Open access to research publications - 2018 Independent advice

peter.suber's bookmarks 2019-02-05


The key recommendations of this report are arranged by stakeholder group, below.

For funders of research:

1) If the current national ‘policy preference for Gold OA’ continues, the RCUK block grant for supporting open access should continue to be provided by UKRI beyond 2020. However, UKRI with sector leaders, should consider the options available to ensure the block grant is able to be used in ways which deliver the maximum value for the public pound. (Recommendation 5)

2) UKRI, the National Funding Councils and sector leaders should work together to articulate a clear, UK-wide policy ambition for Open Access for the next five years, with a focus on achieving open access as the default publication option, delivering financial sustainability for research performing organisations, and value for money on public investment in research. This should be underpinned by a coherent and harmonised UKRI policy on open access. (Recommendation 6)

3) Funders of research should jointly commission further research to monitor the transition towards Open Access every two to three years. This should assess the impact of the various mechanisms being introduced to help shape a more effective market (such as off-setting arrangements), alongside a review of the implementation of the voluntary good practice guide and code of conduct. (Recommendation 12)

For university leaders and agencies:

4) UUK, with partner organisations, to encourage universities to sign-up to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), or to adopt internal policies which are aligned to the same ambitions. (Recommendation 1)

5) Jisc Collections, in collaboration with sector leaders, should consider the role of a range of Licensing and Copyright arrangements in delivering OA objectives, as part of a suite of levers available to leaders of a diverse range of institutions (Recommendation 9).

6) Jisc to lead on selecting and promoting a range of unique identifiers, including ORCID, in collaboration with sector leaders with relevant partner organisations. Funders of research to consider mandating the use of an agreed range of unique identifiers as a condition of grant. (Recommendation 8)

7) Jisc, with the support of sector leaders, to set out a roadmap for developing a suite of tools which, as far as possible, reduce the burden of administration underpinning open access for institutions. This might include a focus on the automatic exchange of information between publishers and institutions, and should be complemented by providing greater levels of information to institutional leaders on their OA options and performance, whilst supporting appropriate levels of optionality in publisher-institutions arrangements, in order to suit the needs of a diverse sector. (Recommendation 7) ...

The extent of the affordability of the “strong preference for Gold” is becoming clearer, however, as the associated evidence base has been improved over recent years. Costs associated with APC payments are continuing to rise at levels above inflation each year, although negotiations to deliver offsetting arrangements may be having some impact in constraining total cost increases. There is nonetheless a significant question around the effective use of public funds associated with this policy preference, under current arrangements. (Sections 5-vi and 6)...."



02/05/2019, 06:15

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags: oa.mandates oa.ukri oa.uuk oa.books oa.offsets oa.germany oa.elsevier oa.platforms oa.infrastructure oa.jisc oa.licensing oa.copyright oa.dora oa.policies.funders oa.funders.public oa.finch_report oa.policies.universities oa.recommendations oa.repositories oa.hei oa.libre oa.policies oa.universities oa.funders

Date tagged:

02/05/2019, 11:15

Date published:

06/01/2018, 07:15