Thesen zur Zukunft des wissenschaftsgeleiteten Open-Access-Publizierens · Community

From Google’s English:  “These theses were developed by the members of the program committee in advance of the conference. They can be discussed in advance and form a topic of discussion at the conference. The aim is to further develop the theses at the conference with the participants. Following the conference, these theses will be published in a revised form.

Thesis 1: Overcome the strategic void

Science-led publication infrastructures require support through an overarching, large-scale strategy. Only a high-profile initiative can guarantee science policy support and the necessary funding commitments and thus strengthen digital sovereignty in science.

Thesis 2: Take diversity of financing and business models into account

Science-led publication infrastructures require different financing and business models depending on the community in order to meet the needs of the respective communities. 

Thesis 3: Strengthen libraries as publication service providers

Science-led publication infrastructures require professional operation. Libraries are predestined to take an active role as publication service providers for science. Publication infrastructures in libraries should be systematically expanded.

Thesis 4: Ensure quality, apply standards 

Science-led publication infrastructures are required to ensure the quality of the content of publications through quality assurance procedures recognized in the respective subject in the spirit of good scientific practice. Assuring formal and technical quality should be implemented by applying open publishing standards for publications and processes.

Thesis 5: Strengthen collaboration with specialist communities

Science-led publication infrastructures need to be firmly anchored in scientific communities and their organizational structures. The cooperation must be participatory. Libraries are required to interact significantly more with specialist communities and to proactively design services for science.

Thesis 6: Promote experiments and innovations

Science-led publication infrastructures have the potential to innovatively design scientific publishing as a field of experimentation. The open-ended testing of new publication formats and the further development of processes, standards and collaborations must be encouraged. 

Thesis 7: Ensure sustainability

Science-led publication infrastructures require sustainable financing and business models. In addition to clear organizational integration, the publication infrastructures require a precisely defined mission statement and the commitment of the supporting organization.

Thesis 8: Orient infrastructures towards the common good 

Science-led publication infrastructures should act with a focus on the common good and design their activities on the basis of the principles and values ??of the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. 

Thesis 9: Enter into new collaborations

Science-led publication infrastructures under academic sponsorship should pursue new cooperation models and act across institutional boundaries so that their visibility and that of their publications increase. Cooperations with external service providers can also make sense if governance is ensured in the spirit of science.

Thesis 10: Implement open science as a paradigm

Science-led publication infrastructures should enable the publishing of texts, data, software and other materials and support their recognition in research evaluation. To this end, they must, wherever possible, be documented openly, machine-readable in accordance with the FAIR principles and made available sustainably….”

Is sustainability research the victim or saviour of a broken academic publishing system? | Impact of Social Sciences

“Is sustainability research broken? A recent opinion piece suggests so, claiming that up to 50% of published sustainability research is ‘scholarly bullshit’. Although being critical of contemporary publishing culture and advocating scientific rigour should be encouraged, is this really a solution? Dismissing half of an entire research stream as ‘bullshit’ based on unclear methodology contributes to cultivating homogeneity and elitism in academia, which is known to be highly exclusive. Rather than shaming scholars and their work, we advocate for a more nuanced and constructive debate on the systemic causes for the current crisis in academic research and publishing….

Much as society must phase out fossil fuels and radically engage in sustainability transformations, so must research find ways phase out of for-profit publishing and quantitative performance metrics….

Central to this final point is the creation and support of non-profit open-access journals that focus on high-quality research, rather than quantity. Such platforms could help both level and widen the academic playing field. Researchers and academic institutions can support non-profit, open-access journals in many ways. For instance, they can make public statements in favour of ethical and non-profit publishing or peer-review systems, withdraw free peer-review or editing labour from commercial journals, include the journal’s business model and publication ethics as criteria when deciding where to submit a paper, and discuss switching to ethical publishing with existing journal owners….”

Advocates for Open Access!

“Vital Partnerships between libraries and publishers in an Open Access landscape: new initiatives, new business models and a glimpse into the future.

