“The INKE Open Scholarship Policy Observatory collects research, tracks findings and national and international policy changes, and facilitates understanding of open social scholarship across Canada and internationally…”
From Google’s English:
“The 2022 Action Plan of the National Research Agency (ANR) is part of the 2021-2030 Research Programming Law (LPR), which consolidates ANR’s missions and strengthens its resources. , and the Plan France relaunch for 2021-2022. ANR’s annual roadmap, the Action Plan describes the actions and calls for projects proposed by the Agency for the coming year, thus giving all scientific communities and all public or private companies involved in French research, general visibility of its funding offer.”
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…”
“On July 4, 2018, Frédérique Vidal, Minister of Higher Education, Research and Innovation, launched the National Plan for Open Science on the occasion of the LIBER days, which bring together more than 400 European university libraries, in the University of Lille.
The report on the implementation of the plan published today traces the many actions carried out during these three years and is a powerful testimony to the respect of the commitments made .
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.
Substantial resources have been deployed to strengthen and perpetuate the national open archive HAL, both technically and for its governance and economic model.
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. It is about having a strategic vision on the management and openness of research data.
Several guides and recommendations for putting open science into practice in everyday research have been published.
About twenty universities and research organizations have adopted an open science policy.
France has taken its full place at European and international level to promote its vision of open science : – the National Open Science Fund has supported structuring international initiatives, such as Software Heritage, the world archive of software, or Research Data Alliance, – it plays its full part in the structuring of the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) and participates in its governance….”
A presentation regarding the Plan S rights retention strategy.
Open science or open access? Impact factor and risk for research diversity?
From Google’s English:
“The national training action “Open science: towards shared knowledge” will be held on October 19 and 20, 2021 in Meudon . Proposed by the DDOR, it is organized jointly with the Inist, the CCSD, the Renatis and Médici networks, and the CNRS data workshop.
This ANF is mainly aimed at information professionals who have a crucial role to play in supporting scientific communities in the open science movement. It is one of the stages in the implementation of the CNRS roadmap and research data plan”
From Google’s English:
“This is the objective that Inist wishes to achieve with its “? Open science thesaurus?” which has just been posted on its Loterre terminology platform ?: https://www.loterre.fr/skosmos/TSO/fr /
The terminological engineering department of Inist initiated this work by relying on existing glossaries in this field and on the open science taxonomy resulting from the FOSTER project. The terminological resource was then enriched thanks to a search of reference documents in the field.”
From Google’s English:
“Launched in July 2018 by the Minister of Higher Education, Research and Innovation, the National Plan for Open Science has three objectives: generalize open access to publications, structure and open research data , initiate a sustainable dynamic, European and international. The ministry draws up a positive assessment of these three years of mobilization, in terms of actions carried out and respect of the commitments made. (…) ”
From Google’s English:
“Open peer review is a method of peer review of scientific work that appeared with the open science movement and which offers a different model than the traditional blind peer review. There are two historical forms of blind peer review: In the simple form, the authors of an article do not know who the…”
From Google’s English:
MOOC “Open Science”
June 1, 2021
In News , Training
“Led by a mixed team from the libraries of Sorbonne University and the National Museum of Natural History, this MOOC, completely free, is primarily intended for doctoral students, especially those of the Alliance Sorbonne University. However, it will be open to everyone.
Its achievement follows the commitment made by Sorbonne University in the Charter for free access to publications , to train all its doctoral students in open science.
Scheduled for release in the fall of 2021 on the FUN (France Université Numérique) platform, all MOOC content will be under a CC-BY license and therefore freely reusable, in particular by other higher education and research institutions ”.”
From Google’s English:
“Open and unlimited access to scientific publications must be defended and developed, against commodification and privatization: this is the point of Pablo Rauzy, researcher and activist.”
