Speaker presentations - Research Councils UK

Transcription

Unlocking the future: open access
communication in a global research
environment
1-2 April 2015
Speaker presentations
Evolution or revolution?
Publishers’ perceptions of future
directions in research communications
and the publisher role
Mark Ware
Unlocking the Future, London, 1 April 2015
“The publishing industry as it
is constituted today is
doomed to extinction. That
isn’t an ‘if’. It’s a ‘when’.”
Razib Khan et al. (2014) Dragging scientific publishing into the 21st
century. Genome Biology doi:10.1186/s13059-014-0556-2
Key pressures for change
•
Digital transition
•
Funder policies
•
Momentum for increased openness
•
Changing researcher behaviours & attitudes
•
& Growth in R&D outputs?
Key forces
Other factors
Funder policies
Government policies
Copyright reform
Economic
Growth in R&D
expenditure
Economies of scale
Lower barriers to entry
Budget strains
Globalisation
Social
Changing researcher
behaviours
Attitudes to copyright
[Open innovation &
co-design]
Digital transition
(Research) data
[Cloud computing]
[APIs / standards]
Political
Technological
… leading to?
•
Evolution, not revolution or disruption
•
“Four functions” have continued relevance
•
Peer review remains central & critical
•
Open access the norm (in “mixed economy”)
•
More competitive market
•
Consolidation & changes to industry structure
Changing industry structure
Dimension
New entrants
Company diversification
Product complexity
Industry concentration
Geography
Vertical integration
Value network complexity
Trend Example
⬆︎
PeerJ; eLife; Google Scholar;
ResearchGate/Academia
⬆︎
Journals platform inc. mobile;
SciVal/Converis
⬆︎
Wolters Kluwer/Medknow;
SciELO; Spanish/Chinese
⬆︎ Elsevier; Digital Science; JBJS
⬆︎ Springer/Macmillan
⬇︎
⬆︎
Production; hosting/distribution;
manuscript submission systems?
Mendeley; collaborative tools;
open science; open innovation
CCBY Celina Ramjoué, Opening up scientific information in Horizon 2020 and beyond
Open Science
Disciplinary differences
•
Open access
•
Peer review
•
Digital transition
Peer review
•
Fundamentally “broken” or just needing improvements?
•
"Soundness not significance"
•
Increased rigour
•
Experimentation and innovation
•
Open and double-blind review
•
Post-publication review
•
Threats to quality & integrity
•
Conflicts of interest
•
Quality signals
•
Standards and guidelines
Gold open access & subscriptions
Advantages
Challenges
Open access
(Gold)
Scalable (in principle)
Lower barriers to entry
→competition & innovation
Cross-disciplinary discovery
Facilitates re-use
Funding transition to Gold
Efficiency
Disciplinary differences
Licensing issues
Subscriptions
Spreads costs more widely
Multiple funding sources
Disciplines w/low funding
High rejection-rate journals
Corporate R&D
Funding growth in outputs
Meeting policy requirements
Delivering open science
Improving open access
•
Business models for Gold
•
Efficiency & standards
•
Improving Green
Pricing & value
•
Value-based pricing: value + market/competition +
cost
•
A range of APCs is desirable
•
Trends in pricing unclear: majority think more likely to
fall than to rise
•
Fair prices / fair value: willing buyer in open
competitive market
Publisher value add & profitability
•
Peer review pre-eminent, but at the head of long list
of publishing activities
•
Neutral third party
•
Systems view
•
Funding & sustaining the system at scale
•
Profitability: encourage market competition, not
regulation
Multi-stakeholder challenges &
opportunities for collaboration
•
Accelerating Gold transition
•
Efficiency improvements
•
Standards and guidelines e.g. metadata
•
Quality guidelines for journals
•
Improving quality of research outputs
•
Research data & reproducibility
•
Improving Green OA
And some final thoughts
•
Well, just how do we accelerate Gold OA?
•
What (if anything) should come after APCs?
•
How should we define “quality”? – e.g. is “quality” in research
papers changing? (e.g. “sound science” vs “significance”)
•
“the science is in the data; publication is just an advertisement”
– is this true? If so, are journals doing enough to reflect it?
•
Does CHORUS provide a good direction for Green?
•
Should there be greater disciplinary flexibility over open access
policies, e.g. embargo periods or permitted licences?
•
How can subscription journals deliver open science?
Exploring the value add of publishers:
Form follows dysfunction?
John Houghton
Victoria Institute of Strategic Economic Studies
Australia
[email protected]
Changing context and new markets
 Doctoral degrees no longer simply a path to an academic career,
they are now common across all sectors of the economy and society.
 Journal authors and readers no longer predominantly in the