After the success of the first two De Gruyter 2023 quarterly webinars, we are proud to announce that Webinar 3 will take place on 28th September, beginning at 2 pm UK time. By popular demand, it will follow on from Webinar 1, to explore further aspects of Open Access. Webinar 3 will focus on the recent American OSTP “Nelson memo”; emerging OA business models, focusing especially on Subscribe-to-Open and why it has become one of the most popular Open Access models; consider where Open Access now stands on the global stage, the long-term financial sustainability of OA models; and how best to reduce inequities in scholarly publishing, particularly for authors in resource-limited contexts. Join us to discuss these and other issues arising in adapting to the changing publishing landscape of Open Access. This is the third in the De Gruyter webinar series 2023: Challenging the Status Quo: Taking Libraries into the Future….”

Assessing Open Education Resources Programs – Ithaka S+R

“Today we are excited to announce that Ithaka S+R is embarking on a one-year research project, funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, to assess the impact and implementation of open educational resources (OER) programs at public institutions of higher education. Through the project, we will develop a framework to guide sustainable OER adoption and implementation.

At their core, OER initiatives aim to increase student learning outcomes by reducing costs. Our project aims to explore how OER strategies have evolved to meet the needs of faculty and students. In particular, we will develop a holistic framework to assess the impact of OER programs and the challenges they face, paying particular attention to faculty perspectives, student learning outcomes, and equity and digital equity.

Drawing on lessons from the broader literature on teaching and learning initiatives in higher education, the project is guided by the following research questions:

To what extent are postsecondary higher education institutions concerned with sustaining open education initiatives?
What attributes do successful OER initiatives share?
How can institutions move from pilot to wider adoption?
What factors contribute to or inhibit the sustainability of new initiatives in postsecondary institutions? …”

Creating an Open-source Hardware Ecosystem for Research and Sustainable Development | Zenodo

“At the core of education, engineering, and science lies the quest to better understand and improve the world. This document aims to explain the essential role of open-source hardware for this mission and why it should be considered an essential pillar of the ongoing open science programmes in Dutch Universities.

Open-source hardware is hardware whose design is made publicly available so that anyone can study, modify, distribute, make, and sell the design or other hardware and products based on that design. Ideally, the design of open source hardware is available in the preferred format for making modifications and uses widely available components and materials, standard processes, open infrastructure, unrestricted content, and open-source design tools to maximize the ability of other individuals to make and use hardware. Open-source hardware gives people the freedom to control their technology while sharing knowledge and encouraging commerce through the open exchange of (compatible) designs.

Open Science practices are becoming the norm in academia, and are rightly encouraged by funders and policymakers of higher education. Open-source hardware is an essential pillar of Open Science. Sharing hardware designs openly both enables more people and teams to access it, and through encouraging replication it makes science more reproducible. But it is also an area of contention because of the exclusive knowledge transfer practices and (not always justified) confidentiality clauses in research partnerships or contract defaults. 

Beyond academia, open hardware has the potential to radically transform science, education, and society by facilitating collaborative innovation and democratizing access to technology. It can massively accelerate the transition of an invention into a useful product, and simultaneously reduce costs and promote sustainable practices. By promoting open-source hardware initiatives, the Netherlands can solidify its position as a leader in Open Science and contribute to the global effort of achieving the sustainable development goals.”

[2308.14953] An Open Community-Driven Model For Sustainable Research Software: Sustainable Research Software Institute

Abstract:  Research software plays a crucial role in advancing scientific knowledge, but ensuring its sustainability, maintainability, and long-term viability is an ongoing challenge. To address these concerns, the Sustainable Research Software Institute (SRSI) Model presents a comprehensive framework designed to promote sustainable practices in the research software community. This white paper provides an in-depth overview of the SRSI Model, outlining its objectives, services, funding mechanisms, collaborations, and the significant potential impact it could have on the research software community. It explores the wide range of services offered, diverse funding sources, extensive collaboration opportunities, and the transformative influence of the SRSI Model on the research software landscape

Who’s afraid of open infrastructures? | Research Information

“Joanna Ball, Yvonne Campfens and Tasha Mellins-Cohen underline the importance of non-profit infrastructure and standards bodies…

both COUNTER and DOAJ are essential components of the knowledge ecosystem – but new challenges arise and new organisations are needed to help meet them. In 2018 the idea for the OA Switchboard ( was conceived to allow publishers, libraries and research funders to easily share information about OA publications throughout the publication journey, synchronising data from a multitude of systems and processes that would otherwise have to be manually connected within each separate organisation.

