Skip to main content

Feedback requested on implementation of Plan S


Following the recent Wellcome announcement of its revised Open Access Policy, today new guidelines on the implementation of Plan S have been announced. The guidelines are published in full with details of technical requirements at https://www.coalition-s.org/feedback/ and feedback is welcomed from all stakeholders, including the public.

Copyright Science Europe 2018 and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence

cOAlition S is committed to fulfil the specific target set out in Plan S – immediate Open Access to all scholarly publications from research funded by coalition members from 2020 onward 
Three routes to achieve OA will be compliant:
  • Publish in fully Open Access journals listed in the DOAJ or on Open Access platforms
  • Deposit in Open Access repositories listed in OpenDOAR
  • Publish in