Tag: open access

Open-Access Monographs: New Tools, More Access | EDUCAUSE

From Monica McCormick in Educause Review:

Preview:

We are in an era of significant change in the United States and Canada for publishing open-access (OA) scholarly monographs. Since most monographs are published by university presses, and most copies are purchased by research libraries, this article focuses on that community. The bulk of OA titles are older or out-of-print works, many funded by the Mellon/NEH Humanities Open Book (HOB) program, which enabled free access to backlist scholarly works. Under that program, about 2,500 books from 28 publishers are now OA. Meanwhile, new OA-only book publishers are, together with traditional scholarly presses and libraries, exploring innovative business models and technologies.

Continue reading here:

Source: Open-Access Monographs: New Tools, More Access | EDUCAUSE

Guest Post: Evaluating Open Access in a Consortial Context – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Gwen Evans in The Scholarly Kitchen:

Preview:

As several recent announcements and initiatives have shown, Open Access (OA) negotiations between libraries and publishers are complex, in a constant state of flux, and provide little predictability — and OA models and negotiations within library consortia contain complexities all their own. One of the key questions library consortia have to ask themselves is, Are you a Publish or a Read library consortium, or somewhere in between? As Lisa Hinchliffe’s recent primer on transformative agreements notes, the implications of Publish and Read versus Read and Publish are different for different consortia.

Continue reading here:

Source: Guest Post: Evaluating Open Access in a Consortial Context – The Scholarly Kitchen

Taking Stock of the Feedback on Plan S Implementation Guidance – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe in The Scholarly Kitchen:

Preview:

Like many others, I found myself reading response after response after response to cOAlition S’ call for feedback on the Guidance on the Implementation of Plan S last week. The volume of response is staggering. Statements have poured in from individual and groups — publishers, scholarly societies, disciplinary repositories, scholarly communications platforms, funding agencies, publishing professionals, libraries, library associations, and researchers themselves. As the deadline drew near on Friday, I could hardly “right click/open link in new tab” fast enough as my Twitter feed scrolled by. The input from Norway alone has reached 885 pages. The Open Access Tracking Project currently has almost 400 documents tagged oa.plan_s. reddit Open Science and Scholia/wikidata have also been tracking replies. One imagines that there is feedback that has not been shared publicly as well.

Continue reading here:

Source: Taking Stock of the Feedback on Plan S Implementation Guidance – The Scholarly Kitchen

More Scholarly Communications Consolidation as Institutional Repository Provider DuraSpace Merges into Lyrasis – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Roger C. Schonfeld via the Scholarly Kitchen:

Preview:

Continue reading:

Source: More Scholarly Communications Consolidation as Institutional Repository Provider DuraSpace Merges into Lyrasis – The Scholarly Kitchen

Open Access 2018: A Year of Funders and Universities Drawing Lines in the Sand | Absolutely Maybe

From Hilda Bastian via Absolutely Maybe:

Preview:

“This is the sixth year I’ve rounded up the year in open access – and it was the most remarkable. When the year began, the world’s largest academic publisher, Elsevier, had increased their annual profits, with an operating profit approaching US$1.2 billion in science, technology, and medicine – a profit margin of over 36%. [PDF] By year’s end, a hefty chunk of the world’s research community was walking away from big subscription deals with Elsevier and others.”

Continue reading here:

Source: Open Access 2018: A Year of Funders and Universities Drawing Lines in the Sand | Absolutely Maybe

Elsevier Chairman YS Chi: An Interview – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Roger Schonfeld via the Scholarly Kitchen

“Last week, approximately 180 leaders from scholarly societies, libraries, publishers, and other organizations came together at ITHAKA’s Next Wave conference in New York City. The day’s sessions featured an array of different formats and experts, focusing mostly on fundamental changes facing higher education in the United States, the result of underlying demographics, financial pressures, narrowing political support, and tension around how to define student success. The program also included a number of sessions focused on scholarly publishing and academic libraries. The opening session was an interview, conducted by ITHAKA president Kevin Guthrie of Elsevier’s chairman Youngsuk (“YS”) Chi, with some additional questions from the audience. The interview generated discussion and perspective not only about Elsevier itself, but also about broader changes in scholarly communication and approaches to organizational leadership. I have attempted to reconstruct the interview here from my notes, and Chi and Guthrie have each had a chance to edit and expand their remarks here for the record.”

Read more here:

Source: Elsevier Chairman YS Chi: An Interview – The Scholarly Kitchen

Plan S: A Mandate for Gold OA with Lots of Strings Attached – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Angela Cochran via the Scholarly Kitchen:

“Over the past several weeks, many in the scholarly publishing world have been reacting to the open access (OA) 10 principles outlined by cOAlition S — a plan now referred to as “Plan S”. The principles laid out were interesting but lacked significant detail leading to loads of conversations trying to imagine what an implementation might look like.

Last week the “implementation plan” for Plan S compliance was posted. The biggest questions going in were whether they would really disallow hybrid models and what the proposed the APC cap would look like.”

Read more here:

Source: Plan S: A Mandate for Gold OA with Lots of Strings Attached – The Scholarly Kitchen

OASPA members demonstrate another year of steady growth in CC BY article numbers for fully-OA journals – OASPA

From Claire Redhead via OASPA:

“A total of 1,128,721 articles were published with the CC BY license in open access-only (fully-OA) journals by members of OASPA during the period 2000-2017, with 219,627 of those being published in 2017 alone.”

Read more here:
Source: OASPA members demonstrate another year of steady growth in CC BY article numbers for fully-OA journals – OASPA

Recording and Slides Available from the Hot Topics Series: The 2.5% Commitment: Investing in Open – Duraspace.org

From Carol Minton Morris at Duraspace:

“Members of Duraspace are among leaders of institutions from all over the world who share a belief that our digital scientific and cultural heritage should be preserved and made accessible for future generations. Members of DuraSpace have been invited to become part of a conversation that aims to begin an investigation into what it will take to sustain the emerging set of open technologies that underpin the open scholarly ecosystem we all depend on.The recording and slides from “The Future Will Be Open?” series kick-off webinar on May 17: “The 2.5% Commitment: Investing in Open” are now available. This webinar focused on David Lewis’ proposal for a 2.5% investment in open infrastructure and how it aims to make visible the investments academic libraries make in open infrastructure and content.”

Read more here:

Source: Recording and Slides Available from the Hot Topics Series: The 2.5% Commitment: Investing in Open – Duraspace.org

Libraries Face a Future of Open Access – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Joseph Esposito via the Scholarly Kitchen:

“When librarians prepare for a negotiation, they now routinely reach for the muscle.

At least that’s how I read the news about the Swedish library consortium and its dealings with Elsevier. If you have been too preoccupied with the Royal Wedding to pay attention to news coming out of the world of STM publishing, you can get a good backgrounder here. Briefly, the Swedish consortium attempted to dictate terms to Elsevier, terms that Elsevier would not accept. The result is that Elsevier’s contract will be cancelled, meaning that there will be no authorized access to Elsevier content for the consortium users.”

Read more here:

Source: Libraries Face a Future of Open Access – The Scholarly Kitchen