scholar-led.network: New Support for Scientific Publication Projects

An interview with Juliane Finger and Marcel Wrzesinski

Public money, public asset.

The scholar-led.network (German) wants to change this and advocates fair, diverse and public spirit-oriented publishing. In doing so, it is committed to and involved in Open Access journals, book publishers and blogs which are run collaboratively by scientists in order to give the diverse community of publication initiatives a voice. The network aims to be an advocate for independent, non-profit-oriented Open Access and to ensure sustainability in a field which is often characterised by project-based funding. In the interview, network co-founders Juliane Finger and Marcel Wrzesinski introduce the initiative and discuss its challenges, goals and initial plans.

The scholar-led.network has recently been established. Who is behind it and what exactly is it? What are your goals?

The scholar-led.network is an alliance of Open Access stakeholders that was constituted at the beginning of 2021 as a “digital focus group” in the context of the project “open-access.network”. The work of the scholar-led.network draws upon the project findings of several projects on non-chargeable Open Access, focussing particularly on scholar-led initiatives such as the establishment of a community platform in the project “Open Gender Platform “ (German) or innovative publication solutions in the project “InnOAccess” (see the White Paper on technology and on business models).

The idea behind the scholar-led.network is initially the network concept: Publishers of scholar-led publication projects, representatives of infrastructure institutions, stakeholders of research institutions and universities should – all those come together to join forces for strong scholar-led publishing.

For us, scholar-led means: publishing on behalf of science and independent of profit-oriented large publishing houses and/or escalating commercial interests.

The scholar-led.network will then also serve to give the diverse publication initiatives a common voice. We identify fields of action and want to develop strategies to improve the situation of scholar-led publication initiatives.

Why is it necessary to take action in this field? What are the problems/challenges?

Despite the upheavals currently taking place in the publication system, we see the danger that “old” problems will continue. The Open Access movement originally developed from the idea of solving the so-called journal crisis. This generally refers to the efforts of several major science publishing houses in the 1990s to continually increase the fees for accessing academic journals, owing to their respective monopoly position. However, these large commercial publishers have now also identified Open Access as a business model for themselves. To finance Open Access publications, authors or their institutions often have to pay high article processing charges (APC). This creates new inequalities. Because not everyone can afford the article processing charges – or only those who are affiliated with a solvent institution.

Scholar-led initiatives also have specific problems to contend with: just like all other journals, they need money for their on-going operations, technology and staff. As non-chargeable Open Access, however, their financial situation is extremely precarious and greatly depends on the voluntary or “gifted” work of editors. In addition, funding in Germany is thus far and above all project-related and time-limited. This means that it may be possible to apply for funding to transfer a journal to the non-chargeable Open Access system, for example at the German Research Foundation. Yet in the long-term, the journals have to develop their own financing structures – a strategic direction of the funding is lacking. A further problem is the lack of a sense of responsibility on the part of those responsible for the subject and research institutions: the many small and interdisciplinary scholar-led projects often unintentionally fall through the disciplinary or institutional cracks and are forgotten.

When establishing the network, you also published a manifesto (German). What are you demanding and from whom?

The manifesto is intended to raise awareness of the precarious situation of many scholar-led projects in a provocative way. It starts the ball rolling for a discussion on the topic. We demand that more is done to strengthen scholar-led initiatives. In the manifesto we have identified three recommendations for action:

  • Firstly, we demand more connectivity, collaboration and a strategic framework to improve the situation of scholar-led publication initiatives.
  • Secondly, we demand the establishment of sustainable funding structures. Current funding for non-commercial publication initiatives is primarily project-based and therefore short-term, making it more difficult for scholar-led initiatives to establish themselves sustainably.
  • And thirdly, biblio-diversity should be supported. As well as the acceptance for new and heterogeneous publication formats, this includes new standards for aspects of quality assurance and accessibility of publications.

