[GOAL] Knowledge Exchange Publication on Monitoring agreements with Open Access elements

Mon Dec 2 06:30:52 GMT 2019

Dear Heather,

First of all, thank you very much for reading and for your interesting comments on the new article about monitoring OA article metadata from Knowledge Exchange (KE).

We agree that OA metadata from publishers should be available not only to consortia but to funders as well as at an institutional level. Ideally, the metadata should be delivered in an interoperable format, so that data can be stored and transferred from accounting systems to institutional repositories and other relevant systems.

As consortia already get metadata at journal level from publishers, KE wanted to investigate if this was the case for OA article metadata.

The study shows that publishers are able to and do provide article metadata to consortia even though much can be improved.

KE hopes to inspire stakeholders to use the metadata checklist - when asking publishers for OA article metadata. The checklist and reporting template are free to use. Getting OA metadata can help to get an overview of the costs of OA publications.

Whether or not it should be consortia, funders or institutions that are responsible for collecting data, we will leave for others to decide. We would, however, suggest that monitoring happens in a coordinated way and that consortia could play a role in collecting this data.

KE certainly shares your vision of Open Scholarship and new formats of research output to be recognized.

Best regards,

Anna Mette Morthorst & Juliane Kant

Dr. Juliane Kant
Scientific Library Services and Information Systems

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
German Research Foundation
Kennedyallee 40
53175 Bonn
Tel. +49 (228) 885-2009
Fax +49 (228) 885-713309
juliane.kant at dfg.de
www.dfg.de<http://www.dfg.de>

Von: goal-bounces at eprints.org <goal-bounces at eprints.org> Im Auftrag von Heather Morrison
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. November 2019 16:06
An: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <goal at eprints.org>
Betreff: Re: [GOAL] Knowledge Exchange Publication on Monitoring agreements with Open Access elements

Thank you for sharing this document, this is very informative.

A comment on the approach: while good intentions are obvious here and the overall goal of full open access is one that we share, the monitoring involved (demanding article-level metadata from publishers which in turn requires author and funder metadata in effect imposing upstream technical requirements) appears to be problematic for several reasons.

Monitoring via publisher offsetting agreements is Inefficient in comparison with institutional OA repository and IR: when a researcher receives grant funding that is administered through a university or research organization, the organization is already tracking the individual researcher and the funding. This is necessary for accountability purposes; the primary focus of monitoring the use of funding is, and should be, ensuring that funds are spent on doing research rather than lining peoples' pockets or subsidizing vacations. Institutional OA policy and services do not require an additional layer of tracking of individual researchers and their grants. If works are deposited in the IR, OA status can be determined locally, and reported consortially or nationally if desired.

As a researcher with funding, my institution and funding agency both have reporting expectations. A funding agency could simply ask for a report on how the researcher has met the OA policy as part of the final report. For some researchers, this might inspire post-hoc OA action. Similarly, an institution can ask researchers to report on OA policy compliance, just as researchers are expected to meet policy requirements for research ethics and accountability.

More important, the impact of technical developments for monitoring seem highly likely to lock in what should be considered a publishing model based on print (journals and books, optimized for the printing press and postal system) that should be regarded as in the process of becoming obsolete.

As an open researcher, very little of my work would be reflected in the monitoring system described. Attempting to expand the monitoring system to include new formats such as open data and research blogs would multiply the inefficiencies of monitoring and likely stifle innovation.

There are compelling public interest arguments for global open access. There are a lot of details to figure out in the shift to OA, but let's not lose sight of the big picture, the potential for uniting humanity in a common quest for knowledge, in the process.

Dr. Heather Morrison

Associate Professor, School of Information Studies, University of Ottawa

Professeur AgrÃ©gÃ©, Ã‰cole des Sciences de l'Information, UniversitÃ© d'Ottawa

Principal Investigator, Sustaining the Knowledge Commons, a SSHRC Insight Project

sustainingknowledgecommons.org

Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca<mailto:Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca>

https://uniweb.uottawa.ca/?lang=en#/members/706

[On research sabbatical July 1, 2019 - June 30, 2020]

________________________________
From: goal-bounces at eprints.org<mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org> <goal-bounces at eprints.org<mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org>> on behalf of Kant, Juliane <juliane.kant at dfg.de<mailto:juliane.kant at dfg.de>>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 8:55 AM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <goal at eprints.org<mailto:goal at eprints.org>>
Subject: [GOAL] Knowledge Exchange Publication on Monitoring agreements with Open Access elements

Attention : courriel externe | external email

Dear list,

I'm happy to let you know that Knowledge Exchange<http://www.knowledge-exchange.info/> (KE) has published the article Monitoring agreements with Open Access elements: why article level metadata is important.

If  you are interested in monitoring OA publications and monitoring cost data for OA publications at a national or institutional level or by funder this may be an interesting article for you to read.

The Knowledge Exchange (KE) Monitoring Open Access (OA) task and finish group has undertaken research on agreements with OA elements (e.g. agreements with APC discounts, offsetting agreements, read and publish agreements) set between consortia from KE countries and major publishers between 2016 and early 2019. Following recommendations from KE and ESAC it assessed agreements with OA elements to investigate what article-level metadata consortia request from publishers and what metadata publishers deliver to consortia.

With Plan S research funders requiring a full transition to OA by 2021, the delivery of article-level metadata becomes critical to monitor publishersâ€™ compliance with Plan S requirements for transformative arrangements.

The research findings showed that:

  *   Not all consortia agreements requested the article-level metadata as recommended by KE and ESAC.
  *   Most importantly, none of the publishers provided all the metadata that the consortia requested.
  *   Publishers also did not deliver the same metadata across countries and this may be due lack of consistency in their practices.

The research findings can be used as a benchmark to monitor how major publishers were performing in KE countries until early 2019 and prior to Plan S comes into effect in 2021.

You can read the full article here: https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.489/ and find out more about Knowledge Exchange's work on Monitoring Open Access here: http://www.knowledge-exchange.info/event/oa-monitoring

We hope the article will give new insights and facilitate collective action. Please help us distributing our work and share it widely through your channels!

With best regards,

Juliane Kant

The Knowledge Exchange<http://www.knowledge-exchange.info/> (KE) partners are six key national organizations within Europe tasked with developing infrastructure and services to enable the use of digital technologies to improve higher education and research: CSC<https://www.csc.fi/> in Finland, CNRS<http://www.cnrs.fr/index.php> in France, DAFSHE<https://ufm.dk/en/the-ministry/organisation/danish-agency-for-science-and-higher-education> in Denmark , DFG<http://www.dfg.de/en/> in Germany, Jisc<https://www.jisc.ac.uk/> in the UK and SURF<https://www.surf.nl/en> in the Netherlands.

Dr. Juliane Kant
Scientific Library Services and Information Systems

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
German Research Foundation
Kennedyallee 40
53175 Bonn
Tel. +49 (228) 885-2009
Fax +49 (228) 885-713309
juliane.kant at dfg.de<mailto:juliane.kant at dfg.de>
www.dfg.de<http://www.dfg.de>
-------------- nächster Teil --------------
Ein Dateianhang mit HTML-Daten wurde abgetrennt...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20191202/37bf9489/attachment-0001.html 