Open Access policy effectiveness: A briefing paper for UK Higher Education Institutions

There are now almost 700 Open Access policies around the world, two thirds of them in universities and research institutes. There is considerable variation across these policies in terms of the conditions they lay down for authors and of their effectiveness. This briefing paper lays out the main issues that affect the effectiveness of a policy in providing high levels of Open Access research material.

Open Access in the UK Briefing on the UK Open Access Case Study

Open Access (OA) policies have been adopted at the national, institutional and funder levels in the UK and various infrastructural support mechanisms are available to facilitate open access. In July 2012, following an independent study on ‘Accessibility, sustainability, excellence: how to expand access to research publications’ the UK Government announced its OA policy. The Government’s policy determines that ‘support for publication in open access or hybrid journals, funded by Article Processing Charges (APCs), [i]s the main vehicle for the publication of research’. At the same time that the UK Government announced its OA policy, the UK’s major research funder, the Research Councils UK (RCUK), revised its OA policy announcing its ‘preference for immediate [Gold] Open Access with the maximum opportunity for re-use’. In March 2014, the UK Funding Councils announced their OA policy for the post-2014 Research Evaluation Framework (REF). The policy requires the deposit of peer-reviewed article and conference proceedings in repositories (Green OA) and is applicable from 1 April 2016. By and large, two distinct OA routes are being promoted by the UK Government and RCUK (Gold OA) and the Funding Councils (Green OA). This scenario requires that continued efforts are made to ensure that advice and support are provided to universities, academic libraries and researchers on the distinct OA policies and on policy compliance. The UK research institutions have been adopting OA policies from as early as 2003 and there currently are 85 institutional OA policies. Despite distinct OA policies having been adopted by policymakers, national research funders and research institutions, the UK’s movement towards OA has been a result of stakeholders coordinated efforts and is considered to be a case of good practice.

Study into licences used by Open Access journals

The Knowledge Exchange Licensing Expert Group has commissioned a study which examined which licences or licence provisions are being used by open access and hybrid publishers when making their publications available in open access. The study intended to identify a ‘best practice’ licence model framework and to formulate recommendations with respect to an OA licence structure, taking into account the commercial and non-commercial needs of authors as well as the publishers. The study was undertaken by Maverick Outsource Services Ltd. This led to the following recommendations for an optimum licence in an open access journal: The author retains copyright; The author or rightholder grants to all users a free, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual right of access to the work, and besides a licence to copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works in any digital medium for any reasonable purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship; A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials is deposited immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository. This includes the permission as stated under 2, in a suitable standard electronic format; The copyright holder can retain the right to restrict commercial use if they wish; The copyright holder provides the publisher with permission to publish, subject to open accessibility of the work in online published form.

Submission Fees - A Tool in the Transition to Open Access?

Knowledge Exchange examined different routes in achieving the vision of 'having a layer of scholarly and scientific content openly available in the internet'. One of these routes involves exploring new developments in the future of publishing. Work is being undertaken investigating interesting alternative business models which could contribute to the transition to open access. In this light KE has commissioned a study investigating whether submission fees could play a role in a business model for Open Access journals. The general conclusion of the report bearing the title ‘Submission Fees a tool in the transition to open access?', written by Mark Ware, is that there are benefits to publishers in certain cases to switch to a model in which an author pays a fee when submitting an article. Especially journals with a high rejection rate might be interested in combining submission fees with article processing charges in order to make the transition to open access easier. In certain disciplines, notably economic and finance journals and in some areas of the experimental life sciences, submission fees are already common. Overall there seems to be an interest in the model but the risks, particularly those involved in any transition, are seen by the publishers to outweigh the perceived benefits. There is also a problem in that the advantages offered by submission fees are often general benefits that might improve the system but do not provide publishers and authors with direct incentives to change to open access. To support transition funders, institutions and publication funds could make it clear that submission fees would be an allowable cost. At present this is often unclear in their policies. Author acceptance of submission fees is critical to its success. It is an observable fact that authors will accept them in some circumstances. Author acceptance would require further study though. Based on the interviews and the modelling in the study one model in particular is regarded as the most suitable way to meet the current requirements (i.e. to strengthen open access to research publications). In this model authors pay a submission fee plus an Article Processing Fee and the article is subsequently made available in open access. Both fees are set at levels that balance acceptability with the author community with securing a meaningful mix of revenues for the Publisher.

Practical challenges in moving to Open Access: a focus on research funders and universities

At the Berlin7 conference in Paris on 3 December 2009 Knowledge Exchange provided a workshop on the practical challenges to be addressed in moving to Open Access. Presentations where provided by John Houghton and Alma Swan discussing the outcomes of studies on the costs and benefits of Open Access for institutions and the society as a whole. These were followed by presentations by two funding agencies on the results of financing publication costs both at an institutional and national level in Germany. Also the results of the Springer deal in the Netherlands where presented. The third section was focused on the results of implementing mandates both by funding bodies and institutions.

