history staff development day open access presentation, jan 14

Open access publishing

Chris AwreLibrary and Learning InnovationHistory Staff Development Day, 9th January 2014

To cover

• [History DMT update]

• Open access publishing– Journals– Books

• Pros and cons

• Current debate

• Policy developments

Open access publishing | 9 January 2014 | 2

History DMT

History DMT

• History Data Management Training and Guidance– AHRC project, in partnership with IHR and University of

Sheffield– Feb 2013-Jul 2014– Targeting PhD students and ECRs

• Producing training materials on research data management for historians– Three workshops being held– Hull workshop successfully run on 12th December

• Doctoral training centre partners invited– Content for training materials has been been collated, and is

being shaped by IHR for national online delivery• RDM now incorporated locally as part of Research Methods module


Open access publishing

‘Traditional’ publishing

• An article/book is written by an author

• The article/book is submitted to a publisher– For articles, a copyright transfer assignment is frequently

required– For books a publishing agreement (contract) will be agreed

• The publisher edits, typesets and, where appropriate, gets the item peer-reviewed

• The article/book is then published (in print or electronic form), for a fee– Journals are sold via subscription– Books are sold individually

• The content is often owned by the publisher, requiring their permission to use it for purposes other than personal study


Open access

• What is open access?– “Open access (OA) literature is digital, online,

free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions” (Peter Suber, http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm) • Free of price barriers• Free of permission barriers

• Open Access Implementation Group (OAIG)– http://open-access.org.uk


http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm

http://open-access.org.uk/

Open access options

• Gold open access– The publication of an article in a journal, where

the journal is freely available to the readers– The publication of a book electronically, where the

book is freely available to readers• Green open access– The publication of an article/book in a digital

repository, which is freely accessible via the Internet

• Both routes may or may not involve a publisher


Open access distinction

• Anything published on open access can be either– Gratis (Free as in beer), or– Libre (Free as in speech)

• True open access is Libre, as it adheres to the broader definition of ‘open’– “A piece of content or data is open if anyone is free to use,

reuse, and redistribute it — subject only, at most, to the requirement to attribute and share-alike.”• http://opendefinition.org/

• Much open access is Gratis– It is important to be aware of what rights are involved

when publishing or accessing open access publications


http://opendefinition.org/

http://opendefinition.org/

Gold open access

• Article/book is published through an intermediary– Publisher, Learned Society, University, Department, etc.

• The content is openly available to readers without charge

• Two models– Use a completely open access route/intermediary

• No money involved, as funding is from a central source– Pay an article or author processing charge (APC)

• Rates vary widely, £50 - >£3,000• Third leg– Hybrid open access

• Pay an APC for publication in a journal normally charging a subscription, to open up your article within this


Gold OA services

• Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), http://www.doaj.org

• Open Library of Humanities, https://www.openlibhums.org/

• OAPEN, http://www.oapen.org / DOAB, http://www.doabooks.org – E.g., Open Book Publishers,

http://www.openbookpublishers.com • See also all major publishers for their gold open access

options

• Beware predatory publishers– http://www.scholarlyoa.com/publishers


http://www.doaj.org/

http://www.doaj.org/

https://www.openlibhums.org/

https://www.openlibhums.org/

http://www.oapen.org/

http://www.oapen.org/

http://www.doabooks.org/

http://www.openbookpublishers.com/

http://www.scholarlyoa.com/publishers

Green open access

• Depositing an article/book in a digital repository– Directly (self-archiving) or via a local intermediary

• The article/book may have been published via a traditional route as well– Hence, there may be an embargo on open access through the

repository– Version made open may be final accepted manuscript, not

published version• The repository may be– Institutional, subject, national, international– Deposit can be in one or more, as required or found to be useful

• Repositories can also hold associated supplementary content– E.g., Data, working papers, media files, etc.


Green OA services

• Local institutional repository, Hydra– http://hydra.hull.ac.uk– Deposit is through Converis– Service is being further developed this year

• Subject repositories, e.g., – Social Sciences – Social Sciences Research Network– Economics – RePeC– Etc.

• All are crawled by Google• International directory of open access repositories– OpenDOAR, http://opendoar.org


http://hydra.hull.ac.uk/

http://opendoar.org/

Open access comparison

Intermediary Output

Publisher

Article

Publisher

Repository

Article

Article

R

E

A

D

E

R

££

££

££A

U

T

H

O

R

Organisation

££


Licensing

• Key to open access is stating clearly how the open content is licensed– This clarifies what can be done with the content– Useful in protecting the content against mis-use

• Licensing vs. copyright– Licensing tells you what you can do with the content– Copyright tells you what you can’t do with the content

• International approach to licensing is required– Research is global– Creative Commons is widely used for this

• http://creativecommons.org


http://creativecommons.org/

Pros and cons

Why open access?

• Improved visibility of research– Particularly to those unable to access all the journal or book

literature• Greater impact through wider awareness– Difference demonstrated through a range of studies

• Saves money– Moves away from increasing journal subscription costs

• Easier to facilitate and manage use and re-use of outputs– Use of Creative Commons licensing

• Demonstrate greater value of publicly-funded research– Government(s) focused on this


Why not open access?

• Where using gold open access, the cost for authors can be prohibitive, especially in lesser funded areas of research

• The sustainability of open access services

• Impact on Learned Societies and the income they receive through journal subscriptions

• Uncertainty around peer review process

• Risk of open material being hijacked (albeit protected by licensing)


Current debate

Areas of debate

• Cost– Who pays, and how do they pay?– Gold open access

• Shift from reader to author in paying for research dissemination

• Publishers benefitting from subscriptions and APCs– Green open access

• Management and maintenance of repositories• Peer review– How should peer review be organised?– Who should organise it?


