Wiley’s First Open Access Agreement in Hong Kong Promotes Research Accessibility

Wiley, one of the world’s largest publishers and a global leader in research and education, today announced a new open access agreement with Joint University Librarians Advisory Committee (JULAC) in Hong Kong, starting January 1, 2023.  

Tren Publikasi Jurnal Open Access di Indonesia

Abstract:  The purpose of this research is to determine the publication trend of open access journals in Indonesia. A systematic review was used as the research method in this study. The focus of this study is to identify the themes that are most frequently discussed and discovered in studies on open access journals in Indonesia. According to the findings of this study, the most frequently discussed research themes were those concerning journal governance, marketing strategies, user perspectives, and matrices. Although several themes were discovered, the most frequently discussed theme was journal governance, specifically the challenges and problems faced by journal managers. Financing issues, journal quality, and piracy are among the challenges and issues discussed. This is due to the state of open access journals, which are still evolving in response to technological advancements.

 

New report provides insights into global OA landscape — and with a focus on China

A new report released today provides insights into the complex and evolving global Open Access landscape — and with a particular focus on China. The report is a product of a collaboration between STM Association and the China Association for Science and Technology (CAST) focused on the bilateral sharing of ideas and best practices in OA publishing.

 

OA Working Group formed in Kyrgyzstan | EIFL

“Universities in Kyrgyzstan have established an Open Access Working Group to promote open access and advance scholarly communication in universities across the country. 

Establishment of the Working Group was one of the outcomes of open access training that took place at the American University of Central Asia (AUCA) in June 2022, involving over 25 representatives from major public universities. The training, over two days, was part of a project supported by EIFL and implemented by EIFL’s partner, the Kyrgyzstan Library Information Consortium. The project was titled,‘Building a foundation for Open Access development across universities in Kyrgyzstan’. 

The Working Group comprises library directors, research officers, and administrators from universities in six regions: Osh State University, Jalal-Abad State University, Batken State University, Issyk-Kul State University, Naryn State University and Talas State University, and the capital city, Bishkek (Arabayev Kyrgyz State University; Karasayev Bishkek State University; AUCA; International Medical University and OSCE Academy)….”

CFP: Ideathon 2022 – OSSAN | Open Science South Asia Network | deadline December 30, 2022

“Open Science practices are yet to get momentum in the South Asian region. Considerable digital, technological and knowledge divides exist between and within South Asian countries. The adoption of open science practices holds a significant promise of progress for the STI ecosystem of this region. But with the promise of a better ecosystem come immense challenges as well. Developing policies for open science, investing in open science infrastructure, transforming scientific culture and incentivisation and investing in capacity building are some of the essential and primary requirements. To address the challenges of fostering an open scientific framework and culture within this region’s STI ecosystem, we are organising OSSAN IDEATHON 2022, a first-of-its-kind event that aims to invite tangible solutions to facilitate open science in the region of South Asia. Students, academics, developers, Open Science enthusiasts, practitioners, researchers, and academics from diverse academic and professional backgrounds from South Asia are invited to share their unique, creative ideas on a set of challenges to facilitate Open Science in South Asia and build a foundation for collaboration among South Asian countries through innovative projects, applications and infrastructures….”

https://www.codeforsociety.org/eventfund/calendar/ossan-ideathon

Can publishers resist self-censorship in China? | Times Higher Education (THE)

“Five years on from Cambridge University Press’ controversial compliance with a Chinese government request to make more than 300 articles unavailable to Chinese readers, publishers are increasingly self-censoring content on ‘sensitive’ topics….

The issue came to light five years ago, when it emerged in the UK’s national press that Cambridge University Press (CUP) had removed “sensitive” content from its prestigious China studies journal, China Quarterly. Since then, other publishers have faced similar accusations of bowing to pressure from Beijing. Springer Nature has restricted access to more than 1,000 articles, while Taylor & Francis, Sage Publishing and Brill have navigated strict content restrictions.

Although some publishers have found routes to navigate these restrictions without self-censoring their online platforms, others appear to be more deeply enmeshed in China’s censorship apparatus – and in recent years, the access constraints facing so-called controversial papers have gone much further than many believe, straying beyond familiar red-flag topics on an unprecedented scale.

By comparing UK-based and China-based IP addresses and the content discrepancies between the two, I’ve managed to gain some handle on the scale of publication data that is now inaccessible in China. My analysis suggests that more than 28,000 records of publication have been suppressed on publisher platforms accessible by Chinese scholars or the public….”

 

Can publishers resist self-censorship in China? | Times Higher Education (THE)

“Five years on from Cambridge University Press’ controversial compliance with a Chinese government request to make more than 300 articles unavailable to Chinese readers, publishers are increasingly self-censoring content on ‘sensitive’ topics….