What do these organisations have in common? We are all owned and led by our community, and we’re not for sale or for profit. We are foundational open infrastructure and standards bodies, operating behind the scenes with low budgets and limited staffing – none of us have salespeople, marketing teams, exhibition budgets or in-house technology support. We collaborate with one another and with bigger bodies like Crossref, ORCID and NISO to create the foundations on which much scholarly infrastructure relies.


And foundations is absolutely the right word: scholarly communications is an exciting and innovative space with new commercial and non-commercial services springing up almost daily. We deliver value through open infrastructure, data and standards, and naturally services and tools have been built by commercial and not-for-profit groups that capitalise on our open, interoperable data and services – many of which you are likely to recognise and may use on a regular basis….”

Queen’s and the Tri-Agency’s Update to National Open Access Policy | Queen’s University Library

“As Canada moves to follow the open access example set by Europe and the USA, questions about financial sustainability and equity must be addressed.

On June 4th, 2023, Canada’s federal research granting agencies announced a review of the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications*, with the goal of requiring immediate open and free access to all academic publications generated through Tri-Agency supported research by the end of 2025. At Queen’s, this will mean significant changes to relevant policies and processes, primarily related to navigating the pay-to-publish model currently dominating the publishing landscape in the form of article processing charges (APCs).

APCs are extra fees that authors pay to academic publishers to make their articles openly available rather than barriered behind paywalls. Academic publishers are increasingly embracing this pay-to-publish business model, making the cost of open access publishing prohibitively expensive for many authors. APC fees vary by publisher and journal and can range from less than $1,000 USD to over $11,000 USD. Estimates indicate that Canadian authors spent at least $27.6 million USD on APCs related to Tri-Agency funded work from 2015 to 2018. This is in addition to the millions of dollars spent annually by academic libraries to provide access to paywalled articles, sometimes in the same journals in which the APC-paid open access articles appear. There are ongoing questions and concerns about not only the financial sustainability of academic publishers’ APC-driven business model, but the potential of this model for creating and reinforcing global inequities to the detriment of authors, libraries, and academic institutions.  Ensuring open, accessible, and sustainable scholarly publishing is all the more urgent given Queen’s University’s strongly established commitment to advancing the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals including ensuring equal access to university education and strengthening protection and safeguards for the world’s cultural and natural heritage.

While the University does not currently fund individual author APC fees, it does support open access through other means, including publishing agreements with select publishers, support for open infrastructure like Open Journal Systems and QSpace, and membership and participation in provincial, national, and international bodies promoting and supporting sustainable open access….”

Cultivating sustainable in-house scholarly publishing programs: Community conversation PT 2

“Gaynor Redvers-Mutton, Associate Director of Business Development and Sales at the Biochemical Society, and Maxine Aldred, Director of Publications Production at the American Society of Civil Engineers, respond to the questions:

What factors do you consider essential for scholarly societies and institutes to sustainably operate in-house publishing programs like yours?
How is your team working to increase publishing efficiencies, promote research equity, and provide more value to the academy?…

We acknowledge that the scientific communities must adapt to changing scholarly norms and develop new dissemination models that address open and equitable access. However, this must be done in a way that preserves the scholarly value of the peer-reviewed version of research. This must be fixed at the time of publication without any possibility of historical rewriting –– meaning that the original work cannot be altered by the author or anyone else. ASCE also believes that learned societies, acting in accordance with their educational mission, should be able to recover their costs of investing in managing the peer review process, editing, publishing, disseminating, and maintaining an ever-growing archive in perpetuity.”

Costs of scientific journals have reached unsustainable level – The future of subscriptions in jeopardy – FinELib

“Publishers are demanding increasingly higher fees for reading scientific journals and open access publishing, even though the scientific community can’t sustain even the current costs. The expenses have risen to a level that doesn’t correspond to the benefits received from the services….

The consortium is prepared that if the goals are not achieved, it’s possible that not all current scientific journal agreements can be continued….”


No-pay publishing: use institutional repositories

“The European Council’s recommended open, equitable and sustainable scholarly publishing system, free to readers and authors, has been dismissed as unsustainable and too costly (see Nature; 2023). However, institutional repositories run by research institutions offer an inexpensive and sustainable route to realizing this aspiration.

