Europe’s open-access drive escalates as university stand-offs spread

[Indigophoton]

Bold efforts to push academic publishing towards an open-access model are gaining steam. Negotiators from libraries and university consortia across Europe are sharing tactics on how to broker new kinds of contracts that could see more articles appear outside paywalls. And inspired by the results of a stand-off in Germany, they increasingly declare that if they don’t like what publishers offer, they will refuse to pay for journal access at all. On 16 May, a Swedish consortium became the latest to say that it wouldn’t renew its contract, with publishing giant Elsevier.

Under the new contracts, termed ‘read and publish’ deals, libraries still pay subscriptions for access to paywalled articles, but their researchers can also publish under open-access terms so that anyone can read their work for free.

Advocates say such agreements could accelerate the progress of the open-access movement. Despite decades of campaigning for research papers to be published openly — on the grounds that the fruits of publicly funded research should be available for all to read — scholarly publishing’s dominant business model remains to publish articles behind paywalls and collect subscriptions from libraries (see 'Growth of open access'). But if many large library consortia strike read-and-publish deals, the proportion of open-access articles could surge.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05191-0?utm

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

I presume this is a way of Nature publishers doing damage limitation - so that they can still make money with 'read and publish'. The truth is that they are redundant. It's like turkeys voting for Christmas to be in January. The end is nigh.

 

[Allele]

It's like turkeys voting for Christmas to be in January.

 

[Alvin]

How would universal open access work, for example a university affiliated researcher uses their current university's subscription to access a paper, if its open access does the university already have it on file, is there a central database, are open access journals linked to a open access database for access?

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

How would universal open access work, for example a university affiliated researcher uses their current university's subscription to access a paper, if its open access does the university already have it on file, is there a central database, are open access journals linked to a open access database for access?

Papers are just online with URL addresses based on the university of origin. At present we go to PubMed and it tells us there is a paper and whether the URL is feely accessed or through subscription. In an open system all Universities will have URLs for papers freely accessible. Nothing could be simpler. It is what SciHub does for us at present.

 

[Alvin]

Papers are just online with URL addresses based on the university of origin. At present we go to PubMed and it tells us there is a paper and whether the URL is feely accessed or through subscription. In an open system all Universities will have URLs for papers freely accessible. Nothing could be simpler. It is what SciHub does for us at present.

I see. So if a new journal is started i assume it is usually affiliated with a publisher and somehow gets a listing on PubMed?

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

I see. So if a new journal is started i assume it is usually affiliated with a publisher and somehow gets a listing on PubMed?

Yes, I am not sure how this works but I think PubMed traditionally has attempted to list everything in what it considers a reasonable list of 'respectable' journals. I think it also includes some stuff from other sources but I don't think it makes any attempt to search for independent documents published online. Of course PubMed itself is redundant now in a sense because you can just Google for a topic and it often gives you more. And independent researchers should be able to make their work known. When Einstein published Special Relativity he was an independent researcher working in a patent office.

 

[Alvin]

Yes, I am not sure how this works but I think PubMed traditionally has attempted to list everything in what it considers a reasonable list of 'respectable' journals. I think it also includes some stuff from other sources but I don't think it makes any attempt to search for independent documents published online.

This is very interesting, thanks

When Einstein published Special Relativity he was an independent researcher working in a patent office.

Indeed, though a new medical journal wouldn't exactly be as earth shattering as Einstein's writings.

 

[Luther Blissett]

Of course PubMed itself is redundant now in a sense because you can just Google for a topic and it often gives you more. And independent researchers should be able to make their work known. When Einstein published Special Relativity he was an independent researcher working in a patent office.

Hopefully (and probably) with the rise of open access, there will be a rise in the quality of search engines dedicated to the task. It wouldn't surprise me as the technology is known.

What are the types of costs associated with open access? There will be the cost of electronic storage, internet hosting, and the associated people to look after that, but is there anything else?

Also, do you think it will make it more likely for null results to be published?

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

What are the types of costs associated with open access? There will be the cost of electronic storage, internet hosting, and the associated people to look after that, but is there anything else?

Also, do you think it will make it more likely for null results to be published?

All the costs and more are already covered by R & D department audit procedures. Every piece of research at UCL has to be logged in advance and a report has to be produced at the end. Documents can be automatically uploaded onto something like ORCID or IRIS (local database). People already upload their stuff on to three or four sites like ResearchGate or Academia or Archiv. I don't see any need for anything new, just a removal of the option of closed publishing.

With an automatic link between research reports and a public database all null results should be published automatically - as they should be.

 

[Daisymay]

With an automatic link between research reports and a public database all null results should be published automatically - as they should be.

Do grant giving bodies ever stipulate that all results must be published, whether null or positive?

And if not why not, surely that should be required of all researchers?

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

Do grant giving bodies ever stipulate that all results must be published, whether null or positive?

And if not why not, surely that should be required of all researchers?

An interesting question. The problem at the moment is that a grant giving body cannot really insist on publication because journals might turn all papers down. At present publishing is a long difficult process because you have to second guess the foibles of the referees. That system needs to be abandoned. Then it would be reasonable for grant bodies to insist on publication.

 

[chrisb]

That makes it sound as though the reviewers ought to be on the list of authors.

It makes one wonder who might have been reviewer for early papers by Wessely and White. The role might have been attractive to someone with a media image to protect.