Gustaf Nelhans Högskolan i Borås
Högskolan Väst: OA Week: Öppen tillgång klockan ett.
21 oktober, 2019
Guidance on the Implementation of Plan S 1. Aim and Scope
• Plan S aims for full and immediate Open Access to peer-reviewed scholarly publications from research funded by public and private grants. cOAlition S, the coalition of research funders that have committed to implementing Plan S, aims to accelerate the transition to a scholarly publishing system that is characterised by immediate, free online access to, and largely unrestricted use and re-use(full Open Access) of scholarly publications.
• cOAlition S is committed to fulfil the specific target for research funded [...] members’ grants under calls published as of1 January 2021.
• Plan S applies to[...] scholarly articles. cOAlition S will, by the end of 2021, issuea statement on Plan S principles as they apply to monographs and book chapters, together with related implementation guidance.
• Although the Plan S principles refer to peer-reviewed scholarly publications, cOAlition S alsostrongly
encourages that research data and other research outputs are made as open as possible and as closed as necessary.The early sharing of research results throughpreprintsis also strongly encouraged.
• cOAlition S supports the principles of theSan Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)that research needs to be assessed on its own merits rather than on the basis of the venue in which the research is published. cOAlition S members will implement such principles in their policies by January 2021.
Source: https://www.coalition-s.org/principles-and-implementation/(Highlights by me)
Mertons vetenskapliga normsystem
• Commun(al)ism
• Universalism
• Disinterestedness
• Organised Scepticism
Merton, R. K. 1973 (1942). The Normative Structure of Science. In The sociology of science:
theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 267-278.
Open access i sitt sammanhang
• Sedan mid-1990s, har prenumerationskostnaderna för
vetenskapliga tidskrifter ökat med över 200 % (= 6 x inflationen)
• Sverige: Publiceringskostnader ~450 MSEK , ~1 % av total offentlig budget
• Kommersiella förlag gör vinster på upp emot 40 %
• Tillsammans med digitaliseringen ser vi ett ökat intresse för öppet tillgänglig publicering på alla nivåer i det akademiska landskapet.
• Svårigheter: forskare verkar mindre villiga att ändra
publiceringspraktiker än vad samhället/finansiärena har trott.
• Andra incitement för publicering:
• t ex bibliometri, särsk. JIF – problematiskt
• Ämnesmässig tradition – ej problematiskt
För vem är öppen tillgång till för?
• Myt: Öppen tillgång är endast ”för allmänheten”.
• Utan:
• Forskare
• vid universitet (tillgång vid spec. högskolor)
• i den globala södern (snarare i det globala ”icke-väst”)
• Professioner:
• läkare i regionerna
• utredare i myndighets-/kommunal tjänst
• ...och ’Allmänheten’:
• patientgrupper
• ”intresserad allmänhet”
• småföretagare
• studenter utanför högskolesektorn
Forms of open access
• Gold OA: flipped model: ”Author pays”:
• More frequently: Read-and-publish deals
• Hybrid : Subscription journal, single article APC’s
• Green: open archive, ”parallell publication”
• Diamond/Platinum: free to publish AND read
• Bronze: ”articles made free-to-read on the publisher website, without an explicit Open license” (Piwowar et al, 2018:
https://peerj.com/preprints/3119)
• Predatory!
Amount and share of OA
Figure 2: Number of articles (A) and proportion of articles (B) with OA copies, estimated based on a random sample of 100,000 articles with Crossref DOIs.
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4375/fig-2
Source: Piwowar, H., Priem, J., Lariviere, V., Alperin, J. P., Matthias, L., Norlander, B., . . . Haustein, S. (2018). The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. PeerJ, 6, e4375.
Citation advantage?
Figure 5: Average relative citations of different access types of a random sample of WoS articles and reviews with a DOI published between 2009 and 2015.
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4375/fig-5
Source: Piwowar, H., Priem, J., Lariviere, V., Alperin, J. P., Matthias, L., Norlander, B., . . . Haustein, S. (2018). The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. PeerJ, 6, e4375.
Funders
Swedish Research Council (VR)
• ”In reports submitted to the Swedish Research Council on research it is funding, as of 2015 the Council will only
accept articles published with open access.”
• 2017 : ” CC-BY-licence , which enables the re-use and new use of the materials that the research findings were based on, as well as so-called text and data mining.”
• Publication in monographs and book chapters exempted
• Open data is next...
Riksbankens jubileumsfond:
• Open access, monographs and chapters omitted
• 12 months embargo, CC-BY
https://www.vr.se/inenglish/researchfunding/applyforgrants/conditionsforapplicationsandgrants/openaccess.4.44482f6612355bb5ee780003075.html https://rj.se/Finansiering/Stod-till-vetenskaplig-produktion/Open-access/
Nationell nivå – Sverige
• Regeringens målbild är att alla de vetenskapliga publikationer som är resultat av offentligt finansierad forskning bör bli omedelbart öppet tillgängliga direkt då de publiceras. Likaså bör forskningsdata som ligger till grund för vetenskapliga publikationer bli öppet tillgängliga samtidigt som den tillhörande publikationen.
