Scoping future data services for the arts and humanities – UKRI

“Apply for funding to explore ways to archive arts and humanities research data….

Your proposal could focus on one of the following:

 

large or complex 3D objects
‘born-digital’ material and complex digital objects
practice research, including performance and visual arts….”

Michael Williams on the Elsevier negotiations: What’s our ‘Plan B’? | Unlocking Research

“As negotiations continue between Elsevier and the UK university sector, institutions need to position themselves to ensure that we have a realistic alternative access solution if the decision is to not sign an agreement. But what would happen in the event of a non-renewal scenario? This post explores how we at Cambridge University Libraries are preparing for Plan B and the alternative access solutions we will be providing….

At Cambridge we are doing our best to engage our research communities with the Elsevier negotiation so that any decisions around the deal and potential implementation of Plan B will only take place following communication and engagement with research-active members of the University. If we need to implement a Plan B, it should not come as a surprise; it will be planned and communicated in advance….”

UKRI’s new open access policy will hinder open science | Times Higher Education (THE)

“The final published version – known as version of record, or VOR – is not some artificial construct of publishers. We know from our recent research with 1,400 researchers, as well as an analysis of article usage, that it is overwhelmingly the VOR that researchers want to read and cite – and it is also the VOR of their own research that, as authors, they want others to read and cite. They find the VOR easier to read, more reliable, and more authoritative and credible because of the reassurance provided by peer review and the stamp of credibility provided by proof of publication in a recognised journal.

Researchers also highlighted the value added to the VOR through the publication process, compared with earlier article versions (the submitted manuscript or the accepted manuscript), including copy-editing and typesetting. Critically, VORs include figures and links to relevant open data, open code and open protocols. This facilitates open science for the whole research system – which is the main goal of making research articles OA in the first place.

Green OA typically revolves around posting the accepted manuscript, but the cost of creating these is, in essence, borne by library subscriptions given that they are created as part of the process of being published in paywalled journals. This is a problem in itself: OA should be about removing paywalls, not becoming dependent on them. Attempts to make accepted manuscripts more widely available do not reflect researchers’ needs and could set back the transition to full (gold) OA and the realisation of the benefits of open science.

Second, as good as transformative agreements are, they have their limits. The industry-standard contract stipulates that a paper’s eligibility for gold OA depends on whether the corresponding author’s institution is part of the agreement. But the UKRI OA policy applies to all co-authors it funds in whole or in part. This is significant. We estimate that between 30 and 40 per cent of papers that have at least one UK author do not have a UK corresponding author and therefore wouldn’t be covered by existing transformative agreements. Those co-authors risk of being left without a viable funded OA publishing route….”

 

Reflections on the new UKRI open access policy | UKSG

by Samuel A. Moore, Scholarly Communication Specialist, Office of Scholarly Communication, Cambridge University Libraries & Niamh Tumelty, Head of Open Research Services, Office of Scholarly Communication, Cambridge University Libraries

At Cambridge University Libraries’ Office of Scholarly Communication, we have been supporting Cambridge researchers to comply with a variety of open access policies for many years. The policy landscape has evolved considerably in the past decade and affects increasing numbers of UK-based researchers, not only through the Research Excellence Framework but also through Plan S and charitable funder policies. Earlier this month, UK Research & Innovation (UKRI) – the UK’s principal government research funder – released its new policy on open access relating to publications arising from UKRI-funded research. In this editorial we explore and assess some of the policy’s implications. 

Graves in 19,000 English churchyards to be mapped online | Anglicanism | The Guardian

“Graves in 19,000 churchyards in England are to be digitally mapped in a seven-year project that will be a boon to people researching family history.

The Church of England is to launch a free website next year that will eventually list every grave memorial in every churchyard in the country.

 

The ancient church of St Bega on the shores of Bassenthwaite Lake in Cumbria is the first churchyard to be scanned by surveyors using sophisticated laser equipment….”

Transformation | British Dental Journal

“The BDJ [British Dental Journal] has become what is termed a Transformative Journal (TJ)….

A TJ commits, among other things, to continuously increase the OA share each year and to ‘flip’ to full OA for primary research once a 75% threshold has been met, and to maximise take-up of the OA option by proactively promoting the benefits of OA to authors of primary research articles….

