Jisc negotiates transformative agreement with the National Academy of Sciences | Jisc

“Jisc and the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (NAS) are pleased to announce a two-year transformational open access (OA) pilot agreement.

The ‘Publish and Read’ deal will allow UK corresponding authors at participating institutions to publish OA articles in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) without incurring any publication charges. Researchers at participating Jisc institutions will be able to access all PNAS content, dating back to 1915, for free….”

PNAS Announces PNAS Nexus

“The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) is pleased to announce the launch of PNAS Nexus, a highly selective, open access journal with a focus on innovation and rapid publication. PNAS Nexus will publish innovative and multi-, trans-, and interdisciplinary work across the biological, physical, and social sciences, particularly encompassing engineering and health sciences. The journal will be published under the leadership of Editor-in-Chief Karen Nelson, president of the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI), and in partnership with Oxford University Press (OUP)….

In late summer 2021, PNAS Nexus will begin considering new submissions along with manuscripts rejected after review from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)—the flagship journal of the NAS—that authors wish to transfer. PNAS Nexus will publish its first issue in early 2022….”

cOAlition S: Response to PNAS | PNAS

The assertion is made that most society publishers—who currently make use of hybrid OA—will “likely be prohibited for authors with Plan S funders.” This is not correct since Plan S supports deposition of articles in repositories as an option for compliance. Indeed, in recent weeks we have seen several United Kingdom learned societies—including the Royal Society* and the Microbiology Society—adopt a Plan S-compliant model, by allowing authors to self-archive their author-accepted manuscript in a repository at the time of publication, with a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY)….

To help learned societies explore alternative revenue streams and business models, the Wellcome Trust, in partnership with United Kingdom Research and Innovation and the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, has just funded a consultancy to work with learned societies to help them adapt and thrive in a Plan S world….”


Reply to Kiley and Smits: Meeting Plan S’s goal of maximizing access to research | PNAS

“Thank you for recognizing the value that scholarly societies bring to the research ecosystem and the scientific enterprise as a whole—and for recognizing the importance of their financial viability (1).

And thank you for clearly stating your goal for Plan S (2). A much simpler route toward achieving your goal of maximizing access to research and allowing for artificial intelligence and text and data mining is Plan U, in which funders require that grantees deposit manuscripts on a preprint server under a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY) before submission and peer review in a journal.* Plan U avoids the tremendous overhead and infrastructure needed to implement, monitor, and enforce Plan S—which entails vetting thousands of individual journals, various journal platforms, and repositories—and eliminates the need to further refine Plan S implementation guidelines, which have to date raised more questions than they answer.

Plan U would establish a far more uniform policy across a much larger group of researchers, while avoiding the need to cap article processing charges or ban hybrid journals. Such a policy is not only more inclusive, but more likely to achieve global buy-in….”

Opinion: “Plan S” falls short for society publishers—and for the researchers they serve | PNAS

“Although implementation guidance was released in November, many details are still unclear. It’s difficult to discern which journals and platforms will be considered compliant. (Conversely, some details of the plan seem mired in minutiae…)….

What does seem clear, at least in their implementation guidelines, is that Plan S will not permit publication in hybrid journals (a dominant model for society publishers) unless they meet one of two conditions: (i) The accepted manuscript is made available in a compliant repository at the time of publication without embargo with a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY) or equivalent (which permits both commercial and derivative reuse) (5). (ii) The article is published OA with a CC BY license in a subscription journal that has “transformative agreements,” which achieve compliance through agreements such as “Read and Publish” (6) during the no-more-than-3-year period before the journal must “flip” to full OA. With such restrictions, publishing in most hybrid society journals will likely be prohibited for authors with Plan S funders, even if their coauthors have other funding. As for PNAS, the journal allows authors to deposit in PubMed Central on publication with no embargo but only if the authors have paid the regular article charge and the OA CC BY surcharge, a funding arrangement that would not be allowed under Plan S. The uncertainty of how this change will affect authors and the journal are indeed part of the problem….

I also worry that a less diverse ecosystem of publishing models will be detrimental for researchers. Some journals are more selective than others and thus have higher publication fees because they process and review many papers compared with the number for which they collect fees. Authors willing to pay a higher fee if their papers are accepted by a more selective journal have that choice….”