• Villkor:
• Gradvis
• Ansvarsfullt sätt
• Vetenskapliga publikationer: nu
• Forskningsdata och “vetenskapliga verk”: inom en tioårsperiod.
• Gemensamt ansvar för alla aktörer (Prop. 2016/17:50)
• Dock! Nationell färddplan för det europeiska forskningsområdet 2019-2020:
• ”Den nationella riktningen är att forskningens produkter så långt det är möjligt ska uppfylla FAIR-principerna och att vetenskapliga publikationer som tagits fram med offentliga medel senast fr.o.m. 2020 bör bli öppet tillgängliga direkt då de publiceras samt att utgifterna för vetenskaplig publicering ska vara transparenta.” (U2019/01576/F)
2026
2020
Internationally
• European Open Science Agenda, May 2016
• Remove obstacles and create incitaments for open access.
• OA-mandate in Horizon 2020: embargo period of 6-12 months
• Investigating possibilities for remuneration for APC:s (Article-Processing Charges)
• ”offset agreements”
• ”transformative deals” (e.g. Read-and-publish)
• During the The Netherlands EU Presidency in 2016 the year 2020 for OA was brought forward an voted for.
• https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/05/dramatic-statement-european-leaders-call-immediate-open-access-all-scientific-papers
2017 KB:s samordningsuppdrag
In 2017 the National Library, directive from the Swedish Government to act as a national
coordinating body in the work towards a transition to open access to scholarly
publications.
Five working groups:
1. The current merit and resource
allocation system versus incentives for open access
2. Funding for a transition from a
subscription-based to an open access publishing system
3. Open access to scholarly monographs 4. Financial and technical support for
converting peer-reviewed and scholarly journals from toll access to open access 5. Monitoring of compliance with open
access policies and mandates
cOAlition S
“With effect from 2021, all scholarly
publications on the results from research funded by public or private grants provided by national, regional and international
research councils and funding bodies, must be published in Open Access Journals, on Open Access Platforms, or made immediately available through Open Access Repositories without embargo.”
https://www.coalition-s.org/principles-and-implementation/
Austria Austrian Science Fund FWF
Finland Academy of Finland AKA
France French National Research Agency ANR Ireland Science Foundation Ireland SFI Italy National Institute for Nuclear Physics INFN
Luxembourg National Research Fund FNR
Netherlands Netherlands Organisation for Sci. Res. NWO
Norway Research Council of Norway RCN
Poland National Science Centre Poland NCN Slovenia Slovenian Research Agency ARRS
Sweden Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life
and Welfare FORTE
Sweden Swedish Research Council for Sustainable
Development FORMAS
Sweden Sweden’s Innovation Agency VINNOVA
UK UK Research and Innovation UKRI
Jordan The Higher Council for Science and
Technology HCST
Zambia National Science and Technology Council NSTC EU European Commission, including the European
Research Council EU
+ Wellcome trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Fund,
World Health Organization, TDR, ASAP WT, BMGF, WHO ...
Svensk debatt
Den svenska debatten
• Öppna brev (”Too far, too risky”, ”...riskerar forskningens kvalitet/frihet”)
• Hearings (Finansiärernas, SU, Umeå hum fak, mm)
• Debattartiklar (KVA, dekaner, UU:s rektorer, forskare)
• Finansiärers svar
• ”Illvilljans hermeneutik”
• Erling Bjurström, Linköping university
Forskares reaktion: too far, too risky
Comments to a Blog post in Curie by Jeroen Bosman
Please correct some basic assertions in this article:
1) “Plan requires Gold open access.” Not true: it permits green, of course under conditions, just as with gold.
2) “Gold open access equates to paying APCs.” Not
true, there are many journals not requiring APCs forgold open access.
3) “APC will have to be paid by researchers themselves.“ Not true: Plan S explicit states that researchers will not have to pay (principle 4).
Without these corrections I think this article is misleading.
(One caveat: I read this in the Google Translate conversion to English. If this has meant that I have misread what you state in Swedish, I am sorry, please let me know.) 2018.10.28
Fler exempel: tvivelaktig publicering och
akademisk frihet
Hotar kvalitén / forskningens frihet
http://biblioteksbladet.se/redaktionellt/plan-s-riskerar-forskningens- frihet/
https://universitetslararen.se/2019/02/21/fo rskningsraden-maste-backa-fran-plan-s/
Uppsala universitets ledning:
”Plan S äventyrar forskningens frihet
• En viktig del av forskningens frihet är att forskare har rätten att fritt välja publiceringsform. I Sverige är
denna rätt till och med lagstadgad.”
