Search

This study investigates the determinants for the uptake of Full and Hybrid Open Access (OA) in the university landscape of Germany and distinguishes between three factors: The disciplinary profile, infrastructures and services of universities that aim to support OA, and large transformative agreements. The uptake of OA, the influence of the disciplinary profile of universities and the influence of transformative agreements is measured by combining several data sources (incl. Web of Science, Unpaywall, an authority file of standardised German affiliation information, the ISSN-Gold-OA 4.0 list, and lists of publications covered by transformative agreements). For infrastructures and services that support OA, a structured data collection was created by harvesting different sources of information and by manual online search. To determine the explanatory power of the different factors, a series of regression analyses was performed for different periods and for both Full as well as Hybrid OA. As a result of the regression analyses, the most determining factor for the explanation of differences in the uptake of both OA-types turned out to be the disciplinary profile. For the year 2020, Hybrid OA transformative agreements have become a second relevant factor. However, all variables that reflect local infrastructural support and services for OA turned out to be non-significant. To deepen the understanding of the adoption of OA on the level of institutions, the outcomes of the regression analyses are contextualised by an interview study conducted with 20 OA officers of German universities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

India's primary science funding agencies, the Department of Science & Technology, and the Department of Biotechnology (DST & DBT) together formulated an open access (OA) policy in 2014. This policy mandates immediate self‐archival of research articles generated from publicly funded research across all the institutions in suitable repositories. But with inadequate infrastructure and awareness, the OA mandate did not flourish as expected. This paper aims to understand whether journal policies impede the prospect of DST‐DBT OA policy and the possible routes to achieve policy compliance. The analysis presented in this paper tracks down the journal self‐archiving policies of the top 50 popular journals (among Indian authors) from each of the six STEM fields—Biology, Chemistry, Clinical‐Medicine, Engineering, Materials science, and Physics. The results show that most journals have an embargo of 12–24 months on self‐archiving of the post‐print (final author version after peer‐review), which contradicts the DST‐DBT OA mandate. The study also reveals that hybrid journals dominate, and article processing charges craft a new form of inequity for Indian STEM researchers. We expect that these findings will be helpful for the funding agencies to restructure their policies, and negotiate with journal publishers to resolve the contradictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Transformationsverträge ermöglichen den lesenden Zugriff auf Zeitschriften und regeln gleichzeitig das Open-Access-Publizieren in ihnen. Mit Transformationsverträgen verbinden sich Hoffnungen, zum Beispiel auf eine Transformation des Publikationswesens, ebenso wie Befürchtungen, zum Beispiel dass andere Verlage durch Transformationsverträge ungebührlich benachteiligt werden. Zur Untersuchung solcher Fragestellungen wurde der Publikationsoutput von Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz untersucht. Im Ergebnis werden keine negativen Auswirkungen durch Transformationsverträge festgestellt, allerdings erfüllen sich bislang auch die Hoffnungen auf substantielle Transformationsschritte nicht. Transformative agreements enable reading access to journals and at the same time regulate open access publishing in them. Transformation agreements are associated with hopes, e.g. for a transformation of the publishing system, as well as fears, e.g. that transformation agreements unduly disadvantage other publishers. To investigate such questions, the publication output of Germany, Austria and Switzerland was examined. No negative effects of transformative agreements were found, but the hopes for substantial transformation steps have not been fulfilled so far either.

We studied journal articles published by researchers at all eight New Zealand universities in 2017 to determine how many were freely accessible on the web. We wrote software code to harvest data from multiple sources, code that we now share to enable others to reproduce our work on their own sample set. In May 2019, we ran our code to determine which of the 2017 articles were open at that time and by what method; where those articles would have incurred an Article Processing Charge (APC) we calculated the cost if those charges had been paid. Where articles were not freely available we determined whether the policies of publishers in each case would have allowed deposit in a non-commercial repository (Green open access). We also examined citation rates for different types of access. We found that, of our 2017 sample set, about two out of every five articles were freely accessible without payment or subscription (41%). Where research was explicitly said to be funded by New Zealand’s major research funding agencies, the proportion was slightly higher at 45%. Where open articles would have incurred an APC we estimated an average cost per article of USD1,682 (for publications where all articles require an APC, that is, Gold open access) and USD2,558 (where APC payment is optional, Hybrid open access) at a total estimated cost of USD1.45m. Of the paid options, Gold is by far more common for New Zealand researchers (82% Gold, 18% Hybrid). In terms of citations, our analysis aligned with previous studies that suggest a correlation between publications being freely accessible and, on balance, slightly higher rates of citation. This is not seen across all types of open access, however, with Diamond OA achieving the lowest rates. Where articles were not freely accessible we found that a very large majority of them (88% or 3089 publications) could have been legally deposited in an institutional repository. Similarly, only in a very small number of cases had a version deposited in the repository of a New Zealand university made the difference between the publication being freely accessible or not (125 publications). Given that most New Zealand researchers support research being open, there is clearly a large gap between belief and practice in New Zealand’s research ecosystem.

