Open Access Mandates in Universities: Challenges and Opportunities

“An Open Access mandate refers to a policy adopted by a funder, institution or the government which necessitates researchers to make their research articles public. This can be done via two routes: Green OA or Gold OA. The former refers to the researcher depositing her research article to an open access repository, generally institutional. The latter refers to submission of research to open access journals?—?some of which may levy Article Processing Charges (APCs) that can be paid by the researcher, his institution or from the research grant.

Universities that have adopted OA mandates include Harvard University (the first to do so), MIT, ETH Zurich, University of Liege and University College London. Harvard University has also developed a model policy language document for institutions looking to implement an open access policy for their faculty….”

Open-Access-Policy, Freie Universität Berlin

As part of its commitment to open access to scientific information and as a signatory of the “Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities,” Freie Universität Berlin calls on all university members to publish the results of their research digitally in accordance with the open access principle without access restrictions.

 

Im Rahmen ihres Engagements für den freien Zugang zu wissenschaftlichen Informationen und als Unter-zeichnerin der „Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities“ fordert die Freie Universität Berlin alle Universitätsangehörigen auf, die Ergebnisse ihrer Forschung nach dem Open-Access-Prinzip ohne Zugriffsbeschränkungen digital zu veröffentlichen.

Increasing transparency through open science badges

“Authors who adopt transparent practices for an article in Conservation Biology are now able to select from 3 open science badges: open data, open materials, and preregistration. Badges appear on published articles as visible recognition and highlight these efforts to the research community. There is an emerging body of literature regarding the influences of badges, for example, an increased number of articles with open data (Kidwell et al 2016) and increased rate of data sharing (Rowhani?Farid et al. 2018). However, in another study, Rowhani?Farid et al. (2020) found that badges did not “noticeably motivate” researchers to share data. Badges, as far as we know, are the only data?sharing incentive that has been tested empirically (Rowhani?Farid et al. 2017).

Rates of data and code sharing are typically low (Herold 2015; Roche et al 2015; Archmiller et al 2020; Culina et al 2020). Since 2016, we have asked authors of contributed papers, reviews, method papers, practice and policy papers, and research notes to tell us whether they “provided complete machine and human?readable data and computer code in Supporting Information or on a public archive.” Authors of 31% of these articles published in Conservation Biology said they shared their data or code, and all authors provide human?survey instruments in Supporting Information or via a citation or online link (i.e., shared materials)….”

University of Arkansas Open Access Policy | Office of the Provost | University of Arkansas

“Faculty members are encouraged to submit scholarly articles to the University of Arkansas for deposit in an open access institutional repository.  For each article submitted to the institutional repository and subject to the license revocation exclusion set out in paragraph 3 below, each faculty member would grant non-exclusive distribution rights for the article to the University of Arkansas.  This grant of non-exclusive distribution rights would transfer from the faculty member to the University of Arkansas a nonexclusive, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to the article, in any medium, provided that the article is not sold for a profit, nor that the University of Arkansas would gain any right to authorize others to do the same….”

#ASAPpdb: Structural biologists commit to releasing data with preprints – ASAPbio

“The Protein Data Bank (PDB) was established as the first open access repository for biological data, and the datasets it hosts have been invaluable to research in fundamental biology and the understanding of health and disease. Just this month, we witnessed the announcement of the AlphaFold2 results toward structure prediction, made possible thanks to the more than 170,000 freely accessible structures in the PDB which provided “training data” for the structure prediction software.

It was not always the case that such structural biology data were freely available, even upon journal publication. From the founding of the PDB in 1971 until the late 1980s, most journals did not require deposition of structures in a public database. A key moment was a petition, circulated in 1987 by a group of leading structural biologists, demanding that the data created be made openly available upon journal publication. This petition led to major journals adopting data deposition standards. In the early 1990s, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) imposed similar requirements on all grantees. 

