“The compendium is a guide and reference for scholars, publishers, developers, librarians, and designers who want to challenge, push, and redefine the shape, form, and rationale of scholarly books. The compendium gathers and links tools, examples of experimental books, and experimental publishing practices with a focus on free and open-source software, platforms, and digital publishing tools that presses and authors can either use freely or can adapt to their research and publishing workflows. With the compendium we want to promote and inspire authors and publishers to publish experimental monographs and to challenge and redefine the shape, form, and rationale of scholarly books. …”
Abstract: Open Research Europe (ORE) is the peer-reviewed open-access publishing platform of the European Commission. It follows the post-publication peer review model to promote scientific transparency and reuse. The Commission plans to develop an infrastructure to underpin ORE in the future that is based on open source software following the open-source code use and distribution model. The present analysis was commissioned to determine if open-source software (OSS) solutions can be used as a foundation for developing the new publishing platform and to document the necessary workflows and functionalities of the new platform. After conducting a thorough analysis, it has become evident that utilizing existing open-source software has its own advantages and disadvantages. Although some risks are associated with this approach, our research has identified a few mature existing solutions that could be further developed to support the future ORE platform.
“Just as social media has become ubiquitous in academia, its established formats and dynamics have been brought into doubt. Björn Brembs argues that learned societies concerned with their core mission as societies should engage and lead developments on federated social media platforms, such as Mastodon.”
“A group of MIT scholars is releasing a new white paper about academic open-access publishing. The paper gathers information, identifies outstanding questions, and calls for further research and data to inform policy on the subject.
The group was chaired by Institute Professor Emeritus Phillip A. Sharp, of the Department of Biology and Koch Institute of Integrative Cancer Research, who co-authored the report along with William B. Bonvillian, senior director of special projects at MIT Open Learning; Robert Desimone, director of the McGovern Institute for Brain Research; Barbara Imperiali, the Class of 1922 Professor of Biology; David R. Karger, professor of electrical engineering; Clapperton Chakanetsa Mavhunga, professor of science, technology, and society; Amy Brand, director and publisher of the MIT Press; Nick Lindsay, director for journals and open access at MIT Press; and Michael Stebbins of Science Advisors, LLC.
MIT News spoke with Sharp and Brand about the state of open-access publishing….”
“The health of the research enterprise is closely tied to the effectiveness of the scientific and scholarly publishing ecosystem. Policy-, technology-, and market-driven changes in publishing models over the last two decades have triggered a number of disruptions within this ecosystem:
Ongoing increases in the cost of journal publishing, with dominant open access models shifting costs from subscribers to authors
Significant consolidation and vertical (supply chain) integration in the publishing industry, and a decline in society-owned subscription journals that have long subsidized scientific and scholarly societies
A dramatic increase in the number of “predatory” journals with substandard peer review
Decline in the purchasing power of academic libraries relative to the quantity and cost of published research To illustrate how researcher behavior, funder policies, and publisher business models and incentives interact, this report presents an historical overview of open access publishing.
The report also provides a list of key questions for further investigation to understand, measure, and best prepare for the impact of new policies related to open access in research publishing, categorized into six general areas: access and business models, research data, preprint publishing, peer review, costs to researchers and universities, and infrastructure.”
Abstract: There are thousands of repositories worldwide, which collectively preserve and provide access to hundreds of millions of scholarly resources. These repositories – mainly hosted by libraries, universities, governments and research centres – represent critical public infrastructure enabling researchers, students and the general public can reap the benefits of research. Yet, there are also challenges for optimizing this global network, which include a lack of interoperability and insufficient resourcing. This talk will discuss the benefits of open science, provide an overview of the current repository landscape, and identify the specific actions being undertaken by COAR and others to advance our collective vision.
“SCOSS is thrilled to announce the launch of its fifth pledging cycle. Both of the chosen projects are already an established and well-known infrastructure with high usage making an important contribution to open science. They need community support to innovate, broaden their global reach and to increase resilience and financial sustainability. We look forward to welcoming RDA and Software Heritage to the SCOSS Family.
On behalf of the SCOSS Board I extend my congratulations to the supported infrastructure for this round. Although the economic downturn and restricted budgets can make pledging more difficult, please do consider helping sustain priority open science infrastructure by pledging a percentage of your relevant budget to structurally help infrastructures on their way to sustainability.”
“However, when that open data is misorganized, appears sloppy, or is poorly documented, this doesn’t inspire the confidence that we want; this isn’t really open science. It’s not just about openly sharing data, it’s about sharing data that is well-organized, well-documented, interpretable, and re-usable. We saw both sides of this so clearly during the pandemic: sharing data, especially genetic data about the virus, accelerated our response to the pandemic — but we also saw high-profile cases that centered on the challenges of data that can’t or won’t be shared.
Federal and private funders are increasingly requiring data sharing. Merely “open” data isn’t enough to combat misinformation or the rising mistrust of research, however. So how do we move from a compliance mindset, which promotes a minimalist approach in which researchers might only put in the minimum amount of effort and thus potentially share poorly documented or disorganized data, to an ecosystem that actually enables and rewards open, equitable, and accessible scholarship? It’s important to note that a key part of this conversation requires nuance. It is not enough to share or not share data — we have to think of what data can be shared, in what forms, and with what documentation. We have to consider all of the potential outputs of a research project, including how best to organize distinct yet interrelated components and how to document these decisions clearly….”
