“Our support for licensing has been a difference maker for libraries and many consortia. The scale at which we operate helps drive down costs and secure excellent terms for libraries. While this work will continue in earnest, Lyrasis has also been deeply involved with Open Access initiatives for several years and is developing new approaches and models as open resources continue to become a much larger focus for our organizations. We will continue to work on behalf of the community to shape sustainable Open Access initiatives and will support scholarly infrastructure with support for important programs such as ORCiD and integration of persistent IDs in our systems….”
Category Archives: oa.orcid
PIDs and Open Science: Building Community in Latin America –
“Persistent identifiers are playing a key role in driving more robust research infrastructure and open science initiatives across Latin America. This was a primary theme at the event “Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) and Open Science in Latin America” (#PIDsLATAM23) held on April 18 in Buenos Aires (Argentina) during csv,conf,v7.
Organized by DataCite, ROR, and ORCID, the event was attended by more than 70 research stakeholders from across the Latin American region and elsewhere, representing 40 different institutions in total….”
Identificadores Persistentes (PIDs) y la Ciencia Abierta en América Latina | 18 April 2023, Buenos Aires
Google translate: “DataCite, ORCID and ROR are pleased to invite the Latin American research community to participate in an event entirely dedicated to persistent identifiers and open science in the region. Aimed at research directors and managers, librarians and technical staff, in this meeting we will talk about the benefits of persistent identifiers and how their adoption contributes to open science and a more open and robust research ecosystem. Use cases from Argentine and international institutions will be presented and there will be ample space for discussion and networking. Registration is free but places are limited…”
Enabling Value featuring The Lens: Showcasing ORCID-enabled scholarly service providers –
“Introducing Enabling Value, a webinar series showcasing how ORCID-enabled scholarly service providers enable fast and simple registry interoperability for ORCID member organizations and other scholarly institutions.
This first session features The Lens and will focus on the new Lens Profiles, a tool built to support researchers to enhance and maintain their ORCID records….”
ORCID Poised to Support Research Institutions in New Era of Public Access and Research Security –
“On 14 January, 2021, the OSTP first signaled its support for persistent identifiers in a Presidential Memorandum on the topic of Research Security, now commonly referred to as NSPM-33. This memo gives direction to the major US Federal funding agencies which includes the adoption of persistent identifier (PID) infrastructure as an important way of enabling researchers to be transparent about their research activities while reducing administrative burden. The NSPM-33 Guidance published a year later further described the role and expectations of funders in adopting persistent identifiers and listed the standards that a PID service for researchers must meet to be included in Federal grant application processes. ORCID is the only organization that currently satisfies all of these criteria.
Fast forward to 25 August, 2022, when OSTP published a subsequent memo that is expected to have lasting impacts on the research community. The memo, titled “Guidance to Make Federally-Funded Research Freely Available Without Delay”—also known informally as the “Nelson memo” or the “Public Access memo”—has implications reaching far beyond the US citizens it was designed to address.
In this article we discuss the new requirements that NSPM-33 and the Nelson memo levy on research funders, universities and research institutions, and researchers themselves. We cover how these requirements will improve the integrity and trustworthiness of research, and perhaps most importantly, the potential of the openness and transparency reflected in the requirements to help the world meet the ever growing challenges of the 21st century….”
Community Call: IRUS and ORCID – YouTube
“ORCID US Community Call: IRUS and ORCID (February 01, 2023).”
Why PID Strategies Are Having A Moment – And Why You Should Care – The Scholarly Kitchen
“Last year’s White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Nelson Memo is just one recent example of a national funding organization that is paying attention to PIDs. It directs US agencies to instruct their funded researchers “to obtain a digital persistent identifier … include it in published research outputs when available, and provide federal agencies with the metadata associated with all published research outputs they produce”. Other examples include UK Research and Innovation’s (UKRI) recently updated open access policy, which states that “Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) for articles must be implemented according to international recognised standards”; and Plan S’s requirement for the “Use of persistent identifiers (PIDs) for scholarly publications (with versioning, for example, in case of revisions), such as DOI”, which has been adopted by multiple countries.