From Google’s English: “THE CALL FOR PARTICIPATION AWAITS PROPOSALS ON THE FOLLOWING SUBJECTS:
The epistemological and ethical issues of observation, analysis, representation and communication on the practices of scientific communities
Methodological issues depending on whether the approaches are quantitative, qualitative or mixed
The challenges of visualizing results
The issues of reproducibility and accessibility of results (data, source code) according to legal constraints
The challenges of recounting collective practices in the context of individual observation
The challenges of receiving these surveys in their evaluative, prescriptive or even performative nature
Prescription issues in the development of applications, or any other classification solution for software or other digital services intended for scientific communities…”
From Google’s English: “The decree publishing the open data calendar for court decisions has just been published in the OJ [ 1 ] . The French pro-open data movement can triumph, even if the calendar dates were predictable for a long time …
This step in the advance of open data [ 2 ] in France inspires me with mixed feelings….”
Abstract: Abstract : This study focuses on one of the contemporary innovations linked to the economy of academic publishing: the so-called transformative agreements, a relatively circumscribed object within the relations between library consortia and academic publishers, and temporally situated between 2015 and 2020. The stated objective of this type of agreement is to organise the transition from the traditional model of subscription to journals (often proposed by thematic groupings or collections) to that of open access by reallocating the budgets devoted to it. Our sociological analysis work constitutes a first systematic study of this object, based on a review of 197 agreements. The corpus thus constituted includes agreements characterised by the co-presence of a subscription component and an open access publication component, even minimal (publication “tokens” offered, reduction on APCs, etc.). As a result, agreements that only concern centralised funding for open access publishing were excluded from the analysis, whether with publishers that only offer journals with payment by the author (PLOS, Frontiers, MDPI, etc.) or publishers whose catalogue includes open access journals. The oldest agreement in our corpus was signed in 2010, the most recent ones in 2020 – agreements starting only in 2021, even announced during the study, were not retained. Several results emerge from our analysis. First of all, there is a great diversity of actors involved with 22 countries and 39 publishers, even if some consortia (Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Germany) and publishers (CUP, Elsevier, RSC, Springer) signed many more than others. Secondly, the duration of the agreements, ranging from one to six years, reveals a very unequal distribution, with more than half of the agreements (103) signed for 3 years, and a small proportion for 4 years or more (22 agreements). Finally, despite repeated calls for transparency, less than half of the agreements (96) have an accessible text at the time of this study, with no recent trend towards greater availability. The analysis also shows widely varying degrees of openness, ranging from simple information on the ESAC directory through the provision of an open format to the allocation of a DOI and a reuse licence (CC-BY), including details of monetary amounts. Of the 96 agreements available, 47 of which were signed in 2020, 62 have been analysed in depth. To our knowledge, this is the first analysis on this scale, on a type of material that was not only unpublished, but which was previously subject to confidentiality clauses. Based on a careful reading, the study describes in detail their properties, from the materiality of the document to the financial formulas, including their morphology and all the rights and duties of the parties. We therefore analysed the content of the agreements as a collection, looking for commonalities and variations through an explicit coding of their characteristics. The study also points out some uncertainties, in particular their “transitional” character, which remains strongly debated. From a morphological point of view, the agreements show a great diversity in size (from 7 to 488 pages) and structure. Nevertheless, by definition, they both articulate two essential objects: on the one hand, the conditions for carrying out a reading of journal articles, in the form of a subscription, combining concerns of access and security; on the other hand, the modalities of open access publication, articulating the management of a new type of workflow with a whole series of possible options. These options include the scope of the journals considered (hybrid and/or open access), the licences available, the degree of obligation to publish, the eligible authors or the volume of publishable articles. One of the most important results of this in-depth analysis is the discovery of an almost complete decoupling, within the agreements themselves, between the subscription object and the publication object. Of course, subscription is systematically configured in a closed world, subject to payment, which triggers series of identification of legitimate circulations of both information content and users. In particular, it insists on prohibitions on the reuse or even copying of academic articles. On the other hand, open access publishing is attached to a world governed by free access to content, which leads to concerns about workflow management and accessibility modalities. Moreover, the different elements that make up these contractual objects are not interconnected: on one side, the readers are all members of the subscribing institutions, on the other, only the corresponding authors are concerned; the lists of journals accessible to the reader and those reserved for open access publication are usually distinct; the workflows have totally different objectives and material organisations, etc. The articulation between the two contractual objects is solely a matter of a financial distribution formula which, in addition to particular combinations between one an