developed Western countries, with China, India, South American and
African countries now major consumers and producers.
 Various models shed light on the changing nature of research:
 Systems of Innovation – focusing on the systems within which
knowledge is produced, communicated and applied.
 New Production of Knowledge – contrasting traditional disciplinary
research, with an emerging trans-disciplinary, problem-oriented mode of
knowledge production.
 Triple Helix – describing the emerging inter-relationship between
universities, industry and the state.
 Post-academic science – describing the emerging era of science and
contrasting it with traditional ‘academic science’.
Changing nature of research
 Increasing diversity in the location of research activities – with a
greater range of organizations and countries involved;
 Increasing focus on interdisciplinary research – with researchers
working on problems that cannot be tackled within a single
disciplinary framework;
 Increasing focus on problems, rather than techniques – with findings
valued for their contribution to the solution, rather than the toolbox;
 Increasing blurring of organizational borders – and greater emphasis
on collaborative work and communication;
 Changes in the modes of communication – with more emphasis on
diverse and informal communication; and
 More diverse forms of accountability – with economic and social, as
well as disciplinary, outcomes taken into account.
Access levels and difficulties
UK
Denmark
SMEs
Large
Firms
N=186
N=111
High-tech
SMEs
N=98
Excellent (I have access to all the articles I need)
Good (I have access to most of the articles I need)
Varied (I sometimes have difficulty getting the articles I need)
Poor (I frequently have difficulty getting articles)
Very Poor (I always have great difficulty getting articles)
2%
26%
56%
14%
3%
7%
39%
37%
13%
3%
6%
16%
41%
32%
6%
Experiencing access difficulties
(i.e. saying their access is very poor, poor or varied)
Have access to all I need
73%
2%
53%
7%
79%
6%
Access to research articles
Sources: Houghton, J.W., Swan, A. and Brown, S. (2011) Access to Research and Technical Information in Denmark, Report to The Danish
Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation and The Danish Agency for Libraries and Media, Copenhagen; and Ware, M. (2009) Access
by UK small and medium-sized enterprises to professional and academic literature, Publishing Research Consortium, Bristol, p13.
(Authors’ analysis).
Aims and performance
 The aim of public and philanthropic research funding is to
have an impact on the economy and society.
 The evidence suggests that there is an increasingly
diverse market of research producers and consumers that
is not being well served.
 Maximising the impact of publicly-funded research
requires innovative solutions.
 Value is not about the minutiae of what publishers do,
but about needs and outcomes.
 How well are academic publishers and publishing models
adapting to meet the needs of emerging research
communication markets?
Sustainability and incentives
Adam Smith (1776) An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes
of the Wealth of Nations:
“…It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the
baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own
self-interest.”
(Book I, Chapter II)
“…by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be
of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this,
as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end
which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the
society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he
frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when
he really intends to promote it.”
(Book IV, Chapter II)
Publishing models and incentives
 Subscription or toll access publishing – market signals hidden, no
cost (or price) discipline, and incentives do not lead to a sustainable
system that maximises the dissemination of research.
 Gold OA with author fees – could link author and service provider,
but special funds and institutional packages block market signals,
and incentives are not aligned (e.g. 693 publishers on Beall’s list of
‘Predatory Publishers’).
 Hybrid OA – widely criticised for higher charges, double dipping, etc.
and incentives are not aligned.
 Gold OA free to readers and authors – no clash of interests, much
more cost discipline, and incentives align.
 Green OA – less disruption to traditional practices and sharper focus
on value from subscriptions, but we need to understand embargoes
and enable sustainable licensing transitions.
Repositories are the future?
 Repositories play a number of roles beyond Green OA:
 Research information and management, evaluation, etc.;
