“Public Health Scotland (PHS) has collaborated with Higher Education Institutions to create a comprehensive repository for COVID-19 Research in Scotland.
The repository, which contains research about COVID-19 in Scotland in a range of formats, is a fully accessible and searchable digital resource.
The creation of a fully searchable COVID-19 Research Repository reduces duplication of effort and makes research easier for policymakers, researchers and the public to find and use.
By providing easy access to recently published research on COVID-19 in Scotland on a single shared platform, PHS hopes to enhance the visibility of leading research and promote Scottish research to a national and international audience….”
“An Open Access mandate refers to a policy adopted by a funder, institution or the government which necessitates researchers to make their research articles public. This can be done via two routes: Green OA or Gold OA. The former refers to the researcher depositing her research article to an open access repository, generally institutional. The latter refers to submission of research to open access journals?—?some of which may levy Article Processing Charges (APCs) that can be paid by the researcher, his institution or from the research grant.
Universities that have adopted OA mandates include Harvard University (the first to do so), MIT, ETH Zurich, University of Liege and University College London. Harvard University has also developed a model policy language document for institutions looking to implement an open access policy for their faculty….”
Much of the CORE Team’s focus involves developing services that underpin open research. The updates for this half-year include numerous examples of this in action. You can find details about these and more news below.
Infrastructures are being developed to enhance and facilitate the sharing of cohort data internationally. However, empirical studies show that many barriers impede sharing data broadly.
Therefore, our aim is to describe the barriers and concerns for the sharing of cohort data, and the implications for data sharing platforms.
Seventeen participants involved in developing data sharing platforms or tied to cohorts that are to be submitted to platforms were recruited for semi-structured interviews to share views and experiences regarding data sharing.
Credit and recognition, the potential misuse of data, loss of control, lack of resources, socio-cultural factors and ethical and legal barriers are elements that influence decisions on data sharing. Core values underlying these reasons are equality, reciprocity, trust, transparency, gratification and beneficence.
Data generators might use data sharing platforms primarily for collaborative modes of working and network building. Data generators might be unwilling to contribute and share for non-collaborative work, or if no financial resources are provided for sharing data.
“San Francisco State University’s J. Paul Leonard Library is a busy, teaching-oriented institution supporting a community of 25,000 students as well as faculty and staff. Our campus is part of the 23-campus California State University system, and we are seeking applications for an Institutional Repository Librarian who will work collaboratively with other librarians and staff across the system to operationalize the CSU-wide institutional repository, ScholarWorks. Additionally, the Institutional Repository Librarian will liaise with our campus community to promote ScholarWorks to students and faculty and provide related guidance on topics such as web accessibility and copyright….”
“Digital objects are inextricably dependent on their context, the infrastructure of people, processes, and technology that care for them. The FAIR Principles are at the heart of the data ecosystem, but they do not specify how digital objects are made FAIR or for how long they should be kept FAIR. This perspective is provided by the Trustworthy Digital Repository (TDR) requirements by defining long-term digital object preservation expectations. We’re all doing something for someone, and to deliver an effective service at scale, we need a sense of the types of users we have and how we can meet their needs, also in the future.
FAIRsFAIR, SSHOC, and EOSC Nordic are all supporting digital repositories in their journey to achieve TDR status. When sharing experiences, the project teams found out that two fundamental TDR concepts are not always easy to understand: preservation and Designated Community. The draft working paper FAIR + Time: Preservation for a Designated Community was prepared in collaboration with the three projects. It seeks to present key concepts and expand on them to specify the standards and assessments required for an interoperable ecosystem of FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) data preserved for the long term in generalist and specialist FAIR-enabling trustworthy digital repositories (TDR) for a defined designated community of users. It seeks to provide context and define these concepts for audiences familiar with research data and technical data management systems but with less direct experience of digital preservation and trustworthy digital repositories. This is intended to help clarify which organisations are potential candidates to receive CoreTrustSeal TDR status and identify and support the types of organisations that may not be candidates but play a vital role in the data ecosystem. …”
From Google’s English: “The National Open Science Plan announced in 2018 by the Minister of Higher Education, Research and Innovation, Frédérique Vidal, has enabled France to adopt a coherent and dynamic policy in the field of open science, coordinated by the Committee for Open Science, which brings together the ministry, research and higher education institutions and the scientific community. After three years of implementation, the progress made is notable. The rate of French scientific publications in open access rose from 41% to 56%. The National Open Science Fund was created, it launched two calls for projects in favor of open scientific publication and it supported structuring international initiatives. The National Research Agency and other funding agencies now require open access to publications and the drafting of data management plans for the projects they fund. The function of ministerial research data administrator has been created and a network is being deployed in the establishments. About twenty universities and research organizations have adopted an open science policy. Several guides and recommendations for putting open science into practice have been published. About twenty universities and research organizations have adopted an open science policy. Several guides and recommendations for putting open science into practice have been published. About twenty universities and research organizations have adopted an open science policy. Several guides and recommendations for putting open science into practice have been published.
