NERL and CRL sign agreement to support Direct to Open from the MIT Press | The MIT Press

“It has become easier for NERL and CRL member libraries to make a strategic choice and switch from buying scholarly books from the MIT Press once for a single collection to funding them once, open access, for the world while enjoying exclusive benefits including backlist access and trade collection discounts

Today, the MIT Press, the NorthEast Research Libraries (NERL), and the Center for Research Libraries (CRL) announced that NERL will handle the central licensing and invoicing for MIT Press’ Direct to Open (D2O) for NERL and CRL member libraries. Through this three-year agreement, NERL and CRL join a growing community of libraries seeking to support innovative, sustainable frameworks for open access monographs through collective action.

Developed over two years with the generous support of the Arcadia Fund, D2O moves professional and scholarly books from a solely market-based, purchase model to a collaborative, library-supported open access model. Through the participation of libraries and consortia like NERL and CRL, D2O will enable scores of titles each year to become openly accessible without BPCs and with real local benefits for supporting libraries. Rather than opening access to books on a per title basis, D2O will allow the Press to open its complete list of scholarly books published in 2022….”

Open Access Publication and Academic Freedom in the Field of the Social Sciences and Humanities from a Constitutional Law Perspective in Italy | SpringerLink

Abstract:  Few scholars are aware of the meaning of open access (OA), especially in the field of the social sciences and humanities, where the rates of OA-publication are remarkably low. The chapter gives an overview of the situation in Italy in order to outline the relation between OA and academic freedom. Also from the viewpoint of academic freedom, it emerges that public funding, university networks and awareness-raising among scholars enhance OA more than does imposition by law.



“Advancing climate science to improve understanding of Earth’s changing climate and changes that pose the greatest risk to society. This includes: facilitating public access to climate-related information that will assist Federal, State, local, and Tribal governments in climate planning and resilience activities, coupled with capacity building and training to increase access to and support the use of data, information, and climate services; research to advance understanding of the societal and economic impacts of climate change (e.g., human and ecosystem health, wildlife and fisheries); improving observational networks to create carbon inventories and baselines; improving modeling capabilities for local-scale, regional climate and related extreme weather events; and disaster attribution science, including in potential tipping points in physical, natural, and human systems….

For example, open science and other participatory modes of research, such as community-based datahubs that give citizens access to information and data, as well as community-engaged research that respectfully provides opportunities for the participation in science and technology of those historically excluded from the scientific enterprise. Public participation in science is critical for the health of the nation and leads to more innovative research of all kinds, including research that addresses the needs of diverse communities…. 

Relevant agencies should develop data infrastructure that facilitates identification of inequities across sectors at scale, especially in underserved rural and urban communities, including through data linkage across Federal agencies, creation of interoperable data systems, and efforts to make data more available to the public, while preserving privacy and upholding ethical principles. This includes a focus on the underutilized, inaccessible, or missing data needed to measure and promote equity. Finally, agencies should also take steps to improve diversity and equity in the research workforce…. 

To build a trustworthy and engaged U.S. science and technology (S&T) enterprise, agencies should prioritize making Federally funded R&D: open to the public in a findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable way; more rigorous, reproducible, and transparent; safe and secure; grounded in assessment of ethical, legal, and societal implications; and free from improper political interference—all while minimizing administrative burden….”

Following Preprints

“An important part of our mission at bioRxiv is to alert readers when new preprints that might interest them are posted. You can already sign up for personalized alerts on the bioRxiv Alerts/RSS page (see figure below) to get automatic notifications when papers that satisfy your search criteria are posted. We also provide dedicated RSS feeds and twitter accounts for certain subject categories (Cell Biology, Neuroscience, Genetics, etc.). 

But preprints can be revised, people comment on them, and ultimately most end up being published in journals. Since these are all events readers might also want to know about, we have now added an exciting new feature that allows you to Follow a preprint so that you get notified when someone comments on it, the authors post a new version, or the paper is published as a version of record in a journal.


To follow a paper, simply click on ‘Follow this preprint’ above the title, enter your email address, and choose which events you’d like to be notified about. We’ll then send you an email when the events occur – summary emails are sent once a day so you are not bombarded! …”

DataCite’s Commitment to The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure

“DataCite was founded in 2009 on the principle of being an open stakeholder governed community that is open to participation from organizations around the world. Today, that continues to be true. Although our services have expanded, we continue to remain grounded to our roots. DataCite’s umbrella was formed with the aim to safeguard common standards worldwide to support research, thereby facilitating compliance with the rules of good scientific practice. DataCite’s identifier registration, Data File, and services are foundational components of the scholarly ecosystem. As the ecosystem continues to evolve, governance, sustainability and living-will insurance have become increasingly important components of the open infrastructure.