Such non-profit repositories are ubiquitous and capable of hosting ‘diamond’ open-access academic journals, which are free to publish and to read. In Spain, for example, the journal Psicológica is owned by the Spanish Society for Experimental Psychology and published on DIGITAL.CSIC, the institutional repository of the Spanish National Research Council (see

Transferred in 2022 from a commercial publisher, Psicológica publishes about 50 articles, preprints and peer reviews annually. Publication costs are shared between the journal — which is financially supported by the society — and the publicly funded repository, which provides services such as archiving, DOI assignation and metadata curation. At an estimated cost of €30 (US$34) per publication, Psicológica can increase its output without incurring substantial extra costs. This underscores the sustainability of such models.”

BishopBlog: Is Hindawi “well-positioned for revitalization?”

“Over the past year, special issues of dozens of Hindawi journals have been exposed as being systematically manipulated, resulting in the delisting of more than 20 Hindawi journals from major journal databases, as well as the retraction of more than 2,700 papers by the publisher. This “unexpected event” at Hindawi also led to a slump in profits for the parent company, John Wiley & Sons. However, in a recent statement, the president, CEO & director of Wiley, Brian Napack, stated that Hindawi was now ready for revitalization and reinstatement of the special issue program. In my opinion, Wiley has not dealt adequately with the integrity issues that led to the problem, but appears focused on growth  through the medium of special issues. This raises questions as to whether Hindawi’s operation is sustainable in the long term. …”

The rebel, the professor, and the entrepreneur: Qualitative study to explore creator stories of FOAM – Zuckerman – 2023 – AEM Education and Training – Wiley Online Library

Abstract:  Introduction

The free open access medical education (#FOAMed, or FOAM) movement creates educational content intended to inform medical education and clinical practice and is distributed in an unrestricted fashion (e.g., open access website). The who, what, and in particular the how of FOAM has raised important questions about the sustainability of the movement.


We recruited a diverse research team that included educational researchers, FOAM contributors, a business academician, and medical trainees to design and conduct a qualitative study exploring the work of FOAM creators. We analyzed the transcripts of interviews with 11 participants from top FOAM websites in emergency medicine and critical care. The team met frequently to iteratively identify and discuss emergent themes (major and minor) until saturation of concepts was achieved.


Creators of FOAM could be categorized using three archetypes: the rebel, the professor, and the entrepreneur. The rebel was categorized as distinctly rejecting “traditional academic structures” yet was compelled to deliver educational content via alternative routes. The professor retained a traditional academic role, instead creating FOAM to supplement academic activities (teaching courses, disseminating scholarship, promotion). Entrepreneurs focused on creating a sustainable entity in an effort to supplement their income and reduce clinical obligations.


While all FOAM creators appear unified in their passion to create, promote, and distribute educational material with unfettered access to educators, their motivations for creating content could be differentiated. Given the grassroots nature of FOAM, creators share concerns related to financing, time commitments, and threats to sustainability of these businesses. The longevity of FOAM and what business models are best suited to support them are uncertain. Further exploration of the implications could investigate the best ways to engage with and support the different FOAM creator archetypes and develop models of sustainability.

eBook Pledge: Making eBook markets sustainable for the long term – Knowledge Rights 21

“Publishers: We ask that you sign up to the pledge.

Libraries and Consortia: We ask that you adopt these principles in your negotiations with publishers.

Authors: We ask that you adopt these principles in your negotiations and discussions with publishers….

The pledge has been prepared in the context of the Knowledge Rights 21 Programme with the engagement of the Authors Alliance and Library Futures. We are organisations that work to promote constructive relationships and the upholding of mutual interests between libraries and publishers in the eBook space, as well as to uphold the interest authors have in reaching new readers….”

USRN Best Practices WG Interest Form

“Following the release of USRN’s Desirable Characteristics for Digital Publication Repositories, USRN will identify and develop best practices to provide more detailed guidance to support movement toward the desirable characteristics. The Best Practices Working Group (BPWG) will divide into subgroups based on expertise to define best practices in a given area. To begin, USRN is seeking BPWG members with expertise or interest in accessibility, persistent identifiers, preservation, and sustainability but welcomes all expressions of interest….”