Arning et al. (2022) Open Access Transformation for Books: The Role of Institutional Presses and Publishing Services | Zenodo

Arning, Ursula, Bargheer, Margo, Meinecke, Isabella, Schobert, Dagmar, & Tobias, Regine. (2022). Open Access Transformation for Books: The Role of Institutional Presses and Publishing Services. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6346271

This position paper highlights important aspects for the Open Access transformation of books. The five authors are all experts in the field of institutional publication infrastructures. They show current fields of action and scope for research institutions in the field of non-commercial infrastructures for OA books.

 

From library budget to information budget: fostering transparency in the transformation towards open access

The discussion on the transformation of scholarly journals to open access (OA) increasingly concerns financial aspects. Considering the variety of funding strategies for article processing charge (APCs), the array of cost types for scientific information and the need for data monitoring to promote cost transparency, an integrated view of the financial dimension of the OA transition is needed. This commentary describes the need for implementing an information budget that looks beyond just the library budget and comprehensively targets all financial flows from universities and other research performing organizations to publishers. An information budget promotes an integrated perspective on the distributed costs at a given institution. This centralized approach of assessing financial flows can be used to strengthen the position of research institutions when negotiating with publishers.

Open Access: Koste es, was es wolle?

Abstract:  The paper introduces the recommendations of German Science and Humanities Council on the transformation of academic publishing towards Open Access, pinpointing core aspects. The key points will illustrate why, 20 years on, these recommendations are indicative of a lack of genuine transformation, and may explain why change has not happened despite the manifold efforts made by libraries. The article also outlines promising aspects that nonetheless may require a long-term view most of the parties involved might not be ready to take.

What are the benefits of open access? TIB study confirms advantages and dispels reservations – Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)

“Open access – free access to scholarly publications – offers many advantages. As surveys show, however, some researchers still have reservations. In the past decade, numerous empirical studies have been published providing substantiated results on the hopes and concerns regarding open access….

To conduct this review, TIB identified a total of 318 scientific studies that empirically examine various effects of open access. From this corpus, the authors selected 61 particularly relevant studies for a systematic comparison; these were then analysed thoroughly and the various results were compared in detail.

The effects studied relate to seven major aspects of open access:

Attention in the scientific community
Quality of scientific publications
Knowledge transfer
Productivity of the publishing system
Use of publications
Inequality in the science system
Economic impact on the publishing system…

Dr. David Hopf, lead author of the study, reported the key findings: “The literature reviewed confirms several advantages of open access: open access leads to increased usage and to a professionally and geographically more diverse readership. At the same time, open access publications make a greater contribution to knowledge transfer than traditionally published research results, and the publishing process – the time between the submission and acceptance or publication of articles – is shorter. What is more, a number of negative concerns assumed in relation to the effects of open access – for example, that open access publications are of an inferior quality and lead to disadvantages in print edition sales – have been dispelled.”

However, one partial result came as a surprise: the fact that open access publications are cited more frequently than publications that are not freely available is often mentioned as an advantage of open access – and is also confirmed by most empirical studies. However, a substantial proportion of the empirical literature deviates from this result, which means that an OA citation advantage cannot be conclusively confirmed empirically. In light of a high level of plausibility and methodological difficulties in this area, however, it can still be assumed that such an advantage exists.

Just one finding indicates a negative effect of open access: where so-called article processing charges (APCs) – publication costs incurred by many open access publications – exist, authors with fewer resources may be discouraged from publishing open access, e.g. due to low income levels in some regions of the world or a lack of institutional funding. However, this is not an effect of open access per se, but rather an effect of a particular business model for financing open access publications….”

Hopf, D., Dellmann, S., Hauschke, C. and Tullney, M. (2022) Wirkungen von Open Access. Literaturstudie über empirische Arbeiten 2010-2021. Hannover : Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB).

Hopf, D., Dellmann, S., Hauschke, C. and Tullney, M. (2022) Wirkungen von Open Access. Literaturstudie über empirische Arbeiten 2010-2021. Hannover : Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB).

Open Access – the free access to scientific publications – intuitively offers many advantages. At the same time, some scientists, members of university administration, publishers, and policymakers continue to have reservations against open access. In the last decade, numerous empirical studies on the effects of open access were conducted. This report provides an overview of the state of research from 2010 to 2021. The empirical findings presented help determine the advantages and disadvantages of open access and serve as a knowledge base for scholars, publishers, academic institutions, and policy makers. An overview of the state of knowledge informs decisions on open access and publishing strategies. In addition, this report identifies aspects of open-access effects that are potentially highly relevant but have not yet been adequately studied. Overall, various advantages of open access can be considered empirically confirmed at the current state of research. These advantages include improved knowledge transfer, increased speed of the publication process, and increased usage by a more diverse readership, both in terms of profession and location. In addition, some presumed negative effects – such as lower quality of publications and disadvantages in the sale of print editions – can be considered empirically refuted. The empirical results on effects of open-access publishing therefore support the goal of a far-reaching transformation to open access, to which the German science organisations, among others, have committed themselves.

