FAIRPoints-FAIRPoints ‘Ask me Anything’ (AMA) – SciLifeLab

“This event is part of a series of “Ask Me Anything”-style events featuring keynote speakers from the RDA, and EOSC groups focused on RDA activities and EOSC solutions in relation to FAIR implementation and Open practices in Science.”

CHECKLIST FOR OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHERS ON IMPLEMENTING THE UNESCO RECOMMENDATION ON OPEN SCIENCE

“This document is part of the UNESCO Open Science Toolkit, designed to support implementation of the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. It has been produced in partnership with the Open  Access  Scholarly  Publishing  Association  (OASPA),  a  diverse  community  of  organizations  engaged  in  open  scholarship.  The  aim  is  to  provide  practical  assistance  to  the  open  access  publishing  community  to  better  understand  the  Recommendation  by  highlighting  the  areas  that apply to open access publishers who wish to support its implementation….”

 

Ten simple rules for implementing open and reproducible research practices after attending a training course | PLOS Computational Biology

Abstract:  Open, reproducible, and replicable research practices are a fundamental part of science. Training is often organized on a grassroots level, offered by early career researchers, for early career researchers. Buffet style courses that cover many topics can inspire participants to try new things; however, they can also be overwhelming. Participants who want to implement new practices may not know where to start once they return to their research team. We describe ten simple rules to guide participants of relevant training courses in implementing robust research practices in their own projects, once they return to their research group. This includes (1) prioritizing and planning which practices to implement, which involves obtaining support and convincing others involved in the research project of the added value of implementing new practices; (2) managing problems that arise during implementation; and (3) making reproducible research and open science practices an integral part of a future research career. We also outline strategies that course organizers can use to prepare participants for implementation and support them during this process.

 

Analysis of Open Science Policy Recommendations Proposed in India’s 5th Science, Technology & Innovation Policy Draft

“One of the core principles of science is to aid socio-economic growth. Open science is a movement that reinforces the primacy of science in the direction of economic and social welfare. UNESCO’s recommendation on open science aims to provide an international framework for open science policy and practice. It endorses unrestricted access to scholarly publications and data, the use of digital technologies to drive scientific processes, more collaboration and cooperation among the actors in the scientific ecosystem, sharing of research infrastructure, acknowledgment of diverse knowledge systems, and science for society. Open science could enable a productive science ecosystem in global south countries through efficient knowledge circulation, resource sharing, and collaboration. Analysis of open science policy from a global south country can provide valuable insights. India is preparing to adopt an open science framework recommended in the 5th Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy (STIP) draft, released in December 2020. The STIP draft recommends open access to articles and research data from publicly funded projects, access to research infrastructure beyond the boundary of academic and research institutions, strengthening of Indian journals, and open educational resources. However, the draft lacks an exhaustive implementation plan. The draft falls short in devising strategies to foster collaboration between actors of the STI ecosystem, the inclusion of traditional knowledge systems, and society’s role in knowledge creation processes. The science policymakers and advisers of the Department of Science and Technology and the government of India should probe these areas to develop a more effective and inclusive open science framework.”

Launch of the UNESCO Open Science Toolkit

“Dr Lidia Brito, UNESCO Regional Director for Southern Africa, launched the UNESCO Open Science Toolkit at the Open Science Day (7 December) that took place on the margins of the World Science Forum 2022 in Cape Town, South Africa. 

The Toolkit is a collection of resources (guides, policy briefs, factsheets and indexes) designed to support implementation of the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. The Toolkit is a living document, and will be updated to reflect new developments in open science and the status of implementation of the Recommendation.

Iryna Kuchma, EIFL Open Access Programme Manager, participated in five working groups that developed the Toolkit. In addition, EIFL specifically contributed to two Checklists in the Toolkit, in collaboration with partners: the Checklist for universities on implementing the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science, in collaboration with LIBSENSE (in English and in French), and the Checklist for open access publishers on implementing the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science, in collaboration with OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association) (in English and in French). …”

WorldFAIR Project (D2.1) ‘FAIR Implementation Profiles (FIPs) in WorldFAIR: What Have We Learnt?’ | Zenodo

“Report on the completed FAIR Implementation Profiles completed by project Case Studies in 2022.  Project Deliverable D2.1 for EC WIDERA-funded project “WorldFAIR: Global cooperation on FAIR data policy and practice”.

