It’s high time to rethink how we pay for Open infrastructure; it’s high time to act

Changes in the current scholarly communications policy, service and infrastructure ecosystem require us to rethink how we will sustain our open efforts in the future. Seed funding will help us innovate; however, are we as libraries ready to invest in maintaining and further developing good practices for years to come such as services we have come to depend upon to implement our policies such as DOAJ or SHERPA/RoMEO? Many of us in Europe are reliant on our ministries or on generous institutions for funding, but when governments or priorities change, how sure are we that this funding can or will continue? Furthermore, funders are increasingly introducing Open policies; what is their contribution to sustaining Open services/infrastructure? Or are we going to leave it to large publishers to purchase services and infrastructure to add it to their increasingly diversified portfolio, increasing our dependency on them? A range of Open Research initiatives is experimenting with new business models to help combat these challenges. Furthermore, a new collective partnership model such as SCOSS is stimulating change in this area. Such developments are changing mindsets as regards the way we finance Open Research. It is time to rethink how we fund the Open services and infrastructure that support Open policy and practice. Merely continuing to talk of the need to sustain service and infrastructure or taking a piecemeal approach will not cut it, we need to see a strategic vision and approach to help ensure the scholarly communications services and infrastructure are here for years to come.

It’s high time to rethink how we pay for Open infrastructure; it’s high time to act

Changes in the current scholarly communications policy, service and infrastructure ecosystem require us to rethink how we will sustain our open efforts in the future. Seed funding will help us innovate; however, are we as libraries ready to invest in maintaining and further developing good practices for years to come such as services we have come to depend upon to implement our policies such as DOAJ or SHERPA/RoMEO? Many of us in Europe are reliant on our ministries or on generous institutions for funding, but when governments or priorities change, how sure are we that this funding can or will continue? Furthermore, funders are increasingly introducing Open policies; what is their contribution to sustaining Open services/infrastructure? Or are we going to leave it to large publishers to purchase services and infrastructure to add it to their increasingly diversified portfolio, increasing our dependency on them? A range of Open Research initiatives is experimenting with new business models to help combat these challenges. Furthermore, a new collective partnership model such as SCOSS is stimulating change in this area. Such developments are changing mindsets as regards the way we finance Open Research. It is time to rethink how we fund the Open services and infrastructure that support Open policy and practice. Merely continuing to talk of the need to sustain service and infrastructure or taking a piecemeal approach will not cut it, we need to see a strategic vision and approach to help ensure the scholarly communications services and infrastructure are here for years to come.

It’s high time to rethink how we pay for Open infrastructure; it’s high time to act

Changes in the current scholarly communications policy, service and infrastructure ecosystem require us to rethink how we will sustain our open efforts in the future. Seed funding will help us innovate; however, are we as libraries ready to invest in maintaining and further developing good practices for years to come such as services we have come to depend upon to implement our policies such as DOAJ or SHERPA/RoMEO? Many of us in Europe are reliant on our ministries or on generous institutions for funding, but when governments or priorities change, how sure are we that this funding can or will continue? Furthermore, funders are increasingly introducing Open policies; what is their contribution to sustaining Open services/infrastructure? Or are we going to leave it to large publishers to purchase services and infrastructure to add it to their increasingly diversified portfolio, increasing our dependency on them? A range of Open Research initiatives is experimenting with new business models to help combat these challenges. Furthermore, a new collective partnership model such as SCOSS is stimulating change in this area. Such developments are changing mindsets as regards the way we finance Open Research. It is time to rethink how we fund the Open services and infrastructure that support Open policy and practice. Merely continuing to talk of the need to sustain service and infrastructure or taking a piecemeal approach will not cut it, we need to see a strategic vision and approach to help ensure the scholarly communications services and infrastructure are here for years to come.

It’s high time to rethink how we pay for Open infrastructure; it’s high time to act

Changes in the current scholarly communications policy, service and infrastructure ecosystem require us to rethink how we will sustain our open efforts in the future. Seed funding will help us innovate; however, are we as libraries ready to invest in maintaining and further developing good practices for years to come such as services we have come to depend upon to implement our policies such as DOAJ or SHERPA/RoMEO? Many of us in Europe are reliant on our ministries or on generous institutions for funding, but when governments or priorities change, how sure are we that this funding can or will continue? Furthermore, funders are increasingly introducing Open policies; what is their contribution to sustaining Open services/infrastructure? Or are we going to leave it to large publishers to purchase services and infrastructure to add it to their increasingly diversified portfolio, increasing our dependency on them? A range of Open Research initiatives is experimenting with new business models to help combat these challenges. Furthermore, a new collective partnership model such as SCOSS is stimulating change in this area. Such developments are changing mindsets as regards the way we finance Open Research. It is time to rethink how we fund the Open services and infrastructure that support Open policy and practice. Merely continuing to talk of the need to sustain service and infrastructure or taking a piecemeal approach will not cut it, we need to see a strategic vision and approach to help ensure the scholarly communications services and infrastructure are here for years to come.

Insights into European Research Funder Open Policies and Practices: A Snapshot

This presentation will describe the results of a research study called the RIF Project that gleans insights into the various patterns of rewards and incentives being employed by European research funders to encourage open access to publications and research data and openness in research assessment for the research they fund. Funders across Europe are using scholarly communications to increase the impact of their grant results, thereby incentivizing researchers to share their research more openly. More than 60 funders responded to a survey that was conducted in early Spring 2019 coming from key international funding bodies, national funding agencies, major charities and foundations, and national academies and from over 25 countries. The study is being led by SPARC Europe in consultation with Science Europe, ALLEA and the EFC. The survey is the first of its kind, also to include academies, foundations and charities in Europe. What kinds of policy choices have funders made to influence how grantees increase open access to their research results with as few restrictions as possible? How can funders contribute to changing the research evaluation system by exploring ways to evaluate the intrinsic value of research beyond the impact factor for example; promoting, and considering a wider range of types of research when evaluating grants. What internal evaluation processes come with that? Can funders stimulate grantees to disseminate a wide range of research more broadly, also for re-use, and encourage its discoverability? How are funders contributing to the investment in open, be it through financing open access journal articles and other material, and supporting infrastructure? The presentation will provide answers to these questions by sharing some of the survey’s high level results, firstly reporting on types of Open Access and Open Science policies amongst a range of funders to frame the other incentives. We will then go into how funders are currently funding Open Access publications, as well as Open Access and research data development, services or infrastructure. Furthermore, we will outline what grant evaluation criteria are used when evaluating the research funders fund or wish to fund and for indications for innovation in this process, e.g. asking how far they endorse initiatives such as the Leiden Manifesto or DORA and where Open Science is and is not included in that process. The project will end by delving into areas of the study that inform on certain principles of Plan S. This research will help raise awareness of the range of opportunities to funders with Open Science to help them and their grantees increase access, visibility and impact of their research results on health, industry and society. For libraries, more rewards and incentives amongst funders in Europe clearly endorses the Open Science work we have been leading on for many years. More development in this area also promises to have positive consequences on helping libraries achieve more open access to research results as seen with the REF in the UK or with Horizon 2020. Note that Plan S, established in Sept 2018, is a key engine for funders to provide more immediate OA to research. Plan S can go hand in hand with studies like the RIF Project that can contribute to showing trends, gaps and good practices to inform and motivate more funders to embrace Open Science in policy and practice on various levels. We hope to tell you how.

Discussion Panel