The steps already taken and the evolution of the international context invite us to extend, renew and strengthen our commitments by adopting a second National Plan for Open Science, the effects of which will be deployed until 2024. With this new plan, France is continuing the ambitious trajectory initiated by the law for a digital republic of 2016 and confirmed by the research programming law of 2020, which includes open science in the missions of researchers and teacher-researchers.
This second National Plan extends its scope to source codes resulting from research, it structures actions in favor of the opening or sharing of data through the creation of the Research Data Gouv platform, it multiplies the levers of transformation in order to generalize open science practices and it presents disciplinary and thematic variations. It is firmly in line with a European ambition and proposes, within the framework of the French Presidency of the European Union, to act to take effective account of open science practices in individual and collective research evaluations. It is about initiating a process of sustainable transformation in order to make open science a common and shared practice…”
“We’re thrilled to announce that OA Works (formerly Open Access Button) has received a grant of $1.9M USD over the next three years from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The investment expands OA.Work’s efforts to streamline self-archiving through ShareYourPaper, and forges a new partnership with the foundation to develop tools that help put OA policies into practice. We’re building three new open-source services for the foundation and other institutions, including:
OAreport: to discover, analyze, and unlock papers covered by OA policies.
ShareYourPaper for Funders: to bring drag-and-drop self-archiving to funders and their grantees.
OAsupport: to provide a help desk that serves authors making their work open access….”
“COAR and SPARC have a shared vision of creating a global, open knowledge sharing system that centers diversity, equity, and inclusion, and we believe repositories play a central role in achieving this vision.
This is an important moment in time, in which open scholarship is more visible and widely-embraced than ever before. The urgency of addressing the COVID-19 pandemic has led many researchers to eagerly embrace new, faster ways of sharing their research papers, data, and more via repositories and other open platforms. There is a renewed interest in community ownership of both infrastructure and content, and a spotlight on empowering author’s rights retention due to new funder requirements, such as Plan S. There is also a growing recognition of the pressing need to intentionally build channels for greater inclusiveness and diversity of voices in the research communication system, as underscored in the UNESCO draft recommendations which were developed through consensus by over 100 member countries.
Yet, against this backdrop of encouraging developments, the trend toward commercial concentration in the publishing industry continues unabated. This consolidation exacerbates a number of serious problems in the system, including unacceptably high and ever-increasing costs for subscriptions and APCs (article processing charges). It also contributes to a steady decline in the diversity of publishing outlets and options – decreasing bibliodiversity, which is fundamental for a healthy ecosystem.
Individual repositories and a global repository network are critical infrastructure that provide the community with means for resisting this consolidation. Repositories are localized and can respond to different users’ needs, advancing equity and diversity in the scholarly communications ecosystem. When they are resourced properly, they are sustainable and long-lived, and because they are mostly managed by research institutions and their libraries, they are operated in a manner consistent with the academic community’s values. Moreover, repositories exemplify the key role institutions must play in preserving, curating, and making accessible content that would otherwise be unavailable to the world….”
Presenter Slides are Available at:
In the first presentation, Henk van den Hoogen and Timon Oefelein present the results of a unique collaborative Open Science initiative by the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU), Springer Nature and several academic libraries in the Netherlands. This presentation provides background to the initiative, its rationale, objectives, and interdisciplinary make up, as well as summarising its key results and those from two large global researcher surveys to do with researchers’ motivations towards SDG research and usage trends of both OA and non-OA content. The presentation will be of interest to academic support librarians supporting researchers with publication and impact, as well as data librarians interested in innovative new SDG mapping technology, and bibliometric and members of the research assessment community interested in new ways of defining and capturing the societal impact of research.
Next, Jos Westerbeke will give a lightning talk about Federated Identity Management (FIM4L), one of LIBER’s Working Groups. In hist talk, they will provide insights and recommendations into authentication practices (single sign-on) for licensed materials and differing privacy issues. He will also discuss what to do when publishers delay implementing privacy enhancing changes and how the Working Group can help with setting up the right configuration for federated SSO access according to a broadly supported uniform library SSO method conforming to FIM4L principles.