The revolution in publishing made possible by preprints calls for a re-evaluation of data disclosure practices in structural biology. While journal review processes take weeks, months, or even years, preprints allow researchers to rapidly communicate their findings to the community. However, withholding access to PDB files that accompany preprints inhibits the progress towards scientific discovery which preprints can enable. 

Commitment

We pledge to publicly release our PDB files (and associated structure factor, restraint, and map files) with deposition of our preprints.

We encourage all structural biologists to also deposit raw data in appropriate resources (e.g. EMPIAR, proteindiffraction.org, https://data.sbgrid.org/, etc). …”

Encouraging data sharing in Genome

“We live in the age of Big Data, and the current data boom is changing the way we do science. Data can be reanalyzed in new ways contributing to scientific information and knowledge. Accessible data also plays an essential role in encouraging responsible conduct. Researchers are increasingly sharing their data with the research community and Genome fully supports the goal of making research data available and accessible to everyone. Although data sharing is not mandatory for Genome, we do strongly encourage it….”

Data Sharing & Citation | Wiley

“At Wiley, we support the growing movement to make research more open, because this leads to a fairer, more efficient and accountable research landscape, which will ultimately drive a more effective and faster pace of discovery. We are committed to improving openness, transparency, and reproducibility of research. Fundamental to enabling reproducible research is the easy access to and ready discovery of its supporting data, made possible through a robust and universal framework that allows research data to be cited through standard reference lists. This will ensure that data is treated as a first-class research object, easily accessible as part of the scholarly literature, and that researchers are credited for their work.

Select an option below to learn more about Wiley’s data sharing and citation policies and service….”

Increase encouragement for open science – L’Edition 13 (june 2020) | Université Paris-Saclay

From Google’s English:  “Paris-Saclay is following the movement, defining its own guidelines on the subject in accordance with the national framework and national, European and international networks. Sylvie Retailleau, President of Université Paris-Saclay explains, “We now have to take a political stance. In 2020, our open science charter will be reinforced to increase encouragement for publication on open access platforms. Our approach is sufficiently developed for us to judge which are the best platforms, provide tools for researchers, and reflect on how to promote people who are committed to open science, for example with recruitment or promotion. The first measures will probably be applied in 2021, after discussion and vote at the University’s academic council.” …”

Open research statement – Staff home, The University of York

“What is open research?

The core idea behind open research is that all aspects of the research cycle should be shared and accessible where possible. Research should be as open as possible, as closed as necessary. Open research practice enables a wide range of audiences to freely discover and engage with our excellent research. It makes the research process transparent and creates new opportunities for outputs and methods to be reused, reproduced and credited. It generates an environment for more effective and efficient research, and a culture where open is the default.

Open research embeds values of inclusivity, diversity, integrity and accessibility in the research process. It is based in the belief that knowledge produces the greatest benefit when it exists in a commons, and that research produced through public funding should belong to and exist for the benefit of all.

The terms ‘open research’ and ‘open science’ are sometimes used interchangeably but are based on the same principles of collaboration and accountability which can be applied widely. Open research is relevant to all researchers, but its applications differ between disciplines.

Our commitment to open research

The University of York is committed to the long-term development of an open research culture in support of our research foundations. As part of this commitment, we have created strong governance structures for advancement of open research. We aim to actively create and pursue opportunities to grow and foster a values-driven, pluralistic, multi-faceted approach towards open research, embracing disciplinary differences and supporting our staff and students in the process.

We believe that all stages of the research lifecycle can potentially be made open, within the bounds of the terms and conditions associated with your research; this ranges from opening up research methodologies through to pre-registration, sharing notebooks, software and data, and publishing open access. Open practice encourages sharing of outcomes with the principle of being as open as possible, as early as possible. Open practice also extends into the teaching domain, for example in the production and dissemination of Open Educational Resources (OERs).

It is widely accepted that open practices allow for greater visibility and wider distribution of research. Open practices unlock access to knowledge and generate new opportunities for collaboration and participation.”