Costs and Benefits of Open Access

In June 2009 a study was completed that had been commissioned by Knowledge Exchange and written by Professor John Houghton, Victoria University, Australia. This report on the study was titled: "Open Access – What are the economic benefits? A comparison of the United Kingdom, Netherlands and Denmark." This report was based on the findings of studies in which John Houghton had modelled the costs and benefits of Open Access in three countries. These studies had been undertaken in the UK by JISC, in the Netherlands by SURF and in Denmark by DEFF. In the three national studies the costs and benefits of scholarly communication were compared based on three different publication models. The modelling revealed that the greatest advantage would be offered by the Open Access model, which means that the research institution or the party financing the research pays for publication and the article is then freely accessible. Adopting this model could lead to annual savings of around EUR 70 million in Denmark, EUR 133 million in The Netherlands and EUR 480 in the UK. The report concludes that the advantages would not just be in the long term; in the transitional phase too, more open access to research results would have positive effects. In this case the benefits would also outweigh the costs.

Sustainability of Open Access Services: Phase 4 Workshop report

Phase 4: Review of the conditions under which individual services and platforms can be sustained On Tuesday 1 October 2013, in Bristol, United Kingdom, Knowledge Exchange brought together a group of international Open Access Service providers to discuss the sustainability of their services. A number of recurring lessons learned were mentioned; Though project funding can be used to start up a service, it does not guarantee the continuation of a service and it can be hard to establish the service as a viable entity, standing on its own feet. Research funders should be aware that if they have policies or mandates for making research outputs available they will eventually also be responsible for on-going support for the underlying infrastructure. At present some services are used globally but the costs are only covered by a limited geographic spread, sometimes only a number of institutions or only one country. Finding other funding sources can be challenging. Various routes were mentioned including commercial partnerships, memberships, offering additional paid services or using a Freemium model. There is not one model that will fit all. As more services turn to library sponsorship to sustain them, one strategy might be to bundle the requests and approach a group of research and infrastructure funders or institutions (and others) with a package rather than each service going through the same resource consuming process of soliciting funding. This will also allow the community to identify gaps, dependencies and overlap in the services. The possibility of setting up an organisation to bundle the services was discussed and a number of risks were identified.

Preparing for the Research Excellence Framework: Examples of Open Access Good Practice across the United Kingdom

This article concerns how higher education institutions across the United Kingdom are implementing systems and workflows in order to meet open access requirements for the next Research Excellence Framework. The way that institutions are preparing is not uniform, although there are key areas which require attention: cost management, advocacy, systems and metadata, structural workflows, and internal policy. Examples of preparative work in these areas are taken from institutions who have participated in the Open Access Good Practice initiative supported by Jisc.

Open Access Repositories & Scholarly Publication

This presentation briefly covers some of the issues around Open Access as it pertains to institutional repositories in the UK higher educational sector. It includes an overview of the current activities of SHERPA, along with the benefits, concerns and potential resolutions of issues in the open access sector. Some speculation as to future trends and developments in scholarly publishing and open access is included. The presentation is in no way comprehensive, and is intended to give an overview of the subject to a general audience who will be engaged with academic and scholarly publishing on a variety of levels.

A Wel(l)come development: research funders and open access

This paper discusses the implications of the Wellcome Trust agreement with Blackwell, OUP and Springer in which authors of accepted papers are able to pay an open-access publication charge to make their article freely available online. In bringing together flexible licence terms and clear funding streams, the agreement has the potential to be used as a way of migrating towards possible new business models for journal publishing. It also has the potential, if implemented more widely, to deliver greater open access in such a way as to work in the interests of a broad range of stakeholders.

Rumours, Bargains and Lies: How to advocate Open Access repositories more successfully

In this workshop seminar delivered twice at the CoFHE/UCR 2006 conference the author explored aspects relating to successful advocacy of Open Access and repositories. Areas covered included preconceptions on the part of academics and support staff, as well as models of implementation of an advocacy programme. A large portion of the material pulls together experience and narrative evidence from the SHERPA Consortium partners and repository administrators; with a particular focus on their successes and failures and the lessons that have been learned.

Libraries and open access: the implications of open-access publishing and dissemination for libraries in higher education institutions

This chapter discusses the consequences of open-access (OA) publishing and dissemination for libraries in higher education institutions (HEIs). Key questions (which are addressed in this chapter) include: 1. How might OA help information provision? 2. What changes to library services will arise from OA developments (particularly if OA becomes widespread)? 3. How do these changes fit in with wider changes affecting the future role of libraries? 4. How can libraries and librarians help to address key practical issues associated with the implementation of OA (particularly transition issues)? This chapter will look at OA from the perspective of HE libraries and will make four key points: 1. Open access has the potential to bring benefits to the research community in particular and society in general by improving information provision. 2. If there is widespread open access to research content, there will be less need for library-based activity at the institution level, and more need for information management activity at the supra-institutional or national level. 3. Institutional libraries will, however, continue to have an important role to play in areas such as managing purchased or licensed content, curating institutional digital assets, and providing support in the use of content for teaching and research. 4. Libraries are well-placed to work with stakeholders within their institutions and beyond to help resolve current challenges associated with the implementation of OA policies and practices.

Can open access repositories and peer-reviewed journals coexist?

It is often assumed that open access repositories and peer-reviewed journals are in competition with each other and therefore will in the long term be unable to coexist. This paper takes a critical look at that assumption. It draws on the available evidence of actual practice which indicates that coexistence is possible at least in the medium term. It discusses possible future models of publication and dissemination which include open access, repositories, peer review and journals. The paper suggests that repositories and journals may coexist in the long term but that both may have to undergo significant changes. Important areas where changes need to occur include: widespread deployment of repository infrastructure, development of version identification standards, development of value-added features, new business models, new approaches to quality control and adoption of digital preservation as a repository function.