This report gives a brief overview of the experience of the WorldFAIR project in using FAIR Implementation Profiles (FIPs).  It describes the WorldFAIR project, its objectives and its rich set of Case Studies; and it introduces FIPs as a methodology for listing the FAIR implementation decisions made by a given community of practice. Subsequently, the report gives an overview of the initial feedback and findings from the Case Studies, and considers a number of issues and points of discussion that emerged from this exercise. Finally, and most importantly, we describe how we think the experience of using FIPs will assist each Case Study in its work to implement FAIR, and will assist the project as a whole in the development of two key outputs: the Cross-Domain Interoperability Framework (CDIF), and domain-sensitive recommendations for FAIR assessment.

We hope this report will be of interest to data experts who want to find out more about the WorldFAIR project, its remarkable and diverse array of Case Studies, and about FIPs.  It is important to stress that this report does not set out to give a comprehensive appraisal of the FIPs approach and could not do so.  All the WorldFAIR Case Studies have developed an initial FIP, but the process of reflection on practice will continue throughout the project.  Each Case Study will complete at least one further FIP, and in some cases more than one, towards the end of the project and this will enrich our understanding of the utility of the approach.  At that stage, we intend to be able to incorporate some robust prospective and aspirational considerations, and we need to consider how best to represent this in the FIPs.

As noted above, the final section of this report looks forward to the development of the Cross-Domain Interoperability Framework (CDIF), and domain-sensitive recommendations for FAIR assessment….”

New report on value and utility of FAIR Implementation Profiles (FIPs) available from the WorldFAIR project – CODATA, The Committee on Data for Science and Technology

“In the WorldFAIR project, CODATA (the Committee on Data of the International Science Council), with the RDA (Research Data Alliance) Association as a major partner, is working with a set of eleven disciplinary and cross-disciplinary case studies to advance implementation of the FAIR principles and, in particular, to improve interoperability and reusability of digital research objects, including data. 

To that end, the WorldFAIR project created a range of FAIR Implementation Profiles (FIPs) between July and October 2022 to better understand current FAIR data-related practices.  The report, ‘FAIR Implementation Profiles (FIPs) in WorldFAIR: What Have We Learnt?’, is published this week and available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7378109.  …”

Just released — new insights into OE in European Libraries of Higher Education 2022 – SPARC Europe

“We are pleased to announce the publication of our report, Open Education in European Libraries of Higher Education: Implementing the UNESCO Recommendation on OER. 

The report presents the findings of the third edition of our annual survey of European academic libraries on the topic of Open Education (OE) and Open Educational Resources (OER). It explores the work being done by European academic librarians to implement the UNESCO OER Recommendation, almost three years on from its initial publication in November 2019. 

Our 2022 survey is structured according to the five areas of action/objectives of the UNESCO OER Recommendation (indicated below) and includes detailed recommendations for each objective:

Objective 1 — Building capacity;
Objective 2 — Developing supportive policies;
Objective 3 — Encouraging diverse, equitable, and inclusive (DEI) access to quality OER;
Objective 4 — Sustaining OER;
Objective 5 — Promoting and reinforcing international collaboration. …”

1Future Leadership Fellows discuss open research with UKRI and UKRN

“On 12 October, UKRI convened several hundred Future Leaders Fellows in Birmingham. The UKRI open research team and the UK Reproducibility Network brought together some of those Fellows in two special interest session s to discuss open and transparent research . H ere we summarise the perspectives a nd ideas that we heard from the Fellows, who work in a range of disciplines and have engaged with open research in a variety of ways . Where we are aware of related work, we note this [in square brackets]….”

FAIRification Process – GO FAIR

“The FAIR Data Principles apply to metadata, data, and supporting infrastructure (e.g., search engines). Most of the requirements for findability and accessibility can be achieved at the metadata level. Interoperability and reuse require more efforts at the data level. The scheme below depicts the FAIRification process adopted by GO FAIR, focusing on data, but also indicating the required work for metadata: …”

[Open letter to White House OSTP]

“We support the goals of the Memorandum of improving access to taxpayer-funded research and greater transparency of research data, but are concerned about the details of how policies will be developed and implemented to maximize their intended value and avoid unintended consequences.

