essence of open science policy is the provision of open access to research data, scientific publications and research infrastructures and the like.Open access to research infrastructures should be noted separately, as research infrastructures are one of the main means of obtaining scientific output. Accordingly, there is a need to analyze existing and develop new approaches to maximize access to research infrastructures with a view to their continued use in the process of public policymaking of open science in Ukraine.Recent research and publications analysis. Some foreign scientists (Foster I., Hey T., Trefethen A., and others) have researched open science and access to research infrastructures as part of it, but the focus of their research is placed on a particular variety of research infrastructures - on e-infrastructure, while the issue of open access also applies to the so-called classic research infrastructures. Ukrainian scientists researched the importance of digital information resources, including portals and registers, for the development of the state (Karpenko O. V., Vatkovskaya M. G., Kulak N. V., and others), but some focused research into the role of such resources in public policy on open science has not yet been conducted.The paper objective. The article aims to substantiate the need to create an open register of research infrastructures as one of the important conditions for implementing a public policy of open science, to demonstrate the benefits of using such a register in general and for Ukraine in particular, and to consider the example of a Romanian open register of research infrastructures.The paper main body. The article demonstrates the importance of creating an open registry of research infrastructures to ensure the implementation of public open science policy, as well as its importance for particular research infrastructures. The list of advantages that the state and the average user of R&D and technical services received in the conditions of creation and operation of such an open register are outlined. The importance of the visibility of research infrastructures to search users and partners for further collaborative research is demonstrated. The functioning and algorithm of user actions on the example of the Romanian open register of research infrastructures are considered.Conclusions of the research. The European Commission and other European institutions, which influence the formation of rules and the direct pursuit of research within the European Research Area, are currently implementing the paradigm innovation, Open science, Openness to the world. Open science policy, as a component of it, is divided into several areas, in particular, open access to research infrastructures. However, without ensuring the visibility of research infrastructures to the end-user, efforts spent to increase the openness of research infrastructures can be considered wasteful.Creating an open register of research infrastructures helps to systematize information on existing research infrastructures and the services they provide, to increase the visibility of research infrastructures for all stakeholders, and to facilitate the accounting, monitoring and evaluation of their status and activities, etc.Besides, the creation of such a registry and a platform that provides effective access to it facilitates easy and clear communication between providers and consumers of scientific and technical services, which is an important prerequisite for accelerating scientific and technological progress in general.The example of Romania illustrates a possible algorithm for the operation of such a registry and platform. A well-defined mechanism of work, limits of liability and user instructions for access and communication can serve as a benchmark for Ukraine when creating similar digital resources. Given the international development of ERRIS services, it is advisable to consider using them for Ukrainian research infrastructures.The areas of further research may be to study the process of creating open registers of research infrastructures in other countries of the European Research Area to use their experience in Ukraine. Also, research openings may include mechanisms for ensuring the openness of research infrastructures.

Introduction: The open science movement has grown rapidly since the mid-2010s, and research has been conducted in various disciplines such as public health, medicine, education, and computer science. Research results have mainly been published in the journals of information science, computer science, and multidisciplinary fields. Method: To identify the intellectual structure of open science, we constructed a keyword bibliographic coupling analysis network. We examined a total of 1,000 articles on open science from the Web of Science, extracting and analysing 4,645 keywords. Then, we implemented and visualised the keyword bibliographic coupling network by constructing a keyword dataset and a reference dataset for each keyword. Results: By analysing the backbone keywords and clusters in the network, the study revealed that the most prominent keywords were open access, open data, and reproducibility. The analysis also uncovered nine clusters in open science research: open access, reproducibility, data sharing, preregistrations and registered reports, research data, open peer review, tools and platforms for reproducible research, open innovation, science policy, and preprints. These results indicated that open science research focuses on transparency and reproducibility. Additionally, it is noteworthy that this study revealed a considerable focus on the open innovation and science policy areas, which have not received much attention in previous studies. Conclusions: The findings can help to understand the landscape of open science research and may guide research funding institutes and research policymakers to design their policies to improve the open science scholarly environment.

University rejects Elsevier's journal subscriptions offer.

