Rethinking open access: alternative forms of sustainability and social impact metrics

Rethinking open access: alternative forms of sustainability and social impact metrics

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0

“No Rights Reserved”] “Open access is two things.

It's a publishing model and it's a social movement”.

Jeffrey Beall

Why OA? > OA improves the speed, efficiency and efficacy of research > OA is an enabling factor in interdisciplinary research�� > OA increases the visibility, usage and impact of research�� > OA allows the professional, practitioner and business communities, and the interested public, to benefit from research.

UNESCO. (2012). Policy Guidelines for the Development and PromoMon of Open Access. UNESCO. hOp://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002158/215863e.pdf

‘Open access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge,

and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions’

(Suber)

Current context Challenges Further questions

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0

“No Rights Reserved”]

Current context by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Current context •  Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002) •  Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing

(2003) •  Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge

in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) •  Dame Janet Finch. "Accessibility, sustainability,

excellence: how to expand access to research publications" (2012)

•  Scientific Publications: Free for all? Tenth Report of Session 2003-04 Volume I: Report (House of Commons Science and Technology Committee)

•  Suber, P. (2012). Open Access. MIT Press.

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Current context by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Source: hOp://www.hefce.ac.uk/whatwedo/rsrch/rinfrastruct/oa/oa/

Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)

OpenDOAR (the Directory of Open Access Repositories):��

(research and or data repositories):

OpenAire.eu; Zenodo.org; Open Knowledge Service, SSRN.

Sherpa Romeo��Publisher copyright policies &

self-archiving

shiXing costs & licences

http://vimeo.com/108790101

Current context Challenges by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


UNESCO. (2012). Policy Guidelines for the Development and Promotion of Open Access. UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002158/215863e.pdf

Challenges to take into consideration when expanding OA (OER)

Challenges

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Scheliga, Kaja, and Sascha Friesike. “Putting open scien

ce into practice:

A social dilemma?.” First Monday 19

.9 (20

14).

Challenges: •  Licensing •  Funding •  Recognition

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Licensing:

Licensing: by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


van Schijndel, Marieke, and Joost Smiers. “Imagining a world without copyright: The market and temporary protecMon a beOer alternaMve for arMsts and the public domain. An essay.” Cut-‐Up: The Art of Living in a MediaMsed Landscape 20 (2005).

Schijndel and Smiers (2005) “many people see the CC licences as an alternative to copyright, but in fact they are not, but are simply licences for the use of work that do not actually affect your copyright” CC doesn't question or challenge the copyright system. CC does not paint a clear picture of how a diverse set of creators (and producers) might generate an income. There is a need for alternative ways to protect the public domain of knowledge and creativity

Licensing: by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0

“No Rights Reserved”] Boyle (2009)

Idealised vision of intellectual property. It should produce incentives for innovation by rewarding creators⋯ Copyright, should be servant of creativity, promoting access to information,�� but it is becoming an obstacle to both. (Creative) Commons is actually based on Copyright and removing the embedded conditions it would open a completely new open perspective. “public domain”, is free of property rights and the user could do with it (content, art or creation) whatever is wanted. That is key for innovation and culture. Boyle, James. The public domain: Enclosing the commons of the mind. Yale University Press, 2009.

Challenges: •  Licensing

•  Funding •  Recognition

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Funding: “It is feared that a gold mandate is very likely to result in a deeper disparity between the wealthier higher education institutions”

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Belfiore, Eleonora, and Anna Upchurch, eds. HumaniMes in the twenty-‐first century: beyond uMlity and markets. Palgrave macmillan, 2013.

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


⋯rejection rates are much higher in humanities journals so the peer review more expensive; ⋯ the demand for journal articles in the humanities declines more slowly after publication than in the science; therefore embargos need to be much longer

than in STEM journals to protect the economic interest of the journals (Suber, 2005)

Why OA has been spreading much more slowly in the arts and humanities than STEM?

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0

“No Rights Reserved”] Funding:

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0

“No Rights Reserved”] Funding: double dipping

Funding: by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Funding:

Anderson, C. (2009). Free: The Future of a Radical Price. Hyperion.

F!: DIRECT CROSS-‐SUBSIDIES Any Product That AOracts You to Pay for Something Else. (iPHONE) F2: THE THREE-‐PARTY MARKET Content, Services, SoXware, etc. (ADVERTISEMENT) F3: FREEMIUM Anything That‘s Matched with a Premium Paid Version (SKYPE) F4: NONMONETARY MARKETS Anything People Choose to Give Away with No ExpectaMon of Payment (TEDx)

