The future of scholarly publishing: where do we go from here?

The future of scholarly publishing: where do we go from here? Research Information in Transition: a meeting organised by the RIN Monday, 11 th October, 2010 Robert Kiley, Head Digital Services, Wellcome Library, Wellcome Trust (r.kiley@wellcome.ac.uk)

Agenda
Review how scholarly communication has changed over the last 5 years
Look at current landscape - OA publishing, repository development, peer review etc.
Consider what needs to change if we are to realise the ambition of providing open access to all funded research

A changing landscape (1)
Growing number of mandates – at both funder and institutional level
Publishing landscape changing
Most publishers offer “funder compliant” OA options
OA publishing becoming mainstream
PLoS One is one the biggest journals in the world – publishing over 4400 articles in 2009
Raft of new OA titles - mBio , PLoS Currents , BMJ Open .
Starting to see a changes to the peer review process
EMBO – publish referees reports
ASM mBio – authors identify 3 ASM members to handle review + 5 other people to review it
BMJ Open – will use “Open Peer Review”
Reviewers will sign their reports and will declare competing interests to editors, and reviewers’ reports will be posted online

More funding available to meet author-pays costs
At least 6 UK universities have an “institutional fund”
Compact for Open Access Publishing Equity
11 universities have signed the Compact including Harvard, Columbia, MIT
RCUK
“ Chief Executives of the Research Councils ..will support increased open access, by: extending their support for publishing in open access journals, including through the pay-to-publish model. [April 2009]
Wellcome Trust

Repository developments
All Russell Group Universities have established IR’s, as have most of the other UK universities
Central, subject-based repositories (like UKPMC) continue to develop
UKPMC has around 2 million full-text documents and a range of value-added functions
Projects, such as Repository Junction, are working to develop automated workflows to move metadata between repositories

UKPMC functionality: text mining Results of text mining the full-text

UKPMC functionality: citation services Cited-by and cited data + API to WoS

UKPMC functionality: FactFinder (goes live early in 2011) Answers extracted from the full text document Questions automatically generated in response to query

Grant Reporting tools “ My Impact Report” “ My Grant Report”

Usage at UKPMC

However, full potential of OA not realised.. Compliance with Wellcome OA mandate

Improving compliance with mandate: role of Funders
Funders must be explicit about how researchers and institutions can access funding for OA
Develop guidance about inclusion of OA publications costs within indirect costs; include specific line in grant application forms to include publication costs (direct costs)
Or, set up dedicated budget (e.g. the Wellcome approach)
Monitor compliance & enforce sanctions
Actively monitor compliance
Following letter from Wellcome to VC’s significant there was a 52% increase in author depositions
Trust also checks End of Grant Reports for compliance
Communication
Demonstrate the benefits of OA to the researcher (as well as the research community more generally)

Improving compliance with mandate: role of institutions & researchers
Improve access to OA funds
Institutions to ensure OA publishing costs are requested as direct and indirect costs when applying for research funds
Establish dedicated budgets to meet OA costs
Better communication
Arrangements for meeting OA fees to be effectively communicated
Support from senior staff
WT Sanger Institute has a compliance rate of 82%
Encouraging authors to self-archive
2009 data shows that only 42% of Wellcome-funded papers – published in Science and Nature – were archived in UKPMC

Improving compliance with mandate: role of publishers
Simplify process for authors who wish to select an OA option
Build OA option into manuscript submission workflow
Make explicit the relationship between subscription costs and uptake of OA option
This will give confidence that funders and institutions are not paying access fees twice (“double dipping)
Top tier titles ( Nature, Science) to consider developing OA publishing option

Access to “top-tier” articles remains an issue

Last slide..
OA has made significant progress over the last 5 years
However, the majority of research papers that will be published in 2010 will not be made OA
The primary actors (funders, researchers, institutions and publishers) need to continue to work together to realise the full benefits of OA

The future of scholarly publishing: where do we go from here?

by Research Information Network on Oct 15, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

The future of scholarly publishing: where do we go from here? — Presentation Transcript