How soon the 75% OA content is reached is difficult to estimate. It is probably some years away, but the important aspect is the commitment to aim for this transformation while also continuing to develop the value of the journal both in print and online for all users.”

ALPSP Copyright Committee responds to UKRI Open Access Policy | STM Publishing News

“The ALPSP Copyright Committee is concerned that the announcement of the UKRI’s new open access policy will have a negative impact on progress made to date.  Limiting the opportunity for funded articles to publish in hybrid journals does not benefit learned society authors as it restricts their choice on where to publish.  Whilst many ALPSP members are investigating whether a transformative/transitional agreement may be a viable option, many learned societies have found that the complexities involved in setting up and maintaining these agreements can be extremely  difficult, particularly for smaller societies who may only publish a few journals.  This may inadvertently put these smaller publishers at a distinct disadvantage and result in their journals no longer being selected by UKRI funded authors.

Additionally, making hybrid journals fully gold open access may not be possible in the near future if there is insufficient gold open access content to include in these journals.  This could well lead to major economic difficulties for many learned and professional societies.  Finally, requiring the publication of Accepted Manuscripts with no embargo and under a CC BY licence fails to recognise the significant investment learned societies will have made in getting to that version, including in terms of peer review and related value added publishing services.  As an unintended consequence, this would dilute the Version of Record and slow the speed of transition towards open access, as publishers and societies would continue to recover their investment through subscriptions.  Ultimately, without significant additional funding being added to the ecosystem in the short term to cover this, we are very concerned about the impact of this new policy on the UK publishing industry generally and on learned societies in particular….”

Senior Open Access Assistant | Jobs | Imperial College London

“This is an opportunity to join the open access (OA) section of the Scholarly Communications Management team, specifically supporting the ‘green’ open access deposit workflows. 

You will be one of two Senior Open Access Assistants working with our newly appointed Institutional Repository Manager enabling College researchers and staff to make their work available on open access in the College’s repository, Spiral. With revised and new funder open access policies being implemented in response to Plan S, you will have a key role in assisting with the provision of advocacy and training related to open research.

You will also be able to get experience in providing paid-for gold open access services, assisting colleagues when necessary. This is an exciting role within the team which is working with partners inside and outside the College to develop effective solutions for open access and with opportunities for advocacy and training with different audiences across multiple campuses….”

 

Senior Open Access Assistant | Jobs | Imperial College London

“This is an opportunity to join the open access (OA) section of the Scholarly Communications Management team, specifically supporting the ‘green’ open access deposit workflows. 

You will be one of two Senior Open Access Assistants working with our newly appointed Institutional Repository Manager enabling College researchers and staff to make their work available on open access in the College’s repository, Spiral. With revised and new funder open access policies being implemented in response to Plan S, you will have a key role in assisting with the provision of advocacy and training related to open research.

You will also be able to get experience in providing paid-for gold open access services, assisting colleagues when necessary. This is an exciting role within the team which is working with partners inside and outside the College to develop effective solutions for open access and with opportunities for advocacy and training with different audiences across multiple campuses….”

 

Service Coordinator – Open research

“This is a fantastic opportunity to work within our Digital Resources directorate, focussing on open research. You will be at the centre of a product team and have a unique perspective on all areas of the team’s services. Our Open research services teams deliver services that help our members embrace the benefits of open research by removing barriers, embedding open practices and developing open infrastructure….”

Upcoming webinar on the strategic and practical implications of CDL for UK academic libraries – UK Copyright Literacy

“On Tuesday 14th September from 2-3.30pm we will be hosting a jointly run webinar with the National Acquisitions Group and ALT Copyright and Online Learning SIG. It brings together experts in the field of copyright, library leadership and collections management to discuss the latest developments in providing digital access to published content for library users under UK copyright law.

Controlled Digital Lending (CDL) has been receiving attention throughout the library and publishing communities as a potential remedy to the restrictive ebook licensing practices operated by some publishers. Libraries argue that these licensing practices undermine the balance between private interests and public access that have long been part of copyright laws, and limit the way library users get access to information and culture. CDL proposes that as long as libraries legitimately acquire physical copies of collection items, it is legal to digitise and provide access to users on a 1:1 “owned to loaned” ratio. CDL is gaining traction in the US and Canada, and IFLA has recently released a statement identifying its potential across the world….”

