RCUK and open access

RCUK and open access

Chris AwreHead of Information Management, Library and Learning Innovation12th March 2013

To cover…

• Why this briefing?

• Open access

• Finch Report

• RCUK open access policy

• Implementation and local impact

• Questions/discussion

RCUK and open access | 12 March 2013 | 2

Briefing

• To describe open access and current Government and funder initiatives in this area of publication

• To highlight specifically the RCUK open access policy and the terms of this

• To stimulate discussion on the impact and ways forward

• To identify advice and guidance that will best serve the University of Hull research community around research dissemination


Why this briefing?

“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


Why this briefing?




Why this briefing?


“The Research Councils expect the researchers they fund to deposit published articles or conference proceedings in an open access repository at or around the time of publication. But this practice is unevenly enforced. Therefore, as an immediate step, we have asked the Research Councils to ensure the researchers they fund fulfil the current requirements.”



Why this briefing?





Why open access?1

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

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

studies• Easier to facilitate and manage use and re-use of

outputs– Standard practice at Public Library of Science

(PLoS)• Demonstrate greater value of publicly-funded

research– The basis of the Government’s approach

1 – See UK Open Access Implementation Group, http://open-access.org.uk/ RCUK and open access | 12 March 2013 | 11

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

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

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

• Two common forms– Gold OA

• Usually publication through a journal that makes the output freely and openly available via the Web. Such a journal may charge a fee to publish

– Green OA• Depositing the output in an open access repository that exposes the

outputs freely and openly to the Web (whilst also managing the content)


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

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

Open access comparison

Intermediary Output

Publisher

Article

Publisher

Repository

Article

Article

R

E

A

D

E

R

££

££

££A

U

T

H

O

R

Organisation

££


Open access options

• Gold– Can publish in completely open access journal

• Directory of Open Access Journals, http://www.doaj.org– Most publishers charge an APC

• Author or Article Processing Charge• Anything from £50 to £3,000

– Hybrid OA option• Pay APC to journal normally charging a subscription to open up your article

• Green– Institutional or subject repository

• Deposit could be to one or other, or both– Repositories may also hold supplementary materials

• E.g., data, reports, etc


http://www.doaj.org/

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


Finch debate

• The Government accepted all the Finch recommendations in principle– The Committee will reconvene in July 2013 to review progress

against them• Many are unconvinced that Finch has chosen the right course– Open access has been largely welcomed– Gold OA, though, appears to be giving more money to publishers

(and uncertainty as to the source of that money)– Expectation that journal subscriptions will come down has been

received with scepticism• Two Parliamentary enquiries ongoing– House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology– House of Commons Business, Innovation & Skills Select Committee– Querying open access options and implementation of Finch

recommendations


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.”


RCUK – compliant journals

• Taking a lead from Finch, Gold OA is preferred

• Journals must– Provide immediate and unrestricted access to the final

published version of the paper, using the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) licence. An APC may be paid

• Many journals are seeking to demonstrate RCUK compliance– Recommended to ask publishers their approach– SHERPA FACT tool will offer compliance advice from April

• http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/


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

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

RCUK Gold OA policy

Intermediary Output

Publisher

Article

Publisher

Repository

Article

Article

R

E

A

D

E

R

A

U

T

H

O

R


Optional

RCUK – alternative option

• Where a publisher does not offer compliant Gold OA, or no APC funding is available, a normal subscription journal may be used

• The journal consents to deposit of the final Accepted Manuscripts (that include all changes resulting from peer review but not necessarily incorporating the publisher’s formatting) in repositories for open access– Without restriction on non-commercial re-use (CC-BY-NC)– Without payment of an APC– No more than a 6 month delay between publication and deposit to

repository• Except for AHRC and ESRC, which allow for 12 months• May be some initial exception up to 24 months

• If the journal does not meet these requirements, they should be asked to do so, or an alternative title identified


RCUK Green OA policy

Intermediary Output

Publisher

Article

Repository Article

R

E

A

D

E

R

A

U

T

H

O

R

6/12 months


RCUK – additional points

• Gold OA preferred due to publisher role in QA process– But Green OA considered perfectly acceptable where no Gold

OA compliant journal is available• RCUK views open access as a journey, not an event– Five-year transition anticipated

• RCUK terms and conditions have been amended to incorporate the open access policy

• RCUK will expect an annual report on adoption from each institution

• RCUK policy covers journal articles and conference proceedings, though focuses on the former– Issue of open access to conference proceedings needs resolution


Implementation and local impact

• Gold OA– LLI is monitoring RCUK developments re: the policy and

compliant journals• Relevant information will be circulated as it becomes available

– All those publishing outputs from RCUK grants need to ask publishers to check journal compliance• Research Councils may ask about publication decisions

– APCs need to come from block grants, not research grants• Re-consideration of how funds are allocated

• Many publishers offer this route and are compliant, others are moving in this direction– Watch for novel models and offers, plus new publishers


Implementation and local impact

• Green OA– Hydra institutional digital repository available for use at

Hull – http://hydra.hull.ac.uk• Submission is via Converis

– Does your discipline make a repository (or archive) available?• E.g., arXiv, http://arxiv.org

– All open content in repositories are crawled by Google to maximise access possibilities

• Almost all UK universities have repositories– See OpenDOAR – http://opendoar.org - for a full global

list


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

http://arxiv.org/

http://arxiv.org/

http://opendoar.org/

In conclusion

• RCUK have expressed the wish that all research outputs generated from their research should be open access– This has been the case since 2006

• Revised policy in the light of the Finch Report and with Government backing seeks to give teeth to the previous approach– RCUK wish to work with the research community to

get the best out of open access• Preferred Gold OA route seeks publisher transformation– Changes will happen– Green OA a viable back-up during the journey


Summary flowchart (local)Article to publish

Identify journal

Check RCUK compatibility

Find and pay APC

Check repository deposit policy

Deposit in repository

Publish

Conference item to publish

Check proceedings’ open access policy

Find and pay APC?

Yes Yes

NoNo

OK

Not OK

££No£

No£

No£


Research publicly funded?

Yes No

Gold OA option available from your publisher?

Yes No

Are APC funds available from research funder?

Green OA after 6 months (AHRC/ ESRC after 12 months)

Yes No

Immediate Gold OA Green OA after 12-24 months

Summary flowchart(RCUK)


Thank you

…Questions?

Chris Awre, [email protected]

RCUK and open access

Education

Transcript of RCUK and open access