Gearing Up for 2023 Part II: Implementing the NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy – NIH Extramural Nexus

“NIH has a long history of developing consent language and, as such, our team worked across the agency – and with you! – to develop a new resource that shares best practices for developing informed consents to facilitate data/biospecimen storage and sharing for future use.  It also provides modifiable sample language that investigators and IRBs can use to assist in the clear communication of potential risks and benefits associated with data/biospecimen storage and sharing.  In developing this resource, we engaged with key federal partners, as well as scientific societies and associations.  Importantly, we also considered the 102 comments from stakeholders in response to a RFI that we issued in 2021.

As for our second resource, we are requesting public comment on protecting the privacy of research participants when data is shared. I think I need to be upfront and acknowledge that we have issued many of these types of requests over the last several months and NIH understands the effort that folks take to thoughtfully respond.  With that said, we think the research community will greatly benefit from this resource and we want to hear your thoughts on whether it hits the mark or needs adjustment….”

Guest Post – Open Access in Japan: Tapping the Stone Bridge – The Scholarly Kitchen

“April Fool’s Day is not really a thing in Japan, so whereas many companies in the West tend to avoid the first of the month when making important announcements, it is in no way unusual that the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), the nation’s second-largest public-sector research funder chose April 1st, 2022 to unveil its revised open access policy and implementation guidelines with a typical lack of fanfare outside of its home country….

Such a comparatively low-key approach is in line with past precedent as Japanese funding bodies such as JST, have typically opted for a light-touch and iterative approach to open access policies – which for the most part have been developed in consultation with publishers – in contrast to counterparts in other countries that have put forward more radical and headline-generating open access initiatives such as the US OSTP “Holdren Memo”, Plan S, and UKRI’s open access policy announced in mid-2021. Previous versions of the JST open access policy issued in 2013 and 2017 went little remarked upon in many open science circles and were notable for their conciliatory approach, in contrast to the openly-stated ambition to disrupt and reform the world of scholarly publishing of many other funders. Following this consultative tradition, the current policy was circulated in draft form to publisher members of CHORUS, of which JST is a participating funder, for comment prior to publication….

The most noticeable difference between the new policy and previous iterations is the introduction of an embargo period which stipulates that at minimum the Accepted Manuscript (AM) of any paper arising from a project submitted for funding to JST after the go-live date of April 1, 2022, must be made publicly accessible in an institutional or public repository in Japan within 12 months of publication of the resultant journal article. Whilst cautious by European standards, this is the first time that an embargo of any type has been included in the JST policy. In addition to AMs of research articles, the policy covers those of review articles and conference papers. While the revised policy signals a preference for the green route and does not mandate that the VoR be made available open access, publication as an open access article is a “permitted” route and under the new policy, APCs are fully reimbursable from grant money….

Furthermore, it is notable that both the policy and its implementation guidelines are silent on the twin subjects of transformative journals and transformative agreements. …

Advocates of faster and more radical transformation will probably lament the lack of clarity or silence on certain issues – such as a ban on publishing in hybrid journals and gaps around CC BY licensing for the AM – that have become totemic in many open access circles and offer a more lukewarm response. Those in the latter group may find some consolation in the knowledge that in Japan, caution does not necessarily indicate disapproval and is often regarded as a virtue, encapsulated in the phrase: ???????? (Ishibashi wo tataite wataru) “to tap on a stone bridge before crossing.” Cautious progress may initially be slower than those who rush headlong, but caution helps avoids missteps. And you’re still going across the bridge.”

 

University of Maryland’s Senate Approves Policy to Enhance Equitable Access to Scholarly Publications | UMD PACT

“At its meeting on April 6, 2022, University of Maryland’s Senate voted to approve a new institutional policy that will advance equitable, open access to the University’s research and scholarship. In alignment with the University’s land-grant mission and its social justice values, the new policy, entitled “Equitable Access to Scholarly Articles Authored by University Faculty,” aids in the removal of price and permission barriers related to discoverability and access for anyone seeking UMD’s peer-reviewed scholarly work. 

The policy was spearheaded by UMD PACT, a campus-wide working group sponsored by the University Library Council, the Office of the Provost, and the Division of Research. The benefits and features of the policy are summarized briefly below: …

Through the policy, faculty members grant certain nonexclusive rights over their scholarly articles to the University of Maryland. This grant of nonexclusive rights, called the Equitable Access License, allows the University to distribute peer-reviewed versions of the articles free-of-charge to the general public, through DRUM, the University of Maryland’s online institutional repository. Faculty members commit to depositing (self-archiving) peer-reviewed versions of their scholarly articles into DRUM. The policy includes waiver and embargo options to enhance author freedom and control over their work….”

