RLUK issues Content Statement in support of libraries reviewing new and renewed content purchasing – Research Libraries UK

“If we do not see concrete action towards the requirements listed below, RLUK member libraries will be forced to cancel valuable resources. We want to work productively with our closest partners, publishers and content suppliers, to develop sustainable business models which work for all stakeholders….

We require:

Reductions in annual subscription costs, not increases or price freezes. This supports the Jisc and Universities UK joint call for publishers to reduce their fees to maintain access to essential teaching and learning materials.

The combined cost of the read and publish elements of transitional deals to result in a reduction on existing subscription expenditure. This supports Jisc’s requirements for transitional OA agreements. It is no longer acceptable to base transitional agreement costs on both uplifted historical subscriptions expenditure and historical APC expenditure, without constraining or reducing costs going forwards.

A permanent move away from historic print spend underpinning the pricing of large subscription packages. We expect fairer and more innovative pricing models which reflect the current scholarly communications and budgetary landscapes.

More flexibility in content selection and a permanent move away from the outdated ‘big deal’ model. Tying valuable content up in large packages has been incredibly damaging to library budgets and collections.

All multiyear deals to have clear, no-penalty opt-out clauses which can be invoked 30 days before the renewal date. Notice periods for resource cancellations should also always be 30 days, rather than 60 or 90 days….”

RLUK issues Content Statement in support of libraries reviewing new and renewed content purchasing – Research Libraries UK

“If we do not see concrete action towards the requirements listed below, RLUK member libraries will be forced to cancel valuable resources. We want to work productively with our closest partners, publishers and content suppliers, to develop sustainable business models which work for all stakeholders….

We require:

Reductions in annual subscription costs, not increases or price freezes. This supports the Jisc and Universities UK joint call for publishers to reduce their fees to maintain access to essential teaching and learning materials.

The combined cost of the read and publish elements of transitional deals to result in a reduction on existing subscription expenditure. This supports Jisc’s requirements for transitional OA agreements. It is no longer acceptable to base transitional agreement costs on both uplifted historical subscriptions expenditure and historical APC expenditure, without constraining or reducing costs going forwards.

A permanent move away from historic print spend underpinning the pricing of large subscription packages. We expect fairer and more innovative pricing models which reflect the current scholarly communications and budgetary landscapes.

More flexibility in content selection and a permanent move away from the outdated ‘big deal’ model. Tying valuable content up in large packages has been incredibly damaging to library budgets and collections.

All multiyear deals to have clear, no-penalty opt-out clauses which can be invoked 30 days before the renewal date. Notice periods for resource cancellations should also always be 30 days, rather than 60 or 90 days….”

OA Switchboard demonstration – Research Libraries UK

“On 27 July 2020, the RLUK OAPP Group hosted a webinar demonstration of the OA Switchboard initiative. The demonstration was led by Yvonne Campfens, Project Manager of OA Switchboard.

The OA Switchboard initiative is a not-for-profit collaboration between funders, institutions and publishers. The OA Switchboard is a central information exchange hub, connecting parties and systems, streamlining the neutral exchange of OA related publication-level information.

This initiative is currently being overseen by Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). When the OA Switchboard moves to an operational stage, following a successful 2020 project, a sustainable governance structure and funding model will be in place….”

OA Switchboard demonstration – Research Libraries UK

“On 27 July 2020, the RLUK OAPP Group hosted a webinar demonstration of the OA Switchboard initiative. The demonstration was led by Yvonne Campfens, Project Manager of OA Switchboard.

The OA Switchboard initiative is a not-for-profit collaboration between funders, institutions and publishers. The OA Switchboard is a central information exchange hub, connecting parties and systems, streamlining the neutral exchange of OA related publication-level information.

This initiative is currently being overseen by Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). When the OA Switchboard moves to an operational stage, following a successful 2020 project, a sustainable governance structure and funding model will be in place….”

Digital shift manifesto – Research Libraries UK

“Digital technologies heavily impact society, higher education and the workplace. As information service providers, research libraries are particularly affected by these changes. This manifesto outlines what actions the community of Research Libraries in the UK (RLUK) proposes to undertake to be ready for the next decade of the Digital Shift, building on work already underway across the sector. It is an open invitation to other organisations and communities, whether from the library sector or not, to work with us. Research libraries are strongly positioned to lead and influence the effective exploitation of digital technologies within their institutions, and we are keen to unlock the potential which the Digital Shift offers.

Twenty years ago, print journals and card catalogues were still featured in research libraries. Today, scholarly journals are (largely) electronic, with discovery and access often bypassing library catalogues. Open science and digital research are actively supported in many libraries. Twenty years from now, subscription-funded access may be the exception and library catalogues could well have ceased to exist as distinct entities as research will be built on new workflows and platforms. To prepare for these developments, research libraries need a programme of change for the coming decade….”

‘Researchers: stop signing away your copyright’ | Research Information

“The fundamental problem is we’re in this period of transition from the print to the digital, and also between closed and open access. Those two axes of change are causing a huge amount of pain and uncertainty for everybody in the system, for the library community, for publishers, and for researchers and funders. 

For the library community there’s increased demands on funding, and the transition to open access is taking a long time. While the UK has been pushing ahead with moving towards open access both in green through the REF policy and through gold, we’re still paying the same very large amounts in subscriptions for big deals. Then there are issues around ensuring compliance of funder mandates, and there’s a lot of effort going into monitoring compliance. While we’re still in this mixed model you’re still having to do all the old stuff you did 10 years ago, but you also have this additional burden.

There are also problems with the ebook models, there’s a bit of a wild west out there of different business models. Letting a thousand flowers bloom is all very lovely and encourages innovation, but there comes a point where it causes a huge amount of confusion and angst. Then there’s still the whole discussion about the appetite and practicalities of open access for academic monographs – how we make that transition, who funds it….”

REF open-access requirement for books ‘worth the outlay’ | Times Higher Education (THE)

As preparations for the 2021 research excellence framework continue apace, UK-based academics could be forgiven for pushing the 2027 assessment to the back of their minds for now.

However, one specific element of the plans for the REF after next has been triggering lively debate in recent weeks: the proposed extension of open-access requirements for submitted outputs to include long-form scholarly works and monographs.

Taylor & Francis scraps extra charges after university protests | The Bookseller

“Taylor & Francis has backtracked over plans to charge extra for access to older research papers online, after more than 110 universities signed a letter of protest.

The latest renewal of UK universities’ deal with the publisher, which is yet to be signed, only covers papers published in the last 20 years, reported Times Higher Education. Research released before this would have to be bought in a separate package by university.

The 20-year span of papers included in the main deal would have moved forward in time with each year. This would mean the archive would increase and costs would escalate further as researchers attempted to access papers from 1997 onwards, described by academics as the beginning of the born digital record. 

In an open letter dated 13th February, head librarians from more than 110 UK and Irish institutions, as well as representatives from Research Libraries UK, the Society of College, National and University Libraries (Sconul), and the Irish Universities Association, urged Taylor & Francis to drop the extra charges.

“A “moving wall” approach for non-subscribed titles within the journal package will increase administration activities and costs substantially for libraries and for Taylor & Francis, impose direct additional licensing costs, and create confusion and annoyance for your customers and our reader communities,” the letter reads….”