 Hosting a wide range of publications, such as books and book
chapters, reports, etc., as well as articles and journals; and
 Hosting research data.
 Open research data may be the key driver of change in
publishing.
 There is a one-to-many relationship between data and
publications, making it easier to hang publications (of all
types) from data than vice-versa.
 We should see Green OA as part of a broader landscape,
where repositories play a key role.
Making it work
To be effective and sustainable, policies and
publishing models need to:
 Establish a system of incentives, aligning self-interests
with the greater social good;
 Ensure that price (market) signals are communicated,
so there can be competition and informed choice;
 Find ways to supply the ‘long tail’ of readers and
authors largely excluded by the subscription
publishing system; and
 Align with emerging research practices, including
integrating with open research data.
Scholarly communications – Costs and
access
Unlocking the future:
Open Access communication in a global research
environment
Joel Cook
1 April 2015
Contents
1
Background
2
Costs
3
Access
4
Conclusions
Page 31
Background
Previous studies by CEPA and associates
• RIN, Heading for the open road: Costs and benefits of transitions in
scholarly communications, May 2011
• Prepared by CEPA and Mark Ware Consulting for RIN
• Project funders were: RIN, JISC, the Wellcome Trust, RLUK, and the PRC
• RIN, Activities, costs and funding flows in the scholarly communications
system in the UK, February 2008
• Work carried out by CEPA with advice and input from John Cox
• Input from RIN and an Expert Panel
In the former report we created five scenario for the UK. We estimated the
benefit-cost ratio of ‘instantaneously’ moving from our 2015 baseline to the
‘scenario’.
Page 32
Costs
It is important to understand what the studies were trying to model
The studies focused on establishing a representative (average) costs for
articles
• Article first copy costs included:
• Select and mange, peer review, editing, rights management and
publishing admin, and depositing.
• Costs per subscription:
• Administer sale, online user management, produce/print, manage
inventory, delivery/fulfilment
• Indirect costs per article:
• Marketing; online hosting; customer service/ helpdesk; and
management, admin and investment
Page 33
Article cost variations
The publishing activity costs varied for only a few reasons
• Article first copy costs varied by:
• Select and mange – by the assumption on rejection rate
• Peer review (non-cash) – by the assumption on rejection rate
• Editing – by subject and journal category (PopHyb, MD, niche)
• Costs per subscription:
• Online user management and produce/print – by journal category
• Indirect costs per article:
• Marketing & online hosting – by publisher type
• Customer service/ helpdesk – by journal category
Page 34
Costs that were captured indirectly
£
There were a number of other assumptions that meant costs were not
included directly
• We did not specifically capture start-up costs (a publisher will attempt to
recover accumulated losses, were incurred, over the journal’s life cycle):
Price
Costs
Time
• We did not specifically capture capital costs (i.e., investment in new
hardware or software).
• IT hardware and software generally have short life cycles = a high rate of
depreciation.
• We sought to capture these in the operating surplus.
Page 35
What did this mean?
The analysis/conclusions (which were comparisons across scenarios) were
not impacted by these assumptions, but…
• The variation in publishing costs across journals were not reflected:
• The variation in editing costs was limited.
• The same functionality was assumed across journals.
• Given the timing of the study, and data limitations, investment in new IT
systems/ services may not have been captured.
• APC was estimated as an average charge with little variation across
publishers/ journals.
Page 36
Access
We attempted to establish ‘useful’ access
• Access: user groups are able to read, download and print articles without
additional payment
• We took into account the following factor to generate a Standardised unit
of access (SUoA):
• Availability
• Version
• Functionality
• Diminishing marginal Useful
access
returns to access
• Useful access varied
by user type
(%)
A
B
Level of access (%)
Page 37
UK funders’ net costs
All scenarios had an upfront cost
One-off
transactional
costs
Panel
A: One-off
transactional
costs
10
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
Green
£ million
Delayed
Annual
system
statestate
plusplus
ongoing
costs)
Panel B:
Annualcosts
system(steady
ccsts (steady
ongoingtransitional
transitional costs)
Gold (higher
APC)
Gold (lower
APC)
Licence
(HEI)