Academic publishers warn over UKRI Open Access impact | The Bookseller

“Academic publishers say they have concerns around funding, embargoes and timing following the announcement of the new UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Open Access policy last week….”

Only the lede is OA. 

UKRI Open Access protocols: August 2021 | Historical Transactions

“Is to publish the research article in a subscription journal and deposit EITHER the Author Accepted Manuscript OR the Version of Record (where the publisher permits) in an institutional or subject repository at the time of final publication. This loosely corresponds to Green Open Access, though whereas this has hitherto operated with an embargo period, the policy now requires immediate Open Access to the deposited article. It is worth noting that some publishers, particularly outside the UK, do not currently permit a zero embargo period: authors will need to request this, which publishers will consider on a case-by-case basis.

In addition, submissions under Route 2 must include the following text in the funding acknowledgement section of the manuscript and any cover letter / note accompanying the submission: ‘For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising’.

Importantly (and in response to input from humanities and social science stakeholders), an exemption is permitted to the CC BY licence. CC BY ND (no derivatives) may be used where this can be justified by the author….”

COPIM response to new UKRI Open Access Policy | Community-led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM)

COPIM (Community-led Publication Infrastructures for Monographs) welcomes the announcement of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)’s open access (OA) policy, which will:

include monographs, chapters & edited collections from 1 January 2024;

require the final version of a publication or accepted manuscript to be made open access via a publisher’s website, a platform or a repository, within a maximum of 12 months of publication;

and recommend Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licensing, while other Creative Commons permissions such as Attribution Non-Commercial (BY NC) and Attribution Non-Derivative (BY ND) licences are also permitted.

At COPIM, we believe that a shift to open access for academic books is not only possible, but necessary. We — together with a larger network of projects committed to community-led and not-for-profit approaches to scholarly publishing — are developing infrastructures and business models to support publishers and authors in making their long-form research output openly available without relying on embargoes or author-facing charges (otherwise known as Book Processing Charges or BPCs). These infrastructures are already supporting university and scholar-led presses to publish open access books without these constraints.

We are pleased to note that both UKRI’s summary of the responses to its consultation on the new policy and its explanation of its policy changes emphasised that COPIM is well positioned to support a transition towards open access for long-form academic work, and we look forward to doing so.undefined

The experience of our consortial partners who publish open access books is that there is a wide and deep appetite among readers for open access to long-form academic research. Furthermore, given the importance of the book to the creation and dissemination of Humanities and Social Science research, it is vital that we achieve immediate and equitable open access routes for books. The alternative is a future in which access to Humanities and Social Sciences research is limited and expensive, and these disciplines increasingly marginalised.

In this response, we would like to briefly outline how COPIM and COPIM’s consortial partners are already supporting embargo- and BPC-free open access for books, and in what ways the infrastructures and models built by COPIM will help to support other presses to do so. We would also like to outline how we feel the UKRI open access policy could be extended further, and what we would like to see from any future policies for open access books, based on our initial response to the UKRI open access consultation.

ALPSP Copyright Committee Responds to UKRI Open Access Policy

“The ALPSP Copyright Committee is concerned that the announcement of the UKRI’s new open access policy will have a negative impact on progress made to date.  Limiting the opportunity for funded articles to publish in hybrid journals does not benefit learned society authors as it restricts their choice on where to publish.  Whilst many ALPSP members are investigating whether a transformative/transitional agreement may be a viable option, many learned societies have found that the complexities involved in setting up and maintaining these agreements can be extremely  difficult, particularly for smaller societies who may only publish a few journals.  This may inadvertently put these smaller publishers at a distinct disadvantage and result in their journals no longer being selected by UKRI funded authors.

Additionally, making hybrid journals fully gold open access may not be possible in the near future if there is insufficient gold open access content to include in these journals.  This could well lead to major economic difficulties for many learned and professional societies.  Finally, requiring the publication of Accepted Manuscripts with no embargo and under a CC BY licence fails to recognise the significant investment learned societies will have made in getting to that version, including in terms of peer review and related value added publishing services.  As an unintended consequence, this would dilute the Version of Record and slow the speed of transition towards open access, as publishers and societies would continue to recover their investment through subscriptions.  Ultimately, without significant additional funding being added to the ecosystem in the short term to cover this, we are very concerned about the impact of this new policy on the UK publishing industry generally and on learned societies in particular….”