Recently several open scholarly infrastructure organizations and initiatives have adopted The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure. DataCite has conducted its own audit against the principles and would like to affirm our commitment to upholding these….”

Revisiting: Is There a Business Case for Open Data?

Revisiting Tim Vines’ 2017 post — Open data continues to gain ground, but is there a revenue stream that would help journals recover the costs of gathering, reviewing and publishing data?

The post Revisiting: Is There a Business Case for Open Data? appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Revisiting: Is There a Business Case for Open Data? – The Scholarly Kitchen

Looking back at this 2017 post brings a mixed bag of thoughts. First, the fortunes being made with collecting, curating, and selling access to consumer data still haven’t spilled across into research data, and that’s likely because a) relatively few research datasets are available, and b) for the most part, the ones that are available have inadequate metadata and incompatible structures, so that combining datasets for meta-analyses is scarcely worthwhile. Until we address the problem of missing research data – which (full disclosure) we’re trying to do with DataSeer – we can’t really make much headway with getting it all into a consistent format. However, while combining datasets for re-use is a core feature for consumer data, it’s only one of the reasons for sharing research data. Open data also allows readers to check the results for the paper itself, and perhaps this is where our attention for the ‘business model for open data’ should turn. In particular, peer review is considerably simpler when the authors submit computationally reproducible manuscripts. Editors and reviewers can then be sure that the datasets support the analyses and hence the results, allowing them to focus solely on the appropriateness of the experimental design and the significance of the conclusions. It’s therefore conceivable that journals could reduce the APC for computationally reproducible articles (or hike it for non-reproducible ones), thereby incentivizing the extra effort required to required to produce them. No matter what route we choose, it’s clear that our current incentive structures around open science (mostly strongly worded policies and the lure of extra citations) are not getting the job done, and we need to consider alternatives. Money can enter the equation at a few places: by only funding open science, as exemplified by Aligning Science Across Parkinson’s, or by offsetting the extra effort required by researchers with additional financial resources, by making things cheaper or non-open science more expensive. Let’s see where we go.

Interview with Editor-in-Chief: Professor Qinglong Peng – News – New Techno-Humanities – Journal – Elsevier

“Open access publishing has attracted huge momentum in recent years. Researchers in humanities now have more opportunities to publish as open access, not to mention for colleagues from science and medicine areas. Quite often authors will have to pay a big sum in order to publish open access and I know this may actually pose serious challenges to some of our authors as fundings in humanities studies are still not such common. I am very happy to see that Shanghai Jiao Tong University will fully sponsor the publication of this journal and thus authors do not need to pay for publication. I trust this sponsorship will provide more opportunities for researchers from those under-represented regions and disciplines. Meanwhile, open access will surely improve the visibility of our contributor’s works, expanding naturally their influence in the long run….”

The Relationship Between Open Access Article Publishing and Short-Term Citations in Otolaryngology – David W. Wassef, Gregory L. Barinsky, Sara Behbahani, Sudeep Peddireddy, Jordon G. Grube, Christina H. Fang, Soly Baredes, Jean Anderson Eloy, 2021

Abstract:  Objectives:

The purpose of this study is to compare the number of citations received by open access articles versus subscription access articles in subscription journals in the Otolaryngology literature.


Using the Dimensions research database, we examined articles indexed to PubMed with at least 5 citations published in 2018. Articles were included from Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, The Laryngoscope, JAMA Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology, and American Journal of Otolaryngology. Multivariate Poisson regression modeling was used to adjust for journal, article type, and topic. Practice guidelines, position statements, or retractions were excluded as potential outliers.


137 open access articles and 337 subscription access articles meeting inclusion criteria were identified, with a median citation number of 8 (IQR 6-11). The most common article type was original investigation (82.5%), and the most common study topic was head and neck (28.9%). Open access articles had a higher median number of citations at 9 (IQR 6-13) when compared to subscription access articles at 7 (IQR 6-10) (P?=?.032). Open access status was significantly associated with a higher number of citations than subscription access articles when adjusting for journal, article type, and topic (??=?.272, CI 0.194-0.500, P?<?.001).


Although comprising a minority of articles examined in this study of subscription journals, open access articles were associated with a higher number of citations than subscription access articles. Open access publishing may facilitate the spread of novel findings in Otolaryngology.