UMD’s Senate Approves Policy to Enhance Equitable Access to Scholarly Publications – News | UMD Libraries

“At its meeting on April 6, 2022, University of Maryland’s Senate voted to approve a new institutional policy that will advance equitable, open access to the University’s research and scholarship. In alignment with the University’s land-grant mission and its social justice values, the new policy, entitled “Equitable Access to Scholarly Articles Authored by University Faculty,” aids in the removal of price and permission barriers related to discoverability and access for anyone seeking UMD’s peer-reviewed scholarly work. 

The policy was spearheaded by UMD PACT, a campus-wide working group sponsored by the University Library Council, the Office of the Provost, and the Division of Research. The benefits and features of the policy are summarized briefly below: …”

 

Implementing the Declaration on Research Assessment: a publisher case study

Abstract:  There has been much debate around the role of metrics in scholarly communication, with particular focus on the misapplication of journal metrics, such as the impact factor in the assessment of research and researchers. Various initiatives have advocated for a change in this culture, including the Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), which invites stakeholders throughout the scholarly communication ecosystem to sign up and show their support for practices designed to address the misuse of metrics. This case study provides an overview of the process undertaken by a large academic publisher (Taylor & Francis Group) in signing up to DORA and implementing some of its key practices in the hope that it will provide some guidance to others considering becoming a signatory. Our experience suggests that research, consultation and flexibility are crucial components of the process. Additionally, approaching signing with a project mindset versus a ‘sign and forget’ mentality can help organizations to understand the practical implications of signing, to anticipate and mitigate potential obstacles and to support cultural change.

 

Implementing the new UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) open access policy | Jisc

“isc is planning to:

Identify and agree with our members their requirements for transformative journals and incorporate transformative journals as one of the models that publishers can adopt/authors can publish in
Increase our engagement and negotiations with the many small and medium sized publishers and societies to provide them with opportunity to adopt open access models that enable compliant options for UKRI funded authors and meet the requirements of our members
Complete the first phase of our data work which will focus on expanding our data collation and analysis to enable us to deliver quality data and intelligence to our members and UKRI to drive value and evaluate the impact of transitional arrangements
Establish new partnerships that will support the accurate and timely sharing of data so that authors have the most up to date information to support publication decisions, in particular with the cOAlition S supported Journal Checker Tool
Run a series of roundtables, workshops and webinars with our members, research organisations, publishers and funders, to discuss challenges around the implementation and to consider solutions that will reduce bureaucracy and increase efficiency…”

UKRI publishes guidance and resources for new open access policy – UKRI

“Peer-reviewed research articles that acknowledge UKRI funding will need to comply with UKRI’s new open access policy from 1 April 2022.

The following new guidance and resources are available:

an FAQ for the policy
supporting guidance for authors
an information pack for research organisations to use to engage their researchers about the policy
CC BY-ND licence exception process and guidance
the policy document….”

Digital regulation that works for research and education

“The current pandemic is one of the best examples of the rise of big data and, more importantly, of ensuring that it is shared. It was a turning point that demonstrated that only through the global opening of data were researchers and innovators able to deploy vaccines and propose adaptable public health measures.

The Open Science is a movement paving the way to making research results openly available to all and to promoting full access, sharing and re-use of data and protocols. More generally, it is a fundamental driver for universities’ mission in society at large and for their ability to cooperate in solving global challenges like climate change or the next pandemic….

The European University Association’s recent survey on Open Science demonstrated the strategic importance of Open Science for European universities, with over half of the surveyed institutions rating it as very high or high importance for their strategy. But while Open Access to research publications was of high importance for 90% of institutions, only 60% considered its implementation level to be high enough….

Furthermore, this gap grows in data-related areas where implementation remains much lower. To specifically achieve Open Access, institutional repositories – platforms or digital archives where research created within a university and made available and accessible with few if any barriers – are seen as the most common and important steps. Yet EU legislation like the Digital Services Act (DSA) could strongly impede if not completely stifle the efforts of universities to share science widely through institutional repositories. If left unaddressed, the DSA would overburden them with unnecessary legal, administrative and financial constraints….

