Springer Nature and the Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) Announce New Partnership

Following Springer Nature’s successful transformative agreements (TAs) in Europe and North America, the company is pleased to announce its first TA in the Asia-Pacific region. The agreement with the Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) will give members of the CAUL consortium the ability to publish their research open access (OA) in over 2000 journals[1], making it CAUL’s largest TA to date.

Collective Governance: an Update from The Open Book Collective Work Package · COPIM

How should a collective be governed? This was the question that punctum books’ Director Eileen Joy and I took the lead in addressing, in collaboration with our COPIM colleagues and a range of workshop participants. The terms of the question seem almost contradictory: a ‘collective’ implies equity, collegiality, co-operation and a lack of organized hierarchy, whilst ‘governed’ suggests top-down management structures, or the imposition of rules and regulations by a select group over a larger majority. Obviously, the latter model would not be in line with the values of a project we are calling the Open Book Collective – i.e., a consortium that brings together publishers, librarians and other stakeholders in the future of open access monographs via a platform that catalogues, distributes and sustains OA books – yet at the same time, we needed to find a way that the different groups of stakeholders could be effectively organized to work together and get the most out of the platform in a mutually beneficial arrangement. For the purposes of the platform we are building, that means publishers, librarians, scholars, researchers, universities, infrastructure providers, authors, readers and more. The platform needs to respond to a wide range of interests, needs and requirements, even if all of us were committed to the overarching values of sustainable Open Access publishing for monographs.

Central licensing and invoicing deals with PALCI and GWLA, and new participation deadline for Direct to Open from the MIT Press | The MIT Press

“Today, the MIT Press announced two new consortial relationships with the Partnership for Academic Library Collaboration and Innovation (PALCI) and the Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) for Direct to Open (D2O) and extended the deadline for libraries to commit to support the collective action model to November 30, 2021.

Libraries that commit to support Direct to Open before November 30, 2021 will earn exclusive benefits. They gain immediate, term access to an archive of gated monographs, including classic works from Rosalind Krauss, Daniel Dennett, Noam Chomsky, Paul Krugman, Sherry Turkle, and many more. D2O participating libraries also receive special discounting on the MIT Press’s trade books collection on the MIT Press Direct platform. If D2O does not reach the success threshold for 2022, participating libraries are assured term access to the archive collection without paying the fee. ”

Finland: Follow the Number of OA Articles

Researchers from Finnish universities and research institutions, can publish their articles open access thanks to the FinELib Consortium agreements. A total of 2929 open articles were published in 2020. The number of open access articles increases as more and more researchers utilise the open access benefits included in the consortium agreements.

You can track the yearly development in the number of open access articles on FinELib’s new web page.

IEEE Reaches a Transformative Open Access Read and Publish Agreement with Finnish Consortium FinELib

IEEE, the world’s largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for humanity, and FinELib, a consortium of Finnish universities, universities of applied sciences, research institutes, and public libraries, have entered an Open Access Read and Publish agreement. For more information, see https://finelib.fi/iel-agreement. 

Principles and Standards for OA Arrangements Between Libraries/Consortia and Smaller Independent Publishers

“The transition to Open Access requires change on the part of all stakeholders, and it is particularly crucial that there is active cross-stakeholder alignment focused on enabling smaller independent publishers to transition successfully. In recognition of this, cOAlition S and ALPSP have asked us to convene groups to work on shared principles, data, licenses, and workflows as outlined in our recent report (see https://www.coalition-s.org/open-access-agreements-with-smaller-publishers-require-active-cross-stakeholder-alignment-report-says/).

We are seeking expressions of interest in engaging with this work. Ideally, we would like a diverse array of people knowledgeable about the topic, who can represent their communities and influence working practices, and backed by organisations willing to communicate, champion, implement and maintain the outputs that will emerge from this work….”

Open Science: read our statement – News – CIVIS – A European Civic University

“CIVIS universities promote the development of new research indicators to complement the conventional indicators for research quality and impact, so as to do justice to open science practices and, going beyond pure bibliometric indicators, to promote also non-bibliometric research products. In particular, the metrics should extend the conventional bibliometric indicators in order to cover new forms of research outputs, such as research data and research software….

Incentives and Rewards for researchers to engage in Open Science activities 

Research career evaluation systems should fully acknowledge open science activities. CIVIS members encourage the inclusion of Open Science practices in their assessment mechanisms for rewards, promotion, and/or tenure, along with the Open Science Career Assessment Matrix….”

Open access publishing and the promise of collaboration · COPIM

“In the discussions about the merits and demerits of collaboration, what tends to be missed though are the untapped potentials that exist in collaborations not just between academics, or between disciplines, or between academics and external organisations, or between academics and the public, but between academics, scholarly libraries, and publishers of scholarly work. This the subject of a new report co-authored by Elli Gerakopoulou, Izabella Penier and me. It focuses on the possibilities that might exist for collaboration between scholarly libraries and open access book publishers, including the kinds of open access publishers led by academics represented by ScholarLed, one of the partners in the COPIM project and with which I am also involved. The report draws on a combination of interviews, workshop discussions (including one workshop with librarians in the US, one in the UK, and one with publishers), and pre-workshop surveys with librarians and individuals involved in library consortia, as well as desk research.