Licence
(NHS)
0
2
4
£ million
6
8
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Green
Delayed
Gold (higher APC)
Gold (lower APC)
Licence
(HEI)
Licence
(NHS)
Page 38
Conclusions from the 2011 study
Green
• Could substantially increase access
• Cost-effective since infrastructure already built
• Low transition/outcome risks
• Risks to system from potential subscription cancellations
• Not self-sustaining
Page 39
Conclusions from the 2011 study
Gold
• Sustainable business model
• Improved economic efficiency (transparency, lower barrier to entry)
• Potentially high BCR and lower net costs to UK academic institutions
• provided average APCs are low enough
• Transition/outcome risks: funding “hump”, APC pricing, UK/Global take-up
Page 40
Contact us
CAMBRIDGE ECONOMIC POLICY
ASSOCIATES
Queens House, 55-56 Lincoln’s Inn Fields
London WC2A 3LJ
Tel: +44 20 7269 0210
Fax: +44 20 7405 4699
[email protected]
www.cepa.co.uk
Page 41
The role of repositories
GRC Seminar: Unlocking the future
Professor Adam Tickell, Provost and Vice-Principal
University of Birmingham
2 April 2015
UK Landscape
• Political, institutional and intellectual commitment to sharing
scientific knowledge
– Finch and beyond
• Settling on a mixed model
– Policy preference towards Gold Open Access
– Policy support for Green OA
– In practice, funders are driving change
• HEFCE, RCUK, charities and government departments
– Must have article of record in repository at point of publication/
acceptance even if it is under embargo and therefore not visible
Repositories galore!
• All universities developing their own repositories
– Funders believe that universities are durable
• Some disciplines have popular repositories themselves, for
example
– Physics
– Economics
– Medicine
• Leads to duplication, potential confusion and additional cost
– Multi-authored papers may end up in multiple repositories with
different meta-data
• Repositories are complementary to Gold OA
– Need to accept embargo periods
Financial sustainability
• Existing model is expensive
– Public funds currently pay separately to do the research and to read
other’s research
• Gold OA means we pay to publish too
– ... but excellent science currently depends on process of peer review
• Complex ecosystem and disruption might damage the whole
– Simply pursuing green OA creates a ‘free rider’ problem
The future
• Repositories will be central
– Institutional repositories will have the majority of UK research by 2020
• ... though much work will be subject to embargo periods
• Monographs and book chapters may become subject to green open
access
• Research data will be in repositories
– Massive scientific benefit but some significant risks
– Clinical trials database?
• Post publication peer review is a possibility
– The end of journals as intermediaries and guarantors of quality?
• ... but subject repositories make most sense in this world
• and the scientific challenges are huge
• Disruption will be disruptive!
Open access is about access and re-use, but it is also about being
able to contribute and participate in global conversations developing region concerns
d
Dominique Babini, CLACSO @dominiquebabini
Session 2: The role of repositories
Workshop “Unlocking the future: Open Access communication in a global
research environment”
Global Research Council (GRC) - Research Councils UK (RCUK)
London, British Library, 1-2 April 2015
In this presentation
– A developing region strategy for OA
– Risks for developing regions: OA being integrated
into commercial publishing
– Role of repositories in shaping the future of OA
1. repositories as publishing platforms
2. repositories as source of indicators for research
evaluation
3. repositories as facilitators for research cooperation
and open science
These visions about open access
The scientific record should be free of financial
barriers for any researcher to contribute to.
(ICSU goals for OA, 2014)
…undue publication barriers must be avoided…
…..minimize any barriers to international research
collaboration….
(GRC Action Plan OA, 2013)
have a different strategic approach in a
developing region
Latin America and the Caribbean Consultation on Open Access to
Scientific Information, sponsored by UNESCO, 23 countries
represented, Kingston, 2013 -, recommended
• Gold and Green routes are suitable form of OA for the region
– For Green routes, inclusive and cooperative OA solutions
should be promoted to avoid new enclosures
– the Gold OA route in the region should continue its
present emphasis on sharing costs.
http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MU
LTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/news/report_open
_access_en.pdf
Examples of scholarly community led OA journal portals in