Incidentally, we are not alone in these demands: The most recently published study on Diamond Open Access by OPERAS and SPARC Europe makes very similar recommendations for action. All these points are addressed to a wide public: the scientific community, science policy, funding organisations, university administrations and libraries.

Who can join in? What and who are you looking for?

The network is open to new members. Scholar-led initiatives are welcome to join the network and connect with each other. But we also invite other stakeholders – whose primary interest lies in supporting non-commercial publication initiatives – to participate. These could be libraries, but also non-profit-oriented publishing companies such as university presses. In this way, we aim to make new partnerships on the basis of common interests possible, e.g. a non-commercial hosting service and a scholar-led journal. Anyone who is interested can find further information on the website of the scholar-led.network.

Which specific activities are you planning?

At the moment, the network meets for regular interexchange. The next meetings will discuss current researchs, sustainable strategies and practical solution approaches. Every meeting involves input from current projects on the scholar-led topic – so as to encourage discussion from a practical perspective.

Further activities are possible in the medium term, such as collaboratively generated information collections (e.g. an own Wiki) or forming affiliations for strategically coordinated negotiations. We are still in the discovery phase here and open for suggestions or ideas from everyone interested.

We were talking to Juliane Finger and Marcel Wrzesinski. This text has been translated from German.

This might also interest you:

Guest Post — The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and Open Access: Gerald Beasley Interviews Timon Oefelein (Part 2 of 2)

In Part 2 of this pair of posts we turn the tables and Gerald Beasley interviews Timon Oefelein of Springer Nature about how publishers can support the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.

The post Guest Post — The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and Open Access: Gerald Beasley Interviews Timon Oefelein (Part 2 of 2) appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Guest Post — The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and Open Access: Timon Oefelein Interviews Gerald Beasley (Part 1 of 2)

In Part 1 of this pair of posts, Timon Oefelein interviews Gerald R. Beasley, the Carl A. Kroch University Librarian at Cornell University, about how librarians can support the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.

The post Guest Post — The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and Open Access: Timon Oefelein Interviews Gerald Beasley (Part 1 of 2) appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Speedy Literature Reviews Using Wikidata and Mining Tools

Image: Indian National Young Academy of Sciences ( INYAS), India, 2021-08-13. Open Science Principles and Practice, slide 38. Peter Murray-Rust, Ayush Garg and Shweata N. Hegde. CC BY 4.0. By Shweata N. Hegde and CEVOpen community. Hashtag: #cevopen CEVOpen is an open research project developing open-source tools to enable search tools for Open Access repositories. The project has a prototype…

Source

Open Reviewer Identities: Full Steam Ahead or Proceed with Caution?

Open peer review has been growing steadily but its implementations take many different forms. Alison Mudditt and Véronique Kiermer take a deep dive into the question of whether reviewers should be openly identified.

The post Open Reviewer Identities: Full Steam Ahead or Proceed with Caution? appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

The Munin Conference on Scholarly Publishing

The Munin Conference is an annual conference on scholarly publishing and communication, primarily revolving around open access, open data, and open science. The 16th annual Munin Conference on Scholarly Publishing will […]

The post The Munin Conference on Scholarly Publishing appeared first on SPARC Europe.

Open Economics Guide: New Open Science Support for Economics Researchers

by Birgit Fingerle and Guido Scherp

Open Science represents the best practice for academic work and is a toolkit for “good scientific practice”. In addition to the general benefits of Open Science for the scholarly system and society, Open Science offers many individual benefits for researchers. Among them are a higher visibility of research work and a greater impact in research and society.

Nevertheless, many researchers in economics and business studies see hurdles and are discouraged from practicing Open Science: A lack of time and of appropriate support are the main reasons for their hesitation. This was revealed by the 2019/2020 study “Die Bedeutung von Open Science in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften – Ergebnisbericht einer Online-Befragung unter Forschenden der Wirtschaftswissenschaften an deutschen Hochschulen 2019” (“The Importance of Open Science in Economics – Result Report of an Online Survey among Researchers in Economics at German Universities 2019”) conducted by the ZBW. See our blog post Open Economics: Study on Open Science Principles and Practice in Economics reporting the studies main findings. Furthermore, the survey on which the study was based expressed a strong desire for support in the form of online materials, especially with regard to Open Science platforms, tools and applications.