The issue came to light five years ago, when it emerged in the UK’s national press that Cambridge University Press (CUP) had removed “sensitive” content from its prestigious China studies journal, China Quarterly. Since then, other publishers have faced similar accusations of bowing to pressure from Beijing. Springer Nature has restricted access to more than 1,000 articles, while Taylor & Francis, Sage Publishing and Brill have navigated strict content restrictions.

Although some publishers have found routes to navigate these restrictions without self-censoring their online platforms, others appear to be more deeply enmeshed in China’s censorship apparatus – and in recent years, the access constraints facing so-called controversial papers have gone much further than many believe, straying beyond familiar red-flag topics on an unprecedented scale.

By comparing UK-based and China-based IP addresses and the content discrepancies between the two, I’ve managed to gain some handle on the scale of publication data that is now inaccessible in China. My analysis suggests that more than 28,000 records of publication have been suppressed on publisher platforms accessible by Chinese scholars or the public….”

 

Crimson Interactive (Enago) acquires The Charlesworth Group, creating a powerhouse in China’s publishing ecosystem | SSP Society for Scholarly Publishing

“The acquisition provides the Charlesworth Group and Enago with the scope to build solutions to successfully address researcher and publisher challenges, in particular, assisting publishers to navigate the transition towards Open Access in China.”

How to move open science from the periphery to the centre

“There have been a number of projects, primarily with a bottom-up approach, designed to promote the importance of open science among the academic sector and to increase public understanding of open science.

The Association of Vietnam’s Universities and Colleges (AVUC) was one of the first organisations to actively promote open science and open education. Over the past 10 years, a team of open science and education experts at AVUC led by Le Trung Nghia has held over 100 training workshops and seminars to teach junior faculty members and librarians about the global movement toward open science and education and how to take advantage of it. At the moment, AVUC is in charge of a website that focuses on sharing and promoting open science and open education to the wider community. Another high-profile initiative is a research group at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Social Research at Phenikaa University in Hanoi, which has launched an open database on Vietnam’s social scientists for public use….”

Pioneering OA agreement in Asia signed between Springer Nature and Japanese universities | Corporate Affairs Homepage

Springer Nature has agreed the largest Transformative Agreement in Japan with 10 institutions participating in an innovative pilot. This will see nearly 900 articles published OA in the coming year, marking a significant step forward to Open Science in the region.  

 

Oxford University Press unveils landmark Read and Publish deal in Japan | Oxford University Press

The world’s largest university press­, Oxford University Press (OUP), has today announced a transformative three-year Read and Publish agreement with major journals consortium, the Japan Alliance of University Library Consortia for E-Resources (JUSTICE).

GBIF – Open Science & Data Use – Chulalongkorn University

“The Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, and the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) cordially invites all to attend “The Asia Regional Engagement meeting and Symposium on Open Science & Data Use” on November 22-23, 2022, from 09.00 – 17.00 hrs. at Room 801, Chaloem Rajakumari 60 Building (Chamchuri 10) Chulalongkorn University. The event aims to demonstrate the benefits brought about by a global open biodiversity data infrastructure such as GBIF to local and regional economies….”

Kahn | Open Access with Chinese Characteristics: Understanding Recent History and Current Practice via Qualitative Interviews at a Large Chinese Research University | Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication

Abstract:  Chinese scholars, administrators, and librarians possess nuanced understandings of what defines open access in China and the barriers that make wider adoption of open access difficult. When we say “open access” in the United States, we imply a complex set of underlying assumptions tied to the history and practice of scholarship. Saying “open access” in China brings with it a similarly complex set of assumptions, which may not be commensurate with the “open access” we speak of, and such 1:1 translation may not be possible or desirable given the unique historical, political, and linguistic differences between the world’s two largest producers and consumers of scholarship. Through a careful analysis of our participants’ observations and a review of the history and context of Chinese academic institutions, we posit that “open access with Chinese characteristics” describes a set of possibilities and constraints that determine how Chinese academics experience both the theoretical project and the practical distribution method we commonly call “open access.” While these multiple understandings of “open access” may not converge on a single, shared meaning, we can endeavor to understand one another better in the service of creating and sharing knowledge.

 

Global impact or national accessibility? A paradox in China’s science | SpringerLink

Abstract:  During the past decades, Chinese science policy has emphasized the international dissemination of research. Such policies were associated with exponential growth of English-language publications and have led China to become the largest contributor to international scientific literature. However, due to the paywalls and language barriers, China’s international publications are less accessible to local Chinese scholars, which suggests that the dissemination to the international scientific community may come at the expense of dissemination to the local Chinese community. This paper investigates the local accessibility of China’s international publications and finds that publishing internationally limits the visibility of Chinese research for the national Chinese scientific community, and the restriction is even worse for immediate access.