developing regions
• SciELO and Redalyc in Latin America (1.300 OA peerreview journals with no APC´s)
• SciELO South Africa (49 OA journals)
• Africa Journals Online-AJOL (188 OA journals)
• JOLs/INASP (314 OA journals): Bangladesh, Mongolia,
Nepal, Sri Lanka, Philippines, Vietnam, Nicaragua,
Honduras
+ journals from developing regions with no APC´s (DOAJ)
universities are taking charge of journal
publishing in OA platforms
e.g.: Latin America universities with more than 100
journals each, in OJS platforms, with no APC´s
UNAM, México
Univ. Sao Paulo, Brazil
revistas.unam.mx
http://www.revistas.usp.br
Univ. Chile
http://www.revistas.uchile.cl/
OA managed by the scholarly community
sharing costs, with no APC´s
now faces
trends of open access being
integrated into commercial
publishing
No relation of APC´s with research funds/research salaries
in developing regions
Average APCs
USD 2.097/2.727 per article,
for article processing charges
(APCs) by “subscription
publishers”
USD 1.418 average per article
by “non-subscription
publishers”
Source: Björk B-C, Solomon D.(2014). Developing an effective
market for open access article processing charges.
http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Policy/Spotlightissues/Open-access/Guides/WTP054773.htm
No funds for APC´s
- grants with no funds for APC
- no relation of APC´s with salaries
e.g.: senior monthly salaries
– Indian Council of Agricultural
Research USD 1,500
– Argentine university ecology
researcher
USD 1,200
– Sudan university
epidemiology researcher USD
350
– Ukraine university full
professor USD 1.138
role of repositories in shaping the future of OA:
a developing region perspective
2. repositories as source of indicators for
research evaluation
3. repositories as facilitators for research
cooperation and open science
research evaluation
1. repositories as publishing platforms:
diversity of outputs, local and international
interest
• managing and rewarding peer-review of nonpeer-reviewed contents in repositories
• metadata describing the evaluation process
and the quality levels of contents
• integrate journal publishing in repositories
• support for infrastructure (individual/shared),
training, advocacy, interoperability, policies
1. repositories as publishing platforms: advances
in OA policies requiring repositories for govfunded research, the case of Latin America
• AO national legislation approved by Congress in
– Peru (2013)
– Argentina (2013)
– Mexico (2014)
• OA legislation proposal in Congress
– Brazil (since 2007)
– Venezuela (2014)
Challenge: implementation strategies and funding
1. repositories as publishing platforms: cooperation
needed from publishers in support of developing
regions
For articles with authors/co-authors from developing
regions institutions
• automatic “export” of released articles after
embargo period, to:
• Recipient repositories:
– national S&T repositories if available
– or author´s institutional repository if available
research evaluation
2. repositories as source of indicators for research
evaluation
• agreements on OA indicators for evaluation
• indicators on quality and relevance of
individual research outputs (research report,
datasets, journal articles, books/book
chapter/conference papers,…)
• training evaluators
• review the reward
and peer-review systems
research evaluation
3. repositories as facilitators of open, collaborative,
and distributed research and publishing
platforms where “publication” is continuous with new
collaborative writing, reviewing and publishing practices
• diversity of research and scholarly outputs and formats,
with metadata identifiyng
– levels of quality
– peer-review processes
– licences for reuse
• interoperability: support national, regional, international
initiatives
Examples of international support needed
• Report on research and scholarly community
perceptions of future directions in research
communications and the repositories role (COARSPARC)
• Next generation repositories project (COAR)
• Interoperability of repositories
– Institutional/national/regional repositories
– Subject repositories
– Journal repositories
Need: international debate and consensus
research evaluation
Thank you!!!!
Dominique Babini – CLACSO, Open Access Program
University of Buenos Aires/IIGG – Open Access research
@dominiquebabini
[email protected]

Speaker presentations - Research Councils UK

Transcription

Similar documents

Easy-Happy-Sex - Aboriginal Tribal Leader Mourning her Son is

- City Research Online

proyecto sm

Invention Machine Goldfire Removing the Barriers to Innovation

Something`s Up in the Attic and It Has Mom!

Planning a Successful Business

Papers32 - OER Knowledge Cloud

Registration Form - Content Malaysia Pitching Centre

Destined Souls