It’s not just the national funders who are getting in on the act; there’s also been a surge in interest at the national government level. A number of countries in the Americas, Asia Pacific, and Europe are at various stages of developing and implementing national PID strategies. They include Australia, Brazil, Canada, Finland, the Netherlands, Peru, South Korea, and the UK, all of which are participating in a Research Data Alliance (RDA) National PID Strategies Working Group, set up following a Birds of a Feather session at the RDA Virtual Plenary 17 last year. There are a number of similarities between these countries’ approaches, as the RDA WG has found. Its aim is “to map common activities across national agencies/efforts and produce a guide on the specific PIDs adopted in the context of national or regional PID strategies [in order to] help others, irrespective of geographical region, follow a blueprint to define their national PID approach. The intention is that it can be adopted or adapted by other countries looking to develop their own PID strategies. By following the recommendations it will encourage standardisation internationally.” One element of this work is to identify the most commonly used PIDs across all countries, which I’m sure is music to the ears of my former NISO colleague Todd Carpenter, who pointed out in his recent post that, “It is past time that we all agree on a core set of identifiers and basic metadata elements and begin to encourage researchers to use them at scale when communicating their results.” Common PIDs (not all of which are open) that have already been identified in the RDA WG’s work include: ORCID or ISNI for researchers; ROR or ISNI for research organizations; Crossref DOIs for research articles; DataCite DOIs or Handles for research data; Crossref DOIs for grants; RAiD for projects; and DOIs, IGSN and RRID for samples and specimens….”
ORCID Welcomes Ukraine to Global Consortia – ORCID
“Last fall, during Open Access Week, we formally announced the formation of our Ukraine Consortium after two years of working together with the consortium lead, the State Scientific and Technical Library (SSTL) of Ukraine. With support from the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, SSTL took the lead in a national ORCID consortium, initiating with 17 members, including the main national universities and scientific institutions.
During the same time, the Ukrainian government also approved the Open Science Action Plan for the country, which was a critical step toward integration with the European Union research community. ORCID is pleased to have been able to provide a small measure of support to the Ukrainian research community during a time of immense hardship and uncertainty for the country….”
2023-02-01 Community Call – IRUS, ORCID, and DOIs – Google Docs
“Guest Speaker: Hannah Rosen, Strategist for Content & Scholarly Communication Initiatives at Lyrasis:
What is IRUS? General overview
How does IRUS work with ORCID?
How does IRUS work with DOIs?
Is there anything else we need to know about IRUS?
How to participate…”
University of Leeds Publications Policy – Research and Innovation Service
Authors must comply with their funders’ policies relating to open access and research data management.
Authors must register for an individual ORCiD identifier and should link it to their University Publications Database profile , include it on any personal webpage, when submitting publications, when applying for grants, and in any research workflow to ensure that the individual is credited for their work and that the correct institutional affiliation is achieved.
Authors must use a standardised institutional affiliation “University of Leeds” in all research outputs to ensure clear affiliation with the University of Leeds.
Authors must specify authors’ contributions in all research outputs to ensure individuals’ roles are identifiable and duly recognised.
Authors must include a Data Access Statement in all research outputs even where there are no data associated with the publication or the data are inaccessible. The statement informs readers where the associated underlying research materials are available and how they can be accessed.
Authors must acknowledge the source of grant funding associated with a research output in all research outputs. Information about the grant should also be linked, by the author, to the record of the publication in the University Publications Database. Grant information in the University Publications Database is fed automatically from the University’s Grant Information System .
Authors must retain the necessary rights to make the accepted manuscripts of research articles, including reviews and conference papers, publicly available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. Recommended wording to include in manuscript submissions is in Appendix 1. This requirement does not apply but is strongly recommended for outputs solely or jointly authored by PGRs (only).
Authors must record bibliographic details of all research outputs in the University’s publications database. For peer-reviewed research articles, including reviews and conference papers, this must be done as soon as possible after acceptance for publication. When creating the record in the University’s publications database, complete the appropriate fields to confirm that a data access and a rights retention statement have been added to the output itself.
Authors must deposit full text copies of final accepted peer-reviewed research articles, including reviews and conference papers into the institutional repository, via the University’s publications database as soon as possible after acceptance for publication. Where the output is already available open access via the publisher website a link may be provided instead. The deposit of other outputs e.g. monographs is also encouraged where copyright permits.
Where copyright allows and there are no confidentiality or commercial constraints, the research outputs in the institutional repository must be made ‘open access’, i.e. freely accessible over the internet.
Outputs must be made open access as soon as possible after acceptance ….”
The State of Journal Production and Access 2022: Report on survey of independent academic publishers
“Among the main findings on the topic of journal production were:
• Compared to 2020, there was apparent growth in journals producing HTML articles.
• Full-text XML article production remained flat since 2020 (38% in 2020 and 2022).
• 50%+ respondents included ORCIDs and DOIs in metadata, but other PIDs like author/ contributor roles, funder IDs, and organizational IDs had lower adoption rates. That said, some PIDs increased across the two surveys, including Funder ID (20% in 2022 versus 16% in 2020) and CRediT (22% in 2022 versus 16% in 2020).
• Most respondents said PDF and HTML are the most important article formats for their readers, as well as reaching publishing program goals.
• When asked to rate their publishers’ primary production goals, most respondents chose “journal/article search engine optimization” (86% reported that this was “very” or “somewhat” important).
Among the main findings on the topic of journal access were:
• 95% of respondents said at least one of their publisher’s journals offered OA options.
• 80% of respondents said their organization utilizes fully-OA publishing models.