Open Access Policy for Scholarly and Creative Works (New) – Administrative Services Gateway – University at Buffalo

“The University at Buffalo (UB, university) is committed to providing the greatest possible reach and impact of the research and scholarly and creative works produced by its faculty, staff, and students. The university recognizes the value of and supports university authors retaining the rights to their intellectual property, while encouraging them to make their works freely and widely available. The university endorses the practice of university authors depositing a preprint, post-print, or final version of each scholarly or creative work in an open access (OA) digital repository.

Participating university authors grant to the university permission to make available copies of their scholarly and creative works (and related products, when possible), and to exercise a copyright license to those works for the purposes of preserving and making them freely and widely available in an OA repository. More specifically, participating university authors retain any rights not already transferred to a publisher and grant to the university a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free license to reproduce and distribute their scholarly or creative works, in any format, for the purposes of preserving and making works openly available.

University authors reserve the right to choose where to publish their work and whether to make it freely and openly available to the public, subject to copyright law and publisher sharing policies. This is an opt-in rather than an opt-out policy for university authors….”

Towards a Research Integrity Culture at Universities: From Recommendations to Implementation

“In recent years there has a been a cultural change in which the outcomes of research are expected to be available to a wider public, in what has been termed ‘open science’. This brings both opportunities and challenges with regard to research integrity and researchers should be made aware of this. With research open to a wider public, there are opportunities for greater awareness and scrutiny of research results. Universities should encourage researchers to make research data ‘open’ and provide a research infrastructure in which responsible management of research data is facilitated. Guidance should be developed for researchers on the appropriate use of secondary data from other sources. Research should be credited in a proper and transparent way through responsible authorship or acknowledgment, and previously published research should be properly cited….”

Sharing your work by self-archiving: encouragement from the Journal of the Medical Library Association | Goben | Journal of the Medical Library Association

Abstract:  Self-archiving offers opportunities for authors to more broadly disseminate their work—both in pre-print form before its submission to a journal and in post-print form after its acceptance and publication in a journal. This editorial provides authors with guidance in navigating the rapidly changing options for self-archiving and affirms that the Journal of the Medical Library Association encourages authors to self-archive their work to boost its reach and impact.

 

Open Access Policy – Open Access – LibGuides at University of Lethbridge

“3.1. University Authors are encouraged to provide the University of Lethbridge Library an electronic copy of the finalized text of all scholarly articles. The electronic copy shall be provided to the University of Lethbridge Library (opus.library@uleth.ca) prior to the date of its publication.

3.2. University Authors grant the University of Lethbridge the non-exclusive permission to permanently archive, preserve, reproduce and openly disseminate, in any medium1, all scholarly articles authored by the University Author, provided that the articles are properly attributed to the University Authors; this permission is granted for the sole objective of archiving the articles for non-commercial purposes. Permission is granted on the understanding that University Authors will not be charged any use or service fees for activities associated with this Policy….”

Building Trust to Break Down Barriers | The Official PLOS Blog

“At PLOS we have invested significantly in people and processes to support a strong journal data sharing policy since 2014. We are seeing a steady increase year-on-year in the proportion of PLOS authors who use a data repository. Although less costly for publishers, journal policies that only encourage data sharing have much lower levels of compliance….”

Implementing publisher policies that inform, support and encourage authors to share data: two case studies

Abstract:  Open research data is one of the key areas in the expanding open scholarship movement. Scholarly journals and publishers find themselves at the heart of the shift towards openness, with recent years seeing an increase in the number of scholarly journals with data-sharing policies aiming to increase transparency and reproducibility of research. In this article we present two case studies which examine the experiences that two leading academic publishers, Taylor & Francis and Springer Nature, have had in rolling out data-sharing policies. We illustrate some of the considerations involved in providing consistent policies across journals of many disciplines, reflecting on successes and challenges.