“Research libraries are already involved in Diamond Open Access (Diamond OA) initiatives as an alternative to existing agreements with publishers. Many LIBER members provide standard and advanced publishing services. They raise awareness within the community for the Diamond OA Road and help journal editors establish valid and sustainable publishing venues. Libraries also provide support on publication ethics or increase the visibility of ethical issues. On a practical level, libraries also contribute financially to Diamond OA infrastructures. More and more members of the LIBER network are opting to support these infrastructures, instead of pushing resources to commercial enterprises. In a short internal report in February 2022, we saw that approximately 55% of the libraries contributing to the SCOSS calls from Europe were LIBER members. Furthermore, research libraries are often the main drivers in their institutions to implement OS policies and invest funds on membership schemes – such as Open Library for Humanities and SCOAP3 – to secure the viable operation of journals.
Such examples underline the existence of an important capital within libraries of knowledge, experience, and energy that is being channeled to Diamond OA. This energy already powers infrastructures that allow scholarly content in minority languages and communities to flourish, contributing to diversity and equity. We know that not all libraries are equal; not all can contribute in the same way. Yet, good examples are everywhere, and we are determined to unearth them.
In our daily work with the research and academic staff of our communities, we work to co-develop a culture for community-led OA venues inside academia. This includes enhancing the visibility of Diamond OA journals and ensuring their inclusion in OA monitoring processes. We are dedicated to enabling high-standard, quality services, from support and production to preservation. Our goal is to establish these services as trustworthy and identifiable, and to streamline processes for financial support….”
German abstract (original): Der vorliegende Report ist im Rahmen des BMBF-geförderten Projekts „Konsortiale Open-Access-Lösungen aufbauen“ (KOALA) entstanden. Das Projekt verfolgt das Ziel, Konsortien zur gemeinschaftlichen Finanzierung von Open-Access-Zeitschriften und -Buchreihen zu etablieren und damit Alternativen zu Open Access mit APC/BPC-basierter Finanzierung zu fördern.
Als Grundlage unserer Modellentwicklung wurden unterschiedliche Ansätze konsortialer Open-Access-Finanzierungen untersucht. Ziel war es, herauszuarbeiten, was die jeweiligen Modelle auszeichnet, wo ihre Schwächen, Chancen und Herausforderungen liegen. Indem diese Untersuchung unterschiedliche Ansätze, Modelle und Initiativen vorstellt, leistet sie auch einen Beitrag zur Debatte um mögliche Modelle einer Open-Access-Finanzierung, die in der Lage sind, den freien Zugang zu wissenschaftlichem Wissen ohne Barrieren für jede*n zu ermöglichen.
English abstract (via deepl.com): This report was produced as part of the BMBF-funded project “Building Consortial Open Access Solutions” (KOALA). The aim of the project is to establish consortia for the joint financing of Open Access journals and book series and thus to promote alternatives to Open Access with APC/BPC-based financing.
As a basis for our model development, different approaches to consortial open access financing were analysed. The aim was to work out what characterises the respective models, where their weaknesses, opportunities and challenges lie. By presenting different approaches, models and initiatives, this study also contributes to the debate on possible models of open access funding that are capable of enabling free access to scientific knowledge without barriers for everyone.
Abstract: Presented October 19, 2023: “Developing New Approaches to Promote Equitable and Inclusive Implementation of Open Scholarship Policies.” Hosted by The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Roundtable on Aligning Incentives for Open Scholarship.
“Recently, Graham Anderson, Head of Publishing Operations at the Royal Society, shared his thoughts on the benefits of integrated infrastructure in helping to advance open science. …”
“Adopters of the POSI principles have met several times over the last few years to discuss the challenges and the improvements they’ve made in the transparency and longevity of their operations and governance. Hear from those involved in introducing the latest version – v1.1.”
“In 2016, the University of Cape Town (UCT) in South Africa launched the Continental Platform to enable the African research community to take ownership of creating and sharing its own scholarly content. The service provides a free outlet for African researchers to publish their scholarly work and provide access to knowledge for all without restriction….”
“SCOSS invites: Building connections – the importance of open infrastructure is a webinar organised by SCOSS. The session aims to reflect on how SCOSS infrastructures have progressed, what the case for open infrastructure is and it gives you the opportunity to meet some of the SCOSS Board who will share their visions for the future.
We meet on Thursday, 30 Nov 2023, 4-6 PM CET, 10-12 AM EST, 9-11 AM CST, 7-9 AM PST, JST 12-2 AM. Please join us!
Over the past five years, over 10 open infrastructures have received support from a wide range of research organisations around the globe. In this webinar, we will highlight these open infrastructures, how far they have come, and above all their connections, whilst stressing the importance of collectively funding this valuable ecosystem. We will also share ongoing work on collective advocacy, presenting four compelling arguments why open infrastructure is important and should receive sustainable funding.
By attending this webinar, you will learn:
What services open infrastructures supported through SCOSS offer to the community, how they are connected, and what they have achieved with SCOSS funding to date
What the main arguments are for sustaining an open scholarly ecosystem
How you can help sustain this ecosystem
What the next steps are for SCOSS according to the SCOSS Board…”