Nej, det stämmer inte, se Högskolelag (1992:1434):
”6 § För forskningen skall som allmänna principer gälla att
1. forskningsproblem får fritt väljas,
2. forskningsmetoder får fritt utvecklas och
3. forskningsresultat får fritt publiceras”
Märkliga citat i debatten (parafraserade)
• ”de vill förbjuda publicering i icke-OA-tidskrifter”
• ”Finansiärerna vill förbjuda publicering i hybridtidskrifter”
• ”akademisk frihet är hotad”
• ”Sveriges högskolelag anger att forskare är fria att publicera i den form vi än väljer”
• - Kan vi inte bara stämma finansiärerna?”
• ”Vill du ha open access: det är bara att besöka biblioteken, det är fritt att låna vad som helst”
• Plan S’ finansiärer har undertecknat ett (hemligt) dokument som påtvingar APC-publicering.
• Plan S är ”en katastrof”, ”planekonomi”, ”förskräcklig”,
”önsketänkande” och ”chockteerapi”.
• PR ’pit bull’, ”author of Nail 'Em! Confronting High-Profile Attacks on Celebrities and
Businesses”
• ”/.../ a group of big scientific publishers has hired the pit bull to take on the free-
information movement, which campaigns for scientific results to be made freely available.”
• “The consultant advised them to focus on
simple messages, such as ‘Public access equals government censorship’. He hinted that the publishers should attempt to equate traditional publishing models with peer review, and ‘paint a picture of what the world would look like without peer-reviewed articles’.
• “Dezenhall also recommended joining forces with groups that may be ideologically opposed to government-mandated projects /... /e.g. the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a
conservative think-tank based in Washington DC, which has used oil-industry money to promote sceptical views on climate change.”
• Fee: 300.000 – $500.000.
Argumenten speglar förlagens respons på införandet av PubMedCentral ~2007
DOI: 10.1038/445347a
Är Plan S så omvälvande som
ofta anges i debatten?
Nio vägar att uppfylla Plan S
Jeroen Bosman @jeroenbosman
Based on 20181127 cOAlition-S guidance document: our updated scheme with now nine routes towards Plan-S
compliance. https://101innovations.wordpress.com/2018/11/30/nine-routes-towards-plan-s-compliance/ …
showing effects for stakeholder groups. w/ @MsPhelps
Lärosäten: Målet är inte alltför långt bort
University of Vienna April 2019:
54 % Plan S compliant
”Fritagning” av tidskrifter
Motargument
Vetenskapliga samfunds vinstmarginaler
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Lg3V_okwCTxqZ02CIZLUrKLedkQKret2T5R8R07DYGs/edit#gid=0
UK: Learned society pilots transformative deal
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post
.php?story=20191018084846934
Akademisk/forskningens frihet?
• I proposition 2009/10:80, underlag för att föra in forskningens frihet i grundlagen, anges specifikt att forskningsfinansiärer [...] även i fortsättningen
[kan] ange ramar för forskningen:
”Resurstilldelning och villkor som ställs av t.ex.
forskningsfinansiärer, uppdragsgivare och samarbetspartner kan även i fortsättningen ange ramar för forskningen. Den föreslagna bestämmelsen innebär inte heller att det ställs krav på att all forskningsverksamhet som bedrivs i statlig, kommunal,
landstingskommunal eller enskild regi måste omfattas av
lagstiftning om skydd för forskningens frihet.” (min kursivering) Proposition 2009/10:80: En reformerad
grundlag
https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-
lagar/dokument/proposition/en
Utestående problem:
• Transformativa ”read-and-publish” avtal riskerar att bli dyra(re)
• Fristående forskare: vem finansierar APC:er?
• Ett kommersiellt publiceringssystem vidmakthålls
• Förlagen är snabba att anpassa sig.
• SpringerNature:
’Transformative Publishing’
(TM?)• Riskerar likriktning efter
främmande ideal
Current initiatives
• AmeliCA
• Ameli, Open Knowledge for Latin America and the Global South(AmeliCA) is an initiative set up by the United Nations Educational, Scientific And Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the Latin American Council Of Social Sciences ( CLACSO ), the Network of Scientific Journals of Latin America and the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal (REDALYC), the Autonomous University of the State of Mexico (UAEM), the University of Antioquia (UdeA) and the National University of La Plata (UNLP)
• COAlition S
• EU
• African Open Science Platform,
• The African Open Science Platforminitiative (AOSP), funded by the South African Department of Science and Technology (DST)through the National Research Foundation (NRF), and implemented and managed by the Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), is a pan-African project for Africa by Africa.
Direction is provided by CODATA (ISC).
• OA2020
• Counting participation by over 100 (138) research organizations, representing hundreds of institutions across five continents, OA2020 is coordinated as a global effort by the Max Planck Digital Library and supported by numerous national research councils, university rectors’ conferences, national libraries, library consortiaand individual research and teaching institutions.
• SciELO
• Brasil: ”SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online) is a bibliographic database, digital library, and cooperative electronic publishing model of open access journals.” (Wikipedia)