On the one hand, the new guidance represents a natural progression for scholarly publishing in this information age, not an entirely new paradigm. If implemented successfully, it will further the goal of enabling transformative scientific discovery across disciplines. We also share the Administration’s goal of ensuring greater access to research results, especially for small businesses and for students and researchers at small, under-resourced institutions, including community colleges, minority serving institutions, and rural institutions. 

On the other hand, the Memorandum is short on details of how the new requirements will be implemented, including how agencies will update their own policies and collaborate with stakeholders to ensure smooth implementation and address new challenges with who can afford  to submit their research for publication, or how to ensure the quality of research publications. We are further concerned about the lack of detail with respect to the requirements for digital data. Making data accessible in a way that is truly useful to advance science has always been a more difficult technical, cultural, and economic challenge than making publications available. It is the responsibility of the Federal government not just to ensure that taxpayer funded research is made publicly available (with appropriate protections for privacy and confidentiality), but that it is done in a way that avoids unintended consequences and maximizes the scientific benefits….

We seek your answers to the following questions no later than October 31, 2022: 1. How will OSTP work with agencies, publishers, universities of all sizes, scientific societies, and other relevant stakeholders to: a. Ensure coordination and consistency in policies, and well as to maximize opportunities for interoperability across agencies and disciplines? b. Develop and support new mechanisms for supporting page charges, peer-review, data repositories, and other infrastructure necessary to support a smooth transition to immediate public access? c. Ensure that the costs of publishing are not shifted entirely to research grants, cutting into funding intended for cutting-edge research and development? d. Ensure continued equity in access for researchers seeking to submit their research results for publication, particularly in journals that may shift from subscription access to page charges? e. Prevent the proliferation of multiple versions of peer-reviewed manuscripts, and support the public archiving of a single version of record, independent of home institution of the author(s)?

2. The data challenge has always been much harder than the publications challenge. It requires new funds, not just new ways of providing funds. The significant differences in culture and needs across disciplines, institutions, and agencies adds another layer of complexity to implementation. a. What steps are OSTP taking to enable implementation of the data requirements in the Memorandum in a way that minimizes burden on researchers and maximizes the cross-disciplinary scientific value of data repositories? b. Does OSTP anticipate that new appropriations will be needed to support the enhancement of existing data repositories or to establish new ones? c. Agencies are directed to plan for ensuring scientific data is freely available to the public “at the time of publication.” Will agencies be required to ensure public access to that data in perpetuity, or for a set period of time?  d. Will OSTP promulgate a rulemaking to formalize a government-wide definition for “scientific data?” Or will agencies be asked to issue discipline-specific definitions so that federally funded researchers can understand what specific scientific data must be made available for public access? e. Will guidance be developed for Federally funded research data not associated with peer-reviewed scholarly publications? …”

 

Chairwoman Johnson and Ranking Member Lucas Send Letter to OSTP Director Prabhakar Requesting Implementation Details of New Memorandum on Access to Federally Funded Research | House Committee on Science, Space and Technology

“Today, Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) and Ranking Member Frank Lucas (R-OK) sent a joint letter on public access to federally funded research to the newly confirmed Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), Dr. Arati Prabhakar….

“We support the goals of the Memorandum of improving access to taxpayer-funded research and greater transparency of research data, but are concerned about the details of how policies will be developed and implemented to maximize their intended value and avoid unintended consequences,” the Chairwoman and Ranking Member said in the letter.