In the report we examine various forms of collaboration that characterise the existing landscape of open access book publishing. This includes examining library membership programmes, of the kind run by both publishers — examples include programmes run by Lever Press, Luminos, punctum books, and Open Book Publishers — and infrastructure providers — notably the OAPEN library membership programme. We also look at intermediaries that aim to increase the likelihood of open access book publishers being able to receive financial support from scholarly libraries, such as Knowledge Unlatched and TOME. This forms part of a scoping exercise to enable us and our readers to understand the diversity of types of collaboration that already exist between and around open access publishers and scholarly libraries and where there are possibilities to learn from such initiatives….” 

The promise of collaboration: collective funding models and the integration of Open Access books into libraries | Zenodo

“This report tackles a simple question: how can open access books be more successfully integrated into scholarly libraries? While there are some important practical efforts being made to address this question in a variety of different contexts, we explore the areas where further work is required to progress from a situation in which supporting and integrating open access books often remains a peripheral concern for libraries.

The report draws on desk research alongside a combination of interviews, workshop discussions and pre-workshop surveys with librarians and individuals involved in library consortia. It explores issues such as the discoverability of open access content in library catalogues, the sustainability of open access monograph publishing, the difficulty of articulating the value of open access for supporting universities and the challenge of aligning open access values with those of stakeholders. It also reimagines a more diverse and inclusive system of scholarly communication in relation to open access monographs. As part of this, the report outlines some of the principles that could inform a new open access model/platform aimed at transforming the relationship between open access book publishers and libraries….”

In pursuit of open science, open access is not enough | Science

“After decades of debate on the feasibility of open access (OA) to scientific publications, we may be nearing a tipping point. A number of recent developments, such as Plan S, suggest that OA upon publication could become the default in the sciences within the next several years. Despite uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of OA models, many publishers who had been reluctant to abandon the subscription business model are showing openness to OA (1). Although more OA can mean more immediate, global access to scholarship, there remains a need for practical, sustainable models, for careful analysis of the consequences of business model choices, and for “caution in responding to passionate calls for a ‘default to open’” (2). Of particular concern for the academic community, as subscription revenues decline in the transition to OA and some publishers prioritize other sources of revenue, is the growing ownership of data analytics, hosting, and portal services by large scholarly publishers. This may enhance publishers’ ability to lock in institutional customers through combined offerings that condition open access to journals upon purchase of other services. Even if such “bundled” arrangements have a near-term benefit of increasing openly licensed scholarship, they may run counter to long-term interests of the academic community by reducing competition and the diversity of service offerings. The healthy functioning of the academic community, including fair terms and conditions from commercial partners, requires that the global marketplace for data analytics and knowledge infrastructure be kept open to real competition.”

 

In pursuit of open science, open access is not enough | Science

“After decades of debate on the feasibility of open access (OA) to scientific publications, we may be nearing a tipping point. A number of recent developments, such as Plan S, suggest that OA upon publication could become the default in the sciences within the next several years. Despite uncertainty about the long-term sustainability of OA models, many publishers who had been reluctant to abandon the subscription business model are showing openness to OA (1). Although more OA can mean more immediate, global access to scholarship, there remains a need for practical, sustainable models, for careful analysis of the consequences of business model choices, and for “caution in responding to passionate calls for a ‘default to open’” (2). Of particular concern for the academic community, as subscription revenues decline in the transition to OA and some publishers prioritize other sources of revenue, is the growing ownership of data analytics, hosting, and portal services by large scholarly publishers. This may enhance publishers’ ability to lock in institutional customers through combined offerings that condition open access to journals upon purchase of other services. Even if such “bundled” arrangements have a near-term benefit of increasing openly licensed scholarship, they may run counter to long-term interests of the academic community by reducing competition and the diversity of service offerings. The healthy functioning of the academic community, including fair terms and conditions from commercial partners, requires that the global marketplace for data analytics and knowledge infrastructure be kept open to real competition.”

 

The Impact of Big Deal Breaks on Library Consortia: An Exploratory Case Study: The Serials Librarian: Vol 0, No 0

Abstract:  This study examines the impact of Big Deal breaks on statewide resource sharing. An analysis within VIVA (Virginia’s academic library consortium) for Big Deal publishers showed significant lending of one publisher with low levels of statewide holdings. A closer examination of an individual institution with the most recent cancellations of this publisher’s content showed high levels of fulfillment from lending partners outside the consortium. As more groups cancel Big Deals, consideration for alternative access will be increasingly important, and understanding the resource sharing environment should inform a cooperative approach to journal acquisitions in order to minimize negative impacts on researchers.

 

The OLH Open Consortial Offer

“Our offer to those joining [OLH] as a bloc would be as follows:

For 10 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/10th of 1 membership at the highest fee of the group.

For 15 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/15th of 2 memberships at the highest fee of the group.

For 20 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/20th of 3 memberships at the highest fee of the group.

For 25 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/25th of 4 memberships at the highest fee of the group.

For 30 members joining the OLH consortium, each member would share a discount equivalent to 1/30th of 5 memberships at the highest fee of the group.

The offer continues to scale as outlined above based on the size of your consortium….”

Data Summit in Paris | LERU

“The international Research Data Rights Summit was held at Sorbonne University on Monday, 27 January. This initiative brought together nine major networks of research-intensive universities from major regions of the world. It was an opportunity to sign the “Sorbonne Declaration” on the rights of research data. This text strongly affirms the willingness of universities to share their data while firmly calling on governments to adopt a clear legal framework to regulate this sharing and to provide the means to put it in place. …”