Open access to publicly funded research information seemed idealistic in 2001, when 34 000 scientists signed the open letter to create a public library of science,1 but it is an idea that is now widely accepted. For example, support for open access is an explicit element within the plan of action produced by the Intergovernmental Working Group on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property2 and a recommendation of the science academies in the United States of America in their assessment of their country’s commitment to global health.3 Where there is Internet access, individuals are increasingly using research information to inform themselves in making decisions about their health4 and a survey in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland showed that many people now consider broadband as essential a utility as water or gas.5 But free access to more text is just the tip of what could be done with the information iceberg. The Internet could radically alter the way scientific research is done.6,7 For that change to happen, more peer-reviewed research papers and the data that support them need to be processed and presented in a high quality digital format to a standard such as the National Library of Medicine’s Document Type Definition (DTD) by, for example, ensuring the paper is deposited in a free public repository such as PubMed Central. This allows the text to be automatically tagged to identify keywords, genetic sequences and chemical compounds. Links can then be made, often by computer, between millions of pieces of data in the research literature, databases and compound libraries.8 The scope for research becomes hugely magnified and interconnected in ways not previously imagined, with greatly improved potential for finding new ways to improve global health. This potential remains unfulfilled while research is kept behind old-fashioned subscription barriers on a multitude of publisher web sites in various formats. So will open access build a bridge to reduce health inequity? The potential is certainly great but the digital divide remains large, with estimates that only 13% of the developing world use the Internet, often on slow and expensive connections.9 Therefore, the inequity in accessing information and communication technology infrastructure will need to improve to allow people to get a foot onto the information bridge. But even once they are there, they will still only be able to access information that has been paid for – even when that information was created using taxpayers’ money. There is a role for more research funders and donors to support open access as an integral cost of undertaking the research itself to ensure public access.10 While the United Nations might be seen as having a “slow bandwidth” approach to this issue, things are moving ahead with the work of the International Telecommunications Union on promoting greater access to information and communication technology worldwide and the newly developed WHO strategy on research for health that states: “[WHO will]… adopt and articulate a WHO position on open access to research outputs; and advocate for the following: databanks, repositories and other mechanisms for maximizing the availability of health-related research findings that are freely accessible in the public domain”.11 ■

Let's Make Those Book Chapters Open Too!

Everyone agrees that scientific communication should be free for all. Unfortunately, accessing publications from many reputed journals comes at a high cost—a cost that many researchers and institutions cannot afford. Although, open-access publication model is considered by many as a possible route to ensure that science is free for all; however, it is fraught with its own challenges. This review attempts at exploring the possibilities of keeping science accessible. Firstly, we re-visit the meaning of “open science” as a comprehensive concept which includes open source, data, access, resources, peer review etc. and not merely open access publication model. Next, we have discussed the global initiatives towards open access—the Budapest Open Access Initiative, Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing, Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, cOAlition S and its Plan S initiative, UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). Following this we have included the various open access initiatives from India. In the next part, we have focused on problems with dissemination of scientific outcomes and the challenges associated with existing publication models. Finally, we explore the possible solutions to the existing challenges, which include promotion of pre-print servers and other ideas that we have detailed in the manuscript.

Scholars have argued that open access has neither future nor meaning unless research assessment processes and practices evolve. Moreover, science’s societal impact is the foundation of open access existence, and therefore, research impact assessment needs to embrace openness principles. Scholarly communication, open access, and open science have been significantly transformed over the years by technological developments; however, contrary to these transformations, research impact assessment in Africa has remained largely focused on academic impact and metrics. Although metrics have dominated performance evaluation because of their ease of use, inter alia, they are not without epistemic challenges and biases, notably for African researchers. Hence, the purpose of this study, which draws from a doctoral study on research impact assessment, is to explore how higher education institutions can advance open access and open science through equitable performance evaluation. The paper adopts a largely quantitative approach (questionnaire and document analysis) to ascertain challenges with metrics used for research impact assessment and best practices in research impact assessment to advance open access and open science. Data collection was via an online structured questionnaire with University of Cape Town (South Africa) researchers and academic staff, and document analysis of relevant documents. The study revealed that higher education institutions need to recenter what they value to transform research assessment. Equally, any fundamental change necessitates a shift in policies, processes, structures, norms, and values to allow for the new changes to be adopted and institutionalized. The study provides insight into how higher education institutions can advance open access and open science by extension through aligning values, policy, research assessment processes, and practices as well as changing how researchers are evaluated.

The editors of CIL comment on the recent news that the editor and the editorial board of another library science journal have resigned in protest over their publisher's policies on authors' rights. The CIL editors put forth this event as an important demonstration of leadership in the open access movement, and they challenge the CIL readership to follow suit by adopting additional professional practices in support of open access.