Recently publishers have attempted to establish overly restrictive criterion in their guidance for researchers in selecting a repository to manage, share and preserve their data. Actors across the research community have expressed their concerns over the nature of the proposed set of criteria. There are also questions surrounding the lack of transparency in the way scientific publishers allow researchers to use open access to data. This can conflict with what universities or funding organisations recommend. It remains important to strengthen and expand the existing repository ecosystem and encourage the adoption of good practices, but researchers must have a real choice including the option to choose community-managed institutional, national, domain or generalist data repositories. Policymakers both in the digital and research fields need to be aware of the conflicts and obstacles on the road to Open Science….”

Using R packages to populate IR

“Many institutions have reported that participation rates of article deposit in their IR are low regardless of their various efforts in outreach and engagement. Even when the deposit is mandated, the participation rate can still be quite low.

Once this hurdle was overcome, there is another challenge faced by the IR administrators, ensuring that the version submitted by the researcher is the appropriate version. If it is not, IR administrators would need to take additional steps to correspond with the researcher to obtain the appropriate version. Thus, increasing their administrative work load.

Therefore, some institutions had taken the pro-active initiative to complete the deposit on behalf of their researchers. This certainly is not a small undertaking. However, there are openly available R packages (https://ropensci.org/) that can be used to automate some of the processes. In this page, I will summarize the steps to do that….”

Accelerating Open Access 2021 Annual Review [cOAlition S]

“This report presents an overview of the activities we have undertaken in 2021, the levels of OA compliance amongst cOAlition S funders, and the latest news on the tools and services we are developing, such as the Journal Checker Tool and the Journal Comparison Service. Next, we outline our support for new publishing models, highlighting the progress on the Transformative Journals framework, the publishers’ reaction to the Rights Retention Strategy, and our role in encouraging small society publishers to move to Open Access. cOAlition S has also supported the publication of a report on Diamond journals and has issued a statement on Open Access for academic books. Looking forward, cOAlition S has identified three strategic priorities for 2022, which we present in the last part of this review….”

Implementing an Open & FAIR data sharing policy—A case study in the earth and environmental sciences – Cannon – 2022 – Learned Publishing – Wiley Online Library

Abstract:  This paper outlines the impact of the introduction of an Open & FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable) data sharing policy on six earth and environmental science journals published by Taylor & Francis, beginning in November 2019. Notably, 18 months after implementing this new policy, we observed minimal impacts on submission, acceptance rates, or peer-review times for the participating journals. This paper describes the changes that were required to internal systems and processes in order to implement the new policy, and compares our findings with recent literature reports on the impact of journals introducing data-sharing policies.

Open Science als Wicked Problem: Wie Bibliotheken die Transformation beschleunigen können | ZBW MediaTalk

From Google’s English:  “The move to open science often appears cumbersome. Why this is so is explained in a recently published workbook using the concept of the Wicked Problem. It also shows how the various roles in the science system can promote the transition to open science. The blog post summarizes the points of particular interest for libraries – including suggestions for their implementation.”

Electronic resource management in a post-Plan S world

Abstract:  cOAlition S and research funding policies mean open access content is no longer a ‘trend’ but rather another consideration of content management for librarians and libraries. In 2018, the authors of this article launched a new version of TERMS (Techniques for Electronic Resources Management). TERMS 2.0 envisages a post-Plan S e-resources life cycle blending e-resources and open access content management. This article outlines how open content management can dovetail into current e-resource management tactics across six TERMS: Investigation of material, procurement and licensing of content, implementation, troubleshooting of problems, evaluation and preservation, and sustainability concerns. Lastly, we reflect on the themes growing in libraries in regard to management of online resources.

 

EOSC activities update and UK engagement – Research

“The European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) is a European Commission (EC) initiative to support the development of open science and the digital transformation of research in Europe and further afield. Now in its implementation phase, it aims to develop a “web” of FAIR data and services, providing a multi-disciplinary environment where researchers can publish, find and re-use data, tools and services. The EOSC is complementary to UK efforts to define and adopt open science policies and practices, and the UK contributes to development of the EOSC through participation in implementation projects and in the EOSC Association, a legal entity established to govern the European Open Science Cloud.

As part of its Tech 2 Tech series, Jisc held an EOSC webinar in March 2021 which helped to confirm strong interest in the EOSC across the UK research community. Another Jisc webinar about EOSC will be held on 15 December. This blog provides an update on the numerous activities which have been taking place as part of the ongoing development of the EOSC, and UK engagement with them….