• When asked to rate their publishers’ primary funding/revenue priorities, most respondents chose “identifying viable funding model(s) for publishing one or more fully-OA journals” (68% reported it’s “very” or “somewhat” important).
• Institutional subsidies and grants were seen as having the highest OA funding potential…”
ORCID Names Hinchliffe Chair of the Board | Recognizing Excellence – University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
“Lisa Hinchliffe, University Library Professor and Coordinator for Research and Teaching Professional Development, has been appointed Chair of the Open Research and Contributor ID (ORCID) Board. ORCID is an international not-for-profit organization that facilitates transparent and reliable connections between researchers, their work, and their affiliations within digital frameworks.”
Research Integrity and Reproducibility are Two spects of the Same Underlying Issue – A Report from STM Week 2022 – The Scholarly Kitchen
“Imagine if the integrity of the publishing process didn’t rely purely on publishers’ ability to detect fraud, malpractice, or mistakes based on the limited information available in a submitted manuscript. Instead, what if this responsibility were spread throughout the ecosystem, from funder grant management system, to data management plan, to data center, to lab notebook, to preprint, to published version of record, making use of trusted assertions to build an open, verifiable research environment that also leverages transparency so that publishers, funders, institutions, and other researchers could all trace findings and claims back through the whole research process?
The vision I laid out above may sound utopian, but much of the technology and tools required already exist. As well as the TREs [Trusted Research Environments], which can be seen as a model for traceability, and ORCID trust markers, which illustrate how the same thing can be done securely in the open, initiatives like Center for Open Science, and Octopus show how a range of outputs and activities can be used to document the entire research process.
The problem is not technology, it’s a wicked mix of perverse incentives, network effects, business model inertia, and sustainability challenges that lock us all into the same restrictive ideas about what constitutes a research publication, and what counts for prestige and career advancement. To address the range of challenges from poor research practice to industrial-scale fraud by paper mills, we need a whole-sector approach that involves funders, institutional research management and libraries, researchers, and publishers. As fellow Chef Alice Meadows and I wrote in a previous post, it really does take a village, and cross-sector collaboration is vital to building the interoperable research information infrastructure needed to connect the people, places, and things of the scholarly ecosystem in a way that is verifiable and trusted.”
Open Research policy | Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment
From the new Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) policy. The policy doesn’t cover all NZ public funders. But MBIE is the largest NZ public funder.
This policy requires that all peer-reviewed publications arising from research funded through research investment processes administered by MBIE be made available with Open Access (free of charge, online access for any person) through one of the approved pathways. These must be made available either:
(a) immediately on publication; or
(b) where a publisher policy requires an embargo period, immediately at the end of the embargo period or 12 months after the date of such publication, whichever is earlier.
5.2 Pathways to Open Access
For the purpose of this policy, the following publication pathways are considered acceptable:
(a) publication in a fully Open Access journal (i.e., Gold OA); or,
(b) deposit of an acceptable version in a suitable online repository (i.e., Green OA)…
5.2.3 Author rights
Authors must publish their outputs in a way that allows them to retain sufficient rights to comply with the policy, either by retaining copyright over their published works (as opposed to transferring copyright to the publisher), or by publishing their work in a journal that permits them to deposit their manuscript in an Open Access repository….”
Open science and research | Uniarts Helsinki
“The Uniarts Helsinki Open Access policy describes the general principles of publishing. The policy applies to researchers, staff and students working at the University of the Arts Helsinki. Publications of the University of the Arts Helsinki are typically both artistic and scientific in nature.
We follow the guidelines on responsible conduct of research determined by the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK) in the publishing and openness of our research results.
Uniarts Helsinki requires open access publishing when possible.
Uniarts supports publishing in Gold open access publication channels through a centralized APC fund, subject to specified criteria.
Uniarts recommends the use of Creative Commons licences in publishing text-based research outputs. If the research funder is the Academy of Finland or the European Commission, CC BY 4.0 should be used. When publishing with open licenses, the author(s) retains the copyright.
Uniarts recommends that researchers register their ORCID iD and add it to their publication data.
Uniarts requires that researchers self-archive their scientific and peer-reviewed research publications when allowed by the publisher. Uniarts recommends researchers to upload the Final Draft (Author Accepted Manuscript, AAM) or the Publisher’s PDF to Uniarts Helsinki’s institutional repository. Artistic research publications or their parts are linked to the metadata in the repository.
The author is responsible for evaluating the quality and responsibility of the publication channel they have chosen to publish in.
The theses of master’s, licentiate’s and doctoral (both scientific and artistic) degrees are published, as appropriate, in Uniarts Helsinki’s open institutional repository Taju and also for example in Research Catalogue.
Training, support and guidance is provided for open access publishing.
The progress of open access publishing is monitored at Uniarts through the strategic goals of research….”