Funding:

http://goo.gl/DnqXnh

benchmarking 9 flexible funding models 1. PLoS ONE: article processing charges (APCs) fee waived for low-Income (FWL). 2. Ubiquity Press: APCs + fee reduction when needed. 3. PeerJ: Authors pay for a publishing plan ($99) or can submit for ‘free’ and pay once accepted +FWL. 4. Open Library of Humanities: To collectively fund journals 250 articles and 12 books in partnership > $700 from 500 libraries + FWL. 5. Co-Action Publishing: Author can publish for free online and/or low cost in a printed edition. Funding Swedish Royal Library + advertising. 6. African Journals OnLine: Free access to article abstracts. Charge for full access. Fee is defined according to the income of the user’s country. 7. SCOAP3 consortium: Large-scale international consortium of libraries +agencies who cover costs of opening access to key journals. 8. eLife: Peer-reviewed OA journal for the biomedical and life sciences (sponsored by founding agencies and donors). 9. F1000Research: Articles are published OA and peer reviewed after publication by referees. Authors pay an APC with discount to referees.

benchmarking flexible funding models

benchmarking flexible funding models ⋯most of them are significantly subsidised, their approaches are complementary and not mutually exclusive.

Common patterns are also: low APCs, reduced fees for low-income countries, adoption of Creative Commons licences, as well as flexibility.

Source: hOps://www.flickr.com/photos/shandopics/4159816223/in/photostream/

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Challenges: •  Licensing •  Funding

•  Recognition

Academics work primarily for impact (not for money)

The ranking list includes every institution that has any Nobel Laureates, Fields Medals, and Highly-Cited Researchers. In addition, major universities of every country with significant amount of articles indexed by Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) are also included.

shanghairanking.com

“Combining different indicators into a single number is like transforming multidimensional spaces into a zero-dimension”

Recognition: ⋯despite the broad concern regarding the need of transforming science and opening up the research process, there is a clear discrepancy between the concept of open science and scholarly reality.

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


(Iiving in a post ‘H index’ world?)

Scheliga and Friesike (2014)

Criticism: The web has given rise to new venues of discussion/dissemination of scholarly information. A paper cited does not mean that it is cited positively (no distinction). Not clear article-level metrics.

Shema, et al (2014)

Buschman and Michalek (2013)

> No single metric can sufficiently reveal the full impact of research.

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


As scholarly comm. migrated to the web, so did citations “Tweets can predict highly cited articles within the first 3 days of article publication.”

Eysenbach,(2011)

> ‘‘multi-metric approach’’ is proposed as necessary

“much is downloaded and never read, just as much used to be photocopied and never read”

Some tools: F1000, PLOS Article-Level-Metrics, Altmetric.com, Plum Analytics, Impact Story, CiteULike or Mendeley

hOps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezmUoxMTFHQ

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Focus on research outputs

www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzVxoUx9rc

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Predatory publishers are those who exploit the gold OA to make a profit. Their job is to get the money from the authors, so they do everything they can to make themselves look legitimate. Academic librarians need to remove metadata for predatory publishers from their online catalogs. A crowdsourced publishing ethics is needed to report instances of misconduct. Wilson, Kristen. “Librarian vs.(open access) predator: An interview with Jeffrey Beall.” Serials Review 39.2 (2013): 125-‐128.

‘Questionable, scholarly OA publishers‘ by Jeffrey Beall

hOp://scholarlyoa.com/2014/01/02/list-‐of-‐predatory-‐publishers-‐2014/

3 phases the transition of Open Access journals. 1. Lack the prestige (pioneering) (1990s). 2. Digitalization (innovation):��Electronic version of their journal(s) freely accessible. 3. Economic Sustainability (consolidation?): BioMedCentral, PLoS, pioneered the use of article processing charges (APCs).

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


Björk, B.-‐C., & Solomon, D. (2012). Open access versus subscripMon journals: a comparison of scienMfic impact. BMC Medicine, 10(1), 73. doi:10.1186/1741-‐7015-‐10-‐73

Björk & Solomon, (2012)

Current context Challenges

Further questions

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


1. Why the APC fees can be up to 10x higher than the cases previously presented?

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


2. How to move toward a gold OA model acknowledging that different disciplines have very different funding realities?

3. Shouldn’t exist major flexibility also in the definition of the embargo period?

4. What about allowing the authors to go for more flexible licences such as CC0?

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


5. Shouldn‘t public entities claim for a more transparent accountability of publisher incomes to avoid double dip and faked peer review?

6. Who will throw the 1st stone when adopting social or multi-metric outcome approaches?

by @

cristbalcob

o at @

Leuven

U Nov.201

4 [CC0


There is not much agreement whether openness is a mean or an end. For instance, Google represents nothing less than the “utopia of openness”. It is “the greatest corporate champion of openness,” the leader of the “openness movement,” and “the incarnation of the Internet gospel of openness.”. [...] “instead of celebrating what Google does for openness, it’s important to investigate

what openness does for Google“.

danke well

@cristobalcobo

oxford internet institute

The presentation is CC0 but images from third parties might have other licences (not this one)

Rethinking open access: alternative forms of sustainability and social impact metrics

Science

Transcript of Rethinking open access: alternative forms of sustainability and social impact metrics