Guest Post – APC Waiver Policies; A Job Half-done? – The Scholarly Kitchen

“Most, if not all, open access publishers offer to waive publication charges (of whatever flavor) for researchers in lower and middle-income countries (LMICs) without access to funds to pay them. After all, no-one wants to see open access actually increasing barriers and reducing diversity and inclusion in direct opposition to one of its fundamental objectives. However, as an echo of the “build it and they will come” mentality, waiver policies may end up failing to achieve their intended outcome if they are poorly constructed and communicated to their intended beneficiaries. A recent study by INASP revealed that fully 60% of respondents to an AuthorAID survey had paid Article Processing Charges (APCs) from their own pockets, despite the widespread availability of waivers. This could be due to internal organizational bureaucracy but more likely to the lack of awareness and understanding of APC waivers and how to claim them.

A White Paper published jointly by STM and Elsevier’s International Center for the Study of Research in September 2020 on how to achieve an equitable transition to open access included a specific recommendation to make publisher policies on APC waivers more consistent and more transparent. The authors commented, “Even though this business model may turn out to be an interim step on the road to universal open access, it is likely to persist for several years to come and may unwittingly end up preventing much important research from reaching its intended audience.”…”

Negotiating Open Access Journal Agreements: An Academic Library Case Study

 

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented an opportunity for academic libraries to advance open access (OA) to scholarly articles. Awareness among faculty on the importance of OA has increased significantly during the pandemic, as colleges and universities struggle financially and seek sustainable access to high-quality scholarly journals. Consortia have played an important role in establishing negotiation principles on OA journal agreements. While the number of OA agreements is increasing, case studies involving individual libraries are still limited. This paper reviews existing literature on publisher negotiation principles related to OA journal negotiations and reflects on recent cases at an academic library in Pennsylvania, in order to identify best practices in OA journal negotiations. It provides recommendations on roles, relationships, and processes, as well as essential terms of OA journal agreements. This study’s findings are most relevant to large academic libraries that are interested in negotiating with scholarly journal publishers independently or through consortia.

PID Strategy of Dutch Research Council (NWO) – PID Best Practices – The PID Forum

“The Dutch Research Council (NWO) has published its Persistent Identifier (PID) strategy to improve its capacity for analysing the impact of research. In the Persistent Identifier (PID) strategy NWO describes how it will gradually implement PIDs in the coming years. PIDs are an increasingly important component of scholarly communication because of the increased digitisation of research. They ensure that research is findable and contribute to save researchers time and effort.

The NWO PID strategy can be summarised by the following five recommendations:

Implement ORCID ID for researchers into grant application, peer review, and project reporting workflows.
Implement Crossref Grant ID in grant application and project reporting workflows.
Implement research organisation IDs in grant application and project reporting workflows.
Contribute to shaping the national PID landscape by participating in the ORCID-NL consortium and in a future PID Advisory Board.
Collaborate with other funders in the international PID landscape, for instance within the context of Science Europe….”

Analyzing Education Data with Open Science Best Practices, R, and OSF | OER Commons

“Overview: The webinar features Dr. Joshua Rosenberg from the University of Tennessee, Knoxville and Dr. Cynthia D’Angelo from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign discussing best practices examples for using R. They will present: a) general strategies for using R to analyze educational data and b) accessing and using data on the Open Science Framework (OSF) with R via the osfr package. This session is for those both new to R and those with R experience looking to learn more about strategies and workflows that can help to make it possible to analyze data in a more transparent, reliable, and trustworthy way.”

Introducing Jisc’s new university press toolkit | Jisc

“The 2017 landscape study of New University Presses (NUPs) and academic-led publishing, Changing publishing ecologies (pdf), found that a growing number of universities and academics have set up their own mission-based presses in an attempt establish autonomy from the large legacy publishing houses.

One of the recommendations of that report was to create a best practice toolkit to assist with the planning and establishment of new university and library-led presses publishing open access material.

In March 2021, Jisc launched a toolkit that will support new and existing university and library open access publishing ventures. The toolkit was developed with the input from an international editorial advisory board consisting of university presses from Liverpool, Stockholm, Westminster, White Rose and University College London and other experts in the field.

This webinar will discuss the aims and objectives of the toolkit, including a short walkthrough. This will be followed by a panel session featuring members of the editorial advisory board and a Q&A session….”

2i2c: Interactive computing infrastructure for your community

“We make interactive computing more accessible and powerful for research and education. We strive to accelerate research and discovery, and to empower education to be more accessible, intuitive, and enjoyable. We do this through these primary actions: …”

The Customer Right to Replicate | 2i2c

“To ensure the Right to Replicate to our customers, 2i2c makes the following commitments to infrastructure we build and operate:

We MUST use only open source software to run our infrastructure. By only using software that is available to everyone on the same terms, we can ensure that customers can replicate the infrastructure without having to negotiate licensing terms with proprietary software vendors. In addition, any changes we make to open source software will be made in public and/or contributed upstream, so customers continue to have access to them regardless of where their infrastructure is.

We MUST NOT directly depend on proprietary cloud vendor specific products or APIs. Instead, we use cloud-managed open source software, or hide the dependency behind a layer of abstraction. This ensures that customers can port their infrastructure to any cloud provider of their choice, or run it on their own hardware with purely open source software.

This set of commitments acts as a business continuity plan for our customers, ensuring 2i2c will follow best practices within the open source, open education and open research ecosystems….”

Report published: OPERAS-P and OASPA workshop on innovative business models for OA books – OASPA

“Together with OPERAS, OASPA is hosting a series of three workshops on business models for open access books targeted specifically at small and medium-sized academic book publishers. These workshops are part of the OPERAS-P project work package 6 (Innovation), looking into innovative, non-bpc, business models to create a sustainable infrastructure for open access book publishing in Europe*. Feedback gathered in the course of these three workshops will inform a report on innovative business models for OA books and will be published by the end of June 2021 as an OPERAS-P project result.

The first of the three events took place on April 7th, for which we invited six publishers from Finland, Croatia, Italy, Germany and the United Kingdom to present their business models for open access book publishing. Each of these publishers shared their experiences and insights with an emphasis on Revenue, Costs, Legal Affairs and Workflows (Production and Distribution). …”

Joint Position Statement on “Data Repository Selection – Criteria That Matter” | Zenodo

Abstract:  Over the past three years, “Data Repository Selection-Criteria That Matter” – “a set of criteria for the identification and selection of those data repositories that accept research data submissions” – were developed by a group of publishers facilitated by the FAIRsharing initiative. Throughout this time, a large number of organizations and individuals have formulated responses and expressed concern about the criteria and the process through which the criteria were developed. Collectively, our organizations consider that the “Data Repository: Selection Criteria that Matter” recommendations – as currently conceived – will act as an impediment to achieving these aims. As such, we are issuing this Joint Position Statement to highlight the community’s concerns and request that the authors of these criteria respond with specific actions.

 

Digital guide: working with open licences | The National Lottery Heritage Fund

“The National Lottery Heritage Fund’s licensing requirement supports open access to the rich heritage in the UK and the exciting possibilities of digital transformation in the cultural sector. All materials created or digitised with grant funding are subject to this requirement, which was updated in September 2020.

Open licences and public domain dedications are tools that give the public permission to use materials typically protected by copyright and other laws….

This guide explains open licensing and provides a step-by-step approach to the open licensing requirement for each stage of your project.

It is aimed at The National Lottery Heritage Fund applicants and grantees but contains useful information for anyone who supports open access to cultural heritage….”