Areas of debate II

• Copyright– Who should own the content?

• SPARC author addendum can be used in negotiation– Who needs what rights to be able to carry out their

role in the publication process?• Re-use– Should the content of an article or book be re-usable

by others in different ways?• If so, what rights need to be stated?• Is licensing the best way of addressing this? If not, what

could be?


Active debate

• British Academy published a collection of essays expanding on the pros and cons of open access– http://www.britac.ac.uk/openaccess/debatingopenaccess.cfm

• LSE and SAGE held a day in October 2013 to discuss open access – Open Access Futures in the Humanities and Social Sciences– http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2013/10/25/bro

wse-open-access-ecollection/

• History journal editors laid out conditions of publishing on open access– http://www.history.ac.uk/news/2012-12-10/statement-position

-relation-open-access


http://www.britac.ac.uk/openaccess/debatingopenaccess.cfm

http://www.britac.ac.uk/openaccess/debatingopenaccess.cfm

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2013/10/25/browse-open-access-ecollection/



http://www.history.ac.uk/news/2012-12-10/statement-position-relation-open-access



Key points

• Open access generally accepted as being part of the landscape– Therefore, how to enable it best for HSS?

• Green OA regarded as preferable to Gold OA– More equable– Simpler– Cheaper

• But Green OA should come with long embargoes to allow for slower peer review and longer audience reach

• Concern about licensing enabling re-use, but recognition that plagiarism is not a major issue


Embargoes vs. access

• American Historical Association indicated a preference for a six-year embargo on dissertations/theses, to protect them

• Recent AHA annual meeting saw active discussion on the benefits of increased access vs. the benefits of an embargo– Many preferred increased access from exploiting the

Internet• Online publication offers scope for alternative forms of

output and publishing, using multiple media

• http://www.history.ac.uk/news/2012-12-10/statement-position-relation-open-access





Policy developments

Open access in the UK (and beyond)

• Government interest

• Finch Report

• Research Councils UK

• HEFCE

• European Union / Horizon 2020


Government interest

“The Government, in line with our overarching commitment to transparency and open data, is committed that publicly-funded research should be accessible free of charge. Free and open access to taxpayer-funded research offers significant social and economic benefits by spreading knowledge, raising the prestige of UK research and encouraging technology transfer”

Innovation and Research Strategy for GrowthDepartment of Business, Innovation & Skills, 2011


The Finch Report

• Accessibility, sustainability, excellence: how to expand access to research publications (July 2012)

• Explored the two open access options– Addressed question: How to make open access work on a scalable basis

for all publicly-funded research?• Recommendations:– Gold OA (also Hybrid OA)– Public funders should ‘establish more effective and flexible

arrangements to meet the costs of publishing in open access and hybrid journals’

– Policies to minimise restrictions on use and re-use of publications– More work should be done to explore models for open access

monographs– Repositories should be developed to complement Gold OA, particularly

in regard of associated data and grey literature


RCUK open access policy

• “Researchers, as the generators of all of the research papers and responsible for much of their peer review, are expected to publish any peer-reviewed research papers which acknowledge Research Council funding in journals that are compliant with the RCUK policy on Open Access.

• All papers must include details of the funding that supported the research and, if applicable, a statement on how the underlying research materials – such as data, samples or models – can be accessed.”

• Came into force from 1st April 2013


RCUK policy overview

• Open to either Green or Gold, but prefers Gold

• Researchers must use a compliant journal– SHERPA FACT service developed to advise on this

• http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact• Gold open access– Licensed to enable maximum re-use – CC-BY

• Green open access– Embargoes should ideally be no longer than six

months• Many publishers insist on 12-48 months


http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact

Supporting Gold OA

• Gold OA is likely to incur an APC– Finch estimate for average cost is £1,450 per article

• RCUK have contributed a small pot of funds towards covering costs– Money to spend by March 2014!

• No other central funds have been committed beyond this– HEFCE QR allocation could be assigned for such use– Grants to Research Councils can no longer include APC costs

• LLI (IM) will process claims against available fund– Use form in the Library channel of the portal


HEFCE consultation

• HEFCE are consulting on behalf of all HE funding councils on the mechanisms for making all post-REF 2014 submissions open access– Focus on journal articles and conference proceedings, in

line with RCUK– Neutral with regard to Green or Gold– Will come into force in 2016– Retrospective open access will not be acceptable

• Aim to facilitate access and re-use

• Investigating open access books for future REF assessments– cf. Wellcome, which already mandates open access books


European Union / Horizon 2020

• “Open access will be mandatory for all publications produced with funding from Horizon 2020, and contributions to the costs for such publications will be eligible for reimbursement. The nature of the open access publications, whether through “gold” or “green” routes, will be left to the discretion of the grant recipient.”

• Horizon 2020 starts in January 2014


Author considerations

• Is open access an option for disseminating research?

• Is there a funder requirement for open access?

• Which route is best suited/required?– Gold open access– Green open access

• What do I need to do to enable the preferred route?– Where are funds available to support an APC?– Which version of the research output can I put in the

repository?• If using a publisher, should I retain or cede copyright?

• How will the work be peer reviewed?

• Which license is best suited/required?Open access publishing | 9 January 2014 | 34

Thank you

history staff development day open access presentation, jan 14

Technology

open access publishing

peer review

open access

funded research

gold oa

access

publishing

open