“Wirkungen von Open Access” – New TIB study on the effects of open access | TIB-Blog

Open access intuitively offers many advantages. However, surveys show that some scientists still have reservations. In the last decade, many empirical studies have been published, providing evidence regarding such hopes and concerns. What was missing is a literature review on the effects of open access that provides a comprehensive overview of these empirical findings. To fill this gap, Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB) on behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (abbreviated BMBF) recently completed a study named “Wirkungen von Open Access. Literaturstudie über empirische Arbeiten 2010 –2021”. The accompanying report is now published and freely available in the repository Renate. In this blog article, we provide a short overview over the results.

 

Practices and Tools of Open Science

The series will be conducted online via Zoom. All are welcome to participate, and participation is free of charge. We do require participants to complete a brief registration via a Google Form. A Zoom link will be sent to you the evening before each scheduled event.

Who we are

The Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID) is the supra-regional research support facility for psychology in German-speaking countries. PsyFaKo (Bundesfachschaftentagung der Psychologiestudierenden) is the representative body of all psychology students in the German-speaking countries.

Content recording

All sessions will be recorded and made available on PsychArchives approximately 2-3 weeks later, unless specifically requested otherwise by the session presenters.

 

Project – BISON

“The B!SON project, realized by TIB and SLUB Dresden, implements a recommendation service for quality-assured open access journals. From the large amount of open access journals available, this system will create a list of suitable journals sorted according to thematic relevance. For this purpose, in addition to common bibliometric methods of determining similarity, machine learning methods are used, which can determine relevant publication venues based on the semantic similarity of the title or abstract of an article to be published.

The partners cooperate with OpenCitations and DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals) and strive for a close exchange with institutions that advise authors. Several scientific institutions support the project.

While open access publishing requirements are steadily increasing and there is a growing number of open access journals, authors often lack knowledge of relevant, quality-assured open access journals that would be suitable for publishing their own research. A freely accessible tool that can be linked to local support structures will help to make the transition to open access successful….”

Beta version of BMBF project B!SON is now online | Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)

Project B!SON: How can I find the right open access journal for my publication?

Beta version of BMBF project B!SON is now online

The requirements for publishing open access are continually increasing and the number of open access journals continues to grow. And yet, many authors are unaware of relevant, quality-assured open access journals that would be suitable for publishing their research results. B!SON, a Recommendation service for quality-assured open access journals helps authors to select a suitable journal for publishing their research results. A beta version has recently been released for all those interested: https://service.tib.eu/bison

 

 

Job: Open Access Journal Officer (Referent:in Open Access Zeitschriften) (E13, fixed-term to 31 Dec 2024) – Stabi-Blog

As an Open Access Journal Officer in the Publication Services Department / Hamburg University Press, you will play a key role in the expansion and further development of a standardised journal hosting system that is oriented towards the requirements of researchers and open science. Your tasks include

    Acquisition of new publication projects
    Knowledge transfer
    Support for publishers
    Further development of the service and the publication processes
    Participation in third-party funded projects

The position is to be filled as soon as possible and is limited until 31.12.2024. Payment is according to remuneration group 13 TV-L (remuneration table).

 

 

Als Referent:in für Open-Access-Zeitschriften in der Abteilung Publikationsdienste / Hamburg University Press sind Sie maßgeblich am Ausbau und der Weiterentwicklung eines an den Anforderungen der Forschenden wie auch einer offenen Wissenschaft orientierten standardisierten Zeitschriften-Hostings beteiligt. Ihre Aufgaben umfassen

Akquise neuer Publikationsvorhaben
Wissenstransfer
Support für Publizierende
Weiterentwicklung des Angebots und der Publikationsprozesse
Beteiligung an Drittmittelprojekten

Die Stelle ist schnellstmöglich zu besetzen und bis zum 31.12.2024 befristet. Die Bezahlung erfolgt nach Entgeltgruppe 13 TV-L (Entgelttabelle).

Do German university medical centres promote robust and transparent research? A cross-sectional study of institutional policies | Health Research Policy and Systems | Full Text

Abstract:  Background

In light of replication and translational failures, biomedical research practices have recently come under scrutiny. Experts have pointed out that the current incentive structures at research institutions do not sufficiently incentivise researchers to invest in robustness and transparency and instead incentivise them to optimize their fitness in the struggle for publications and grants. This cross-sectional study aimed to describe whether and how relevant policies of university medical centres in Germany support the robust and transparent conduct of research and how prevalent traditional metrics are.

Methods

For 38 German university medical centres, we searched for institutional policies for academic degrees and academic appointments as well as websites for their core facilities and research in general between December 2020 and February 2021. We screened the documents for mentions of indicators of robust and transparent research (study registration; reporting of results; sharing of research data, code and protocols; open access; and measures to increase robustness) and for mentions of more traditional metrics of career progression (number of publications; number and value of awarded grants; impact factors; and authorship order).

Results

While open access was mentioned in 16% of PhD regulations, other indicators of robust and transparent research were mentioned in less than 10% of institutional policies for academic degrees and academic appointments. These indicators were more frequently mentioned on the core facility and general research websites. Institutional policies for academic degrees and academic appointments had frequent mentions of traditional metrics.

Conclusions

References to robust and transparent research practices are, with a few exceptions, generally uncommon in institutional policies at German university medical centres, while traditional criteria for academic promotion and tenure still prevail.

FFII | Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure information on software patents, enforcement of IP, trade agreements

“The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) is a European alliance defending your right to free and competitive software creation since 1999. We are working towards the mitigation of legal risks in software development. We do so by keeping software free from patents and promoting a digital infrastructure based on genuine open standards and free and open hardware and software.

The FFII famously made a difference to prevent a EU software patent directive and continues to shed light on the schemes of the patent system to enter the software sphere and detach itself from democratic and fiscal oversight. One recent example is the Unified Patent Court (UPC). A specialised court which fences patent reforms off. We rely on networking with the European Parliament members and partners from industry and civil society. Its work won the FFII the Outstanding contribution to software development prize by CNET….”

OPERAS Open Chat… zu Diamond Open Access und Open Access Geschäftsmodellen, 21 April 2022, 11am (CEST) | OPERAS GER

Donnerstag, 21.04.2022 ab 11 Uhr

Eine große Frage der Open Access Transformation ist die nach der Finanzierung von Verlagsaktivitäten und nachhaltigen Geschäftsmodellen. Dazu gehören auch die verschiedenen Formen von Open Access, um die es in diesem Termin geht.

Why publication services must not be negotiated | bjoern.brembs.blog

Recently, the “German Science and Humanities Council” (Wissenschaftsrat) has issued their “Recommendations on the Transformation of Academic Publishing: Towards Open Access“. On page 33 they write that increasing the competition between publishers is an explicit goal of current transformative agreements:

publishers become publication service providers and enter into competition with other providers

This emphasis on competition refers back to the simple fact that as content (rather than service) providers, legacy publishers currently enjoy monopolies on their content, as, e.g., the European Commission has long recognized: In at least two market analyses, one dating as far back as 2003 and one from 2015, the EC acknowledges the lack of a genuine market due to the lack of substitutability:

it is rare that two different publications can be viewed as perfect substitutes, as there are differences in the coverage, comprehensiveness and content provided. Therefore, in terms of functional interchangeability, two different publications could hardly be regarded as substitutable by the end-users, the readers. On that basis, the Commission found that consumers will rarely substitute one publication for another following a change in their relative prices

or

Publications for different academic subjects are clearly not substitutable from the reader’s point of view. Even within a given discipline, there may be little demand side substitution from the point of view of the individual academic between different publications.

As this lack of substitutability is one of the main sources of the problems associated with academic publishing today, not just the German WR, but many initiatives around the globe see increased competition among publishers as key to moving forward.

Koala

“In the KOALA [Konsortiale Open-Access-Lösungen aufbauen] project, consortial solutions for financing open access are being established. Collaborative funding of open access journals and book series by academic libraries is an alternative to the dominant APC model (article processing charges), where articles are paid for individually by authors or their institutions. During the project period, the TIB will work with the Communication, Information, Media Centre (KIM) of the University of Konstanz to establish at least one corresponding consortium as a funding partner for open access periodicals. Within this framework, further analyses will be carried out and conversions of periodicals to open access will be accompanied. In addition, a central helpdesk for editors who need help with the transition to open access or with finding sustainable funding will be created. The infrastructure created by KOALA enables fair and sustainable financing of quality-assured open access publications. It contributes to removing financial hurdles for authors and thus facilitates participation in open access publications.”