Finally, Elisa Herrmann, Stefanie Paß, and Jana Rumler will provide insights from the Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, a small integrated research museum within the Leibniz Association. In their presentation, they will discuss the future activities for the implementation and promotion of Open Access in their institution, which include an in-house publication fund, the development of Green Open Access infrastructures, and the handling of OA publications in the acquisition process. As a smaller institution themselves, they will also pose the question of how big the gap is in the implementation of Open Access between large and small libraries. They will then identify possibilities to narrow the gap and, in the best case, create structures that will help smaller libraries to promote Open Access and Open Science in their institutions.
“KEY RESULTS: • Open Science principles: over half (59%) of the surveyed institutions rated Open Science’s strategic importance as very high or high. Open Access to research publications was considered to be highly important for 90% of institutions, but only 60% considered its implementation level to be high. However, the gap between importance and implementation is much wider in data-related areas (RDM, FAIR and data sharing): high importance at between 55-70% of the institutions surveyed, with high levels of implementation at 15-25%. • Open Science policies: 54% of institutions have an Open Science policy and 37% are developing one. Only 9% of surveyed institutions lack an Open Science policy or are not planning to draft one. • Monitoring Open Access to research publications: 80% of institutions monitored the number of publications in their repository and 70% monitored articles published by their researchers in Open Access journals. In addition, almost 60% reported monitoring the cost of publications by their researchers in Open Access journals. • Infrastructure for Open Access to research publications: 90% of the institutions surveyed have their own repository, participate in a shared repository or both. For journal hosting or publishing platforms this figure reaches 66%, and levels out at 57% for monograph hosting/publishing. In addition, 66% of those surveyed reported that their institution has participated in or supported non-commercial Open Access publishing. • Data-related skills: over 50% of the surveyed institutions reported that research data skills were only partially available. Moreover, all of the institutions that indicated the absence or partial availability of data skills, considered that more of these skills are needed at institutional level. • Emerging areas of Open Science: Approximately 50% of the respondents know of citizen science and open education activities at their institutions. • Open Science in academic assessment: In 34% of institutions, none of the Open Science elements examined by the survey were included in academic assessments. Amongst the institutions that included Open Science activities in their academic assessments, 77% took into consideration article deposition in a repository….”
“On behalf of the leaders of 125 major research libraries, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) is pleased to see that the US House of Representatives included the following policies in the National Science Foundation (NSF) for the Future Act (H.R. 2225), which center researchers and create public value by promoting the availability of publicly funded research:
Criteria for trusted open repositories to be used by federally funded researchers sharing data, software, and code. According to the House bill, the criteria would be developed with input from the scientific community. Research libraries look forward to partnering with NSF and the scientific community to develop these criteria.
Data management plans to facilitate public access to NSF-funded research products, including data, software, and code….
We strongly support public access to publications resulting from NSF-funded research with zero embargo, and we are heartened to see language in the Senate-passed US Innovation and Competition Act (S. 1260) requiring the publication of federally funded research data within 12 months, “preferably sooner.” Making research outputs publicly available to the widest possible audience in the timeliest manner possible, and machine-accessible for computation, is critical for developing scientific insights and solutions for public health, climate, technological advancement, and more….”
“In the 1990s, new repositories and databases were born that would become pillars of a solid infrastructure for open-access scientific communication. With the launch of the open access journals databases Latindex, SciELO and Redalyc, the digitisation of scientific journals was given a boost and a quality seal was granted to published research. With a strong public imprint, these repositories acted as a springboard for the development of non-commercial open access environment that is today the hallmark of the region.
Latin America now has the optimal conditions to create open science infrastructure that capitalises on these previous efforts. And two examples stand out.
Brazil’s BrCris was developed by the Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia alongside major national public agencies. Brazil is an immense country, with a professionalised scientific and technological system that has produced many databases on a national scale, making integration a huge challenge. Examples include the Open Data Portal, the CV system Plataforma Lattes and the directory of research groups known as CNPQ….
The second case is that of the PerúCRIS platform. It was first devised when Peru approved its Open Access Law in 2013. The need then arose to integrate three scientific information platforms: the directory of researchers, the national directory of institutions and the national network of repositories. The new platform also includes all undergraduate and graduate theses….”
“The Northeast Institutional Repository Day 2021 (NIRD21) Program Committee is pleased to issue its Call for Proposals for the third annual Northeast Institutional Repository Day, a free event that brings together all in the Northeast (and beyond!) who manage or are interested in institutional repositories, digital collections, and digital preservation. Understanding the current environment and financial challenges faced this year, NIRD21 will be a virtual event….”