We studied journal articles published by researchers at all eight New Zealand universities in 2017 to determine how many were freely accessible on the web. We wrote software code to harvest data from multiple sources, code that we now share to enable others to reproduce our work on their own sample set. In May 2019, we ran our code to determine which of the 2017 articles were open at that time and by what method; where those articles would have incurred an Article Processing Charge (APC) we calculated the cost if those charges had been paid. Where articles were not freely available we determined whether the policies of publishers in each case would have allowed deposit in a non-commercial repository (Green open access). We also examined citation rates for different types of access. We found that, of our 2017 sample set, about two out of every five articles were freely accessible without payment or subscription (41%). Where research was explicitly said to be funded by New Zealand's major research funding agencies, the proportion was slightly higher at 45%. Where open articles would have incurred an APC we estimated an average cost per article of USD1,682 (for publications where all articles require an APC, that is, Gold open access) and USD2,558 (where APC payment is optional, Hybrid open access) at a total estimated cost of USD1.45m. Of the paid options, Gold is by far more common for New Zealand researchers (82% Gold, 18% Hybrid). In terms of citations, our analysis aligned with previous studies that suggest a correlation between publications being freely accessible and, on balance, slightly higher rates of citation. This is not seen across all types of open access, however, with Diamond OA achieving the lowest rates. Where articles were not freely accessible we found that a very large majority of them (88% or 3089 publications) could have been legally deposited in an institutional repository. Similarly, only in a very small number of cases had a version deposited in the repository of a New Zealand university made the difference between the publication being freely accessible or not (125 publications). Given that most New Zealand researchers support research being open, there is clearly a large gap between belief and practice in New Zealand's research ecosystem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic libraries provide intellectual access (discovery and procurement) to the full text of electronic journal articles through traditional library technologies like discovery layers, link resolver software and knowledge bases. These technologies mainly rely on accurate title-level metadata to successfully deliver journal articles to library users. Open Access articles pose a difficulty for many participants in the e-journal supply chain, including libraries and publishers, as Open Access status is a property of the article, not the title. A review of the literature examines: the impact of Open Access on intellectual access through traditional library technologies, current proposed solutions, and emerging technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years open access (OA) publishing agreements have left a lasting impact on several aspects of the research life cycle, and on the manner in which institutions work with publishers and researchers to support the transition to OA. Apart from the immediate financial implications, one significant challenge libraries are facing is the sub-optimal level of workflow infrastructure that could determine the success or failure of otherwise innovative approaches. This article will examine the Vienna University Library’s hands-on experience with OA agreements and the implementation of relevant workflows. It will describe existing workflows, review the benefits of the various systems in place and identify areas for improvement. The paper will also propose items for discussion for organizations when negotiating OA agreements with publishers and will highlight potential pitfalls to be avoided.

Ralf Schimmer beantwortet Fragen über die Positionierung der Max Planck Gesellschaft zu Open Access und spricht auch über Motive und Zeitpunkt der Veröffentlichung der programmatischen Schrift „Disrupting the subscription journals' business model for the necessary large-scale transformation to open access: A Max Planck Digital Library Open Access Policy White Paper”. Thematisiert werden auch die verschiedenen Wege und die Finanzierung von Open Access sowie die Frage nach der künftigen Aufgabe für Bibliotheken, wenn Open Access das klassische Modell der subskriptions- und lizenzbasierten Zeitschrift abgelöst hat.

Ralf Schimmer beantwortet Fragen über die Positionierung der Max Planck Gesellschaft zu Open Access und spricht auch über Motive und Zeitpunkt der Veröffentlichung der programmatischen Schrift „Disrupting the subscription journals' business model for the necessary large-scale transformation to open access: A Max Planck Digital Library Open Access Policy White Paper”. Thematisiert werden auch die verschiedenen Wege und die Finanzierung von Open Access sowie die Frage nach der künftigen Aufgabe für Bibliotheken, wenn Open Access das klassische Modell der subskriptions- und lizenzbasierten Zeitschrift abgelöst hat.

In recent years open access (OA) publishing agreements have left a lasting impact on several aspects of the research life cycle, and on the manner in which institutions work with publishers and researchers to support the transition to OA. Apart from the immediate financial implications, one significant challenge libraries are facing is the sub-optimal level of workflow infrastructure that could determine the success or failure of otherwise innovative approaches. This article will examine the Vienna University Library's hands-on experience with OA agreements and the implementation of relevant workflows. It will describe existing workflows, review the benefits of the various systems in place and identify areas for improvement. The paper will also propose items for discussion for organizations when negotiating OA agreements with publishers and will highlight potential pitfalls to be avoided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]