With the new Open Economics Guide (German), the ZBW aims to address these wishes and to support economics and business studies researchers in implementing open practices.

Support for open science practice

The Open Economics Guide addresses the challenges and support needs identified in the study. It is based on the perspective and the needs of economics and business studies researchers. It takes into account, for example, that for them lack of time is the top obstacle to Open Science. This is why the texts of the Guide are concise and clear. Therefore, the Open Economics Guide starts with concrete benefits for researchers, for example by recommending first steps for getting started with Open Science easily and quickly to implement.

Accordingly, where necessary, the content reflects the specifics of economics and business studies research. The Open Economics Guide is also based on systematically reviewed existing content, which it picks up or refers to and recommends where necessary. Since the range of information, tutorials and tools related to Open Science is constantly growing, the Open Economics Guide offers good orientation for researchers and takes up current developments.

The ZBW has thus designed the Open Economics Guide as the central entry point specifically for Open Science in economics and business studies, initially for German-speaking countries. In the Open Economics Guide, economists can discover how openness enriches their research and how they can benefit from the advantages of open research.

Quick start, tool overview and knowledge base

The Open Economics Guide supports economics and business studies researchers with practical tips, methods and tools to practice Open Science independently and successfully and thus to promote their academic career. To this end, the Guide contains, among other things:

  • easy-to-understand quick-start guides to Open Science topics (currently Open Science, Open Access, Open Data and Open Tools),
  • a comprehensive overview of more than 70 tools (German), subdivided by the phases of the research workflow,
  • a growing knowledge database with currently about 100 entries (German) with extensive background information and practical tips on how to proceed,
  • a clear glossary (German), which answers comprehension questions about the most important terms related to open research at a glance.

Content under open license and further expansion

The content of the Open Economics Guide is offered under an open license as far as possible. Thus, it can be reused in other contexts according to the principles of Open Science, for example by other libraries for their researchers.

The Open Economics Guide will be continuously expanded and extended. For instance, further focal points, such as Open Educational Resources and Open Research Software, will be added. All aspects of Open Science relevant to economics and business studies research will be covered. In doing so, a close communication as well as a close cooperation with researchers of economics and business studies will be strived for, in order to develop new contents also jointly. In addition, the guide will aim at an international target group in the future.

Visit the Open Economics Guide now

Featured Image: Mockup created by freepik – www.freepik.com

The post Open Economics Guide: New Open Science Support for Economics Researchers first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.

Revisiting: Is There a Business Case for Open Data?

Revisiting Tim Vines’ 2017 post — Open data continues to gain ground, but is there a revenue stream that would help journals recover the costs of gathering, reviewing and publishing data?

The post Revisiting: Is There a Business Case for Open Data? appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Revisiting — The Tyranny of Unintended Consequences: Richard Poynder on Open Access and the Open Access Movement

Looking back at Richard Poynder’s in-depth analysis of the state of open access. What’s changed since then?

The post Revisiting — The Tyranny of Unintended Consequences: Richard Poynder on Open Access and the Open Access Movement appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Guest Post — One Publisher to Rule Them All? Consolidation Trends in the Scholarly Communications and Research Sectors

Jon Treadway and Sarah Greaves look at the consolidation of the scholarly communications market and where it is leading.

The post Guest Post — One Publisher to Rule Them All? Consolidation Trends in the Scholarly Communications and Research Sectors appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Subscribe to Open (S2O): An Interview Post in Two Parts (Part 2)

Robert Harington interviews a number of experts with a few burning questions on the Subscribe to Open (S2O) model in a two part post, part two appearing here.

The post Subscribe to Open (S2O): An Interview Post in Two Parts (Part 2) appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.