 

They continued, “the Memorandum is short on details of how the new requirements will be implemented, including how agencies will update their own policies and collaborate with stakeholders to ensure smooth implementation and address new challenges with who can afford to submit their research for publication, or how to ensure the quality of research publications. We are further concerned about the lack of detail with respect to the requirements for digital data. Making data accessible in a way that is truly useful to advance science has always been a more difficult technical, cultural, and economic challenge than making publications available. It is the responsibility of the Federal government not just to ensure that taxpayer funded research is made publicly available (with appropriate protections for privacy and confidentiality), but that it is done in a way that avoids unintended consequences and maximizes the scientific benefits.” …”

NOT-OD-22-189: Implementation Details for the NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy

“The purpose of this notice is to inform the extramural research community of implementation details for the NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing (DMS Policy) affecting grant and cooperative agreement applications submitted for receipt dates on or after January 25, 2023. The specific changes to competing grant and cooperative agreement application instructions clarified below will be implemented with application form packages identified with a Competition ID of “FORMS-H” and incorporated into the forthcoming FORMS-H application guides.

Although the DMS Policy will apply also to Research and Development (R&D) contracts, NIH intramural research projects, and other funding agreements (e.g., Other Transactions), the forms changes and other implementation details provided in this Notice apply only to NIH extramural grant and cooperative agreement activities. Details applicable to R&D contracts will be incorporated into the appropriate Requests for Proposals, and details applicable to Other Transactions will be incorporated into the appropriate Research Opportunity Announcement….”

Opening the Future: How to Implement an Equitable Revenue Model for Open Access Monographs | Community-Led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM)

Eve, Martin Paul, Pinter, Frances, Poznanski, Emily, & Grady, Tom. (2022). Opening the Future: How to Implement an Equitable Revenue Model for Open Access Monographs (1.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6907707

Abstract:

COVID-19 has thrown many aspects of university research culture into acute relief. As the reality of the virus dawned and campuses worldwide went into lockdown, publishers scrambled to unpaywall their research. Publishers made topical works and more general material openly available, through their own sites and platforms such as Project Muse and JSTOR. Physical collections became inaccessible and demand for openly accessible research skyrocketed. It is unclear that it is desirable to return to the previous systems of scholarly communication in the book publishing world, in which physical copies may remain affordable, even while e-licensing agreements for libraries are not.

This has been recognised in several recent global policy announcements including the cOAlition S/Plan S guidelines, and the recent UKRI consultation on OA. The latter’s proposed measures include the possibility of zero-embargo green OA, more liberal open licensing, and the long- vaunted requirement for funded monographs to be in scope. This last element built on a longstanding policy history in the UK foreshadowing a mandate for OA monographs.

That said, the path to OA monographs is not free of obstacles. Among the many issues, the most frequently raised is the business model of Book Processing Charges (BPCs) and their apparent unaffordability, mostly due to distributional allocation of library resources. Happily, several recent reports have detailed non-BPC OA revenue and business models that presses could use to transition to OA – one of the most recent being COPIM’s Revenue models for Open Access monographs 2020.

That report describes a variation on the journal ‘Subscribe to Open’ model whereby members ‘subscribe to a backlist, with the revenue then used to make the frontlist openly accessible’. This constitutes a new business model for OA monographs that had not previously been implemented. We implemented this model, dubbed ‘Opening the Future,’ in a partnership between the COPIM project, the Central European University Press (CEUP), and Liverpool University Press (LUP). This model presents a potential route for the mass and sustainable transition to OA of many small-to-mid sized university presses.

This document sets out how we implemented this model, including the documentation of challenges, resources, timetables, and activities. It is intended as a roadmap for other presses that wish to implement an ‘Opening the Future’-esque model. Of course, this document is unlikely to cover everything, but the authors are happy to respond to individual queries where this will prove helpful.

Monagle & Taylor (2022) Assessing and managing transitional read and publish deals: a University of Salford case study

Monagle, Helen, and Wendy Taylor. 2022. “Assessing and Managing Transitional Read and Publish Deals: A University of Salford Case Study”. Insights 35: 12. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.581

Abstract

This case study explores the processes and challenges of assessing and managing transitional agreements (TAs) at the University of Salford. TAs are contracts with publishers that shift spending from subscriptions to open access and therefore enable the transition to full and immediate open access for research articles. As a teaching-intensive and research-informed university with a small team, Salford needs to ensure that transitional deals are managed effectively and efficiently to maximize our resources and provide the content and publishing opportunities needed to support our teaching and research strategies. Here we describe our processes and the challenges we have faced working remotely and across teams. Finally, we reflect on future developments and how we can continue to adapt and develop our processes as the scholarly landscape evolves.