The Journal of Diabetes is adopting Open Access – Bloomgarden – – Journal of Diabetes – Wiley Online Library

“”The Editors and Associate Editors of the Journal have looked with great interest at the growth of the Open Access model of medical publishing. Fundamentally, we consider highly desirable the goal of making the research and commentary of the Journal fully available to all those involved in the understanding and treatment of diabetes. In a sense, Open Access began in the Medical Sciences in mid- 1997, when Medline (the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online) was made available via PubMed, a bibliographic database of life sciences and biomedical information ( 1 ) used by most of those in the field. For those of us whose professional childhood began with trips to the Medical Library to pore over monthly and yearly printed (and weighty) tomes of Index Medicus, PubMed was nothing short of revolutionary, and we recall the excitement with which we greeted its initial appearance. With Open Access, particularly as more journal move to this model, authors can count on reaching an audience far larger than that of a subscription-based journal, essentially all of those with internet access, allowing greater visibility and impact of their work. With a click on the Table of Contents, and soon with a click on PubMed Central ( ), readers will have access to the full details of all articles we publish, rather than just having access to abstracts and one table or figure. This should translate into greater support of a more sustainable model for the work of education carried out by Libraries and Universities ( 2 ). As with many other journals in the field ( 3 ), we are now committed to a move to Open Access to begin in the first issue of 2022. The dilemma, and one about which we have had a great deal of internal debate, is that the cost of carrying out the activities of the Journal, with peer-review processes and maintenance of high publishing standards, will no longer be funded by subscriptions. We have wrestled with the unavoidable manuscript charges which will be required under Open Access. Arguments have been made on both sides as to whether this is or is not a desirable development ( 4 ).We fully expect that charges will be usually be borne by employers or funders, and in certain cases partially or fully waived (and we encourage authors to apply for this when their financial capacity is limited). But, the benefits will include greater visibility as more readers will be able to access published articles, and we will continue to endeavor to process manuscripts rapidly to help with their more widespread dissemination.”

Transformation | British Dental Journal

“The BDJ [British Dental Journal] has become what is termed a Transformative Journal (TJ)….

A TJ commits, among other things, to continuously increase the OA share each year and to ‘flip’ to full OA for primary research once a 75% threshold has been met, and to maximise take-up of the OA option by proactively promoting the benefits of OA to authors of primary research articles….

How soon the 75% OA content is reached is difficult to estimate. It is probably some years away, but the important aspect is the commitment to aim for this transformation while also continuing to develop the value of the journal both in print and online for all users.”

Scholarly journals should use “Archived on” instead of “Accessed on” | chem-bla-ics

“Publishing habits changes very slowly, too slowly. The whole industry is incredibly inert, which can lead to severe frustration as it did for me. But sometimes small changes can do so much. 

Linkrot, the phenomenon that URLs are not persistent, has been studied, including the in scholarly settings (see 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2008, 2014, 2015, 2000, 2021, and probably many more). Indeed, scholarly publishers started introducing the following: URLs should be accompanied with an “accessed on” statement. Indeed, you can find this in many bibliographic formatting standards.

Indeed, this must change, and we already have a solution since 1996: the Internet Archive (tho the archive goes back much longer). I call all publishers to change their “Accessed on” to “Archived on”. Two simpel solutions that can compliment each other:

Authors archive upon submission

This solution is simply introduced by updating author guidelines. Surely it will take a bit of time for bibliography software to be updated, and for the time being we still write “Accessed on” until there is proper support of “Archived on”.

Journals archive upon acceptance…

BTW, projects like Wikipedia have automated the process of archiving URLs and I see no reason why publishers could not do this.”

Open Access Australasia Webinar

“The contribution of open access to the UN Sustainable Development Goals presented by Director of Research and Corporate at UNSW Library, Fiona Bradley

The UN Sustainable Development Goals were adopted in 2016. Five years in, great progress has been made in some areas while others lag. When the goals were adopted, the importance of data, evidence, and research to demonstrate progress was emphasised, but how much has been achieved and what role does open access play?

Join us for a brief overview of the process that led to the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda process and the ongoing review mechanisms will emphasize the agenda as a tool for advocacy at global, national, and local institutional levels in which open access and access to information contribute to underpinning the achievement of all other goals.”

Open Access is Key to the Sustainable Development Goals – Librarian Resources

“Open Access is key to achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. The Sustainable Development Goals are reliant on improved access to information and knowledge, therefore creating a clear link between Open Access, access to information, and sustainable development.

Open Access supports the importance of immediate access and access to all. Open access publishing makes scientific results available to everyone and facilitates new discoveries and empowers researchers through rapid and efficient access to knowledge.
Open Access benefits researchers, innovators, teachers, students, media professionals and the public.
It promotes global knowledge flow for the benefit of scientific discovery, innovation, and socio-economic development. Open Access is beneficial to all users in all countries, but disproportionately limits users in developing countries who have poor or non-existent acquisition budgets….

UNESCO “believes that universal access to high quality education is key to the building of peace, sustainable social and economic development, and intercultural dialogue.” International organizations such as UNESCO already recognize this connection and officially recognize open access as a driver for achievement of the SDGs and sustainable social, political, and economic development. UNESCO believes that Open Access has a fundamental role to support the SDGs and supports the agendas of Open Access….”