Jisc has announced a new agreement with Copernicus Publications, a fully open access, not-for-profit publisher, whose portfolio of journals covers engineering, geosciences, humanities and life sciences.
“Jisc has announced a new agreement with Copernicus Publications, a fully open access, not-for-profit publisher, whose portfolio of journals covers engineering, geosciences, humanities, and life sciences.
The agreement helps institutions streamline administering open access publication, making it quicker and easier.
Copernicus uses simple, fair and reasonable article processing charges (APCs) and created one of the first public and fully transparent peer-review processes for academic journals.
Jisc members can now set up a prepayment account or choose to be invoiced for several papers on a single invoice….”
“To what extent have ideas on open peer review developed by Godlee and others been realized over the past two decades? There is no straightforward answer to this question, since the availability of systematic data on peer review practices is limited. In this blog post, we use data from Crossref to offer some partial insights into the growing popularity of open peer review…..
As shown in Figure 2, Publons is by far the largest contributor of peer review records in Crossref, accounting for two-third of all records. A large majority of these records are linked to journal articles published by Wiley. Indeed, Wiley has made a considerable effort to promote open peer review (referred to as transparent peer review by Wiley). Other important contributors of peer review records in Crossref are PeerJ and eLife….
Copernicus and F1000 are special cases. Copernicus offers an integrated platform that publishes both journal articles and preprints as well as the associated review reports. Likewise, F1000 provides a platform that publishes multiple versions of an article, including the review reports for each version. Because of their special nature, we present statistics for Copernicus and F1000 separately from the statistics reported above. Peer review records for Copernicus and F1000 aren’t included in Figures 1, 2, and 3….”
“Reliance delivers a suite of innovative and interconnected services that extend EOSC’s capabilities to support the management of the research lifecycle within Earth Science Communities and Copernicus Users….”
“Copernicus Publications is committed to the open-access model of publishing. This ensures free web access to the results of research and maximum visibility for published papers. Authors retain copyright and works are distributed under the CC BY License. However, it requires the author or a supporting institution to pay the publisher’s costs of the administration of the review process, typesetting, image processing, language copy-editing, web publication, dissemination, and long-term archiving (via Portico and CLOCKSS) in the form of article processing charges (APCs). Copernicus Publications provides all its services in-house. The current page prices for the individual journals can be found at our APC overview page….
Most of the journals we publish are owned by learned societies and other scientific institutions. These journal owners can decide whether they want to subsidize their journal(s) by covering the costs of our services entirely or partly (no APCs for authors or APCs smaller than the costs of our services); they can forward the costs of our services to the authors and thereby break even (APCs = costs of our service); or they can decide to generate some income for their own community activities by adding an amount x to the amount of our service fee (APCs for authors higher than the costs of our services)….
The following APC breakdown represents an average of all journals we publish: …”
“Copernicus Publications has endorsed a number of statements recently, including the Enabling FAIR Data Commitment Statement and an open letter on the publication of peer review reports initiated by ASAPbio. Why are publishers like yourselves increasingly advocating for open data and open peer review?
Copernicus Publications was one of the pioneers of open peer review; we’ve been using our interactive public peer review since 2001, and we want others to get onboard too. Half of our journals operate with open peer review now. Transparency in publishing is incredibly important, especially for readers; they can be far more informed of editors’ impressions when assessing the quality of manuscripts with open peer review.
Our data policy at Copernicus has been in place for several years and was updated in 2015 in order to include the FORCE11 data citation principles. Recently, we did a rewrite of it when we signed the Enabling FAIR Data Commitment Statement in the Earth, Space, and Environmental Sciences. We are committed to enabling reproducibility in science; science isn’t just about great articles, but also about sharing data, code, and other underlying material and research outputs. The whole process needs to be transparent to enable opportunities for new findings and knowledge to be shared and created.
What have been some particular highlights for you in your time working in open access?
In general, it’s great to work for a research-friendly publisher which also often positively resonates in the library community. Within my work for Copernicus Publications I would like to highlight two aspects:
People in the industry often say that it’s difficult or even impossible to convince learned societies to transform their journals from subscription into open access. Besides being involved in the launch of numerous new society-owned open-access journals, I’ve been taking part in the conversion of multiple society-owned subscription journals: Fossil Record, Geographica Helvetica, the Journal of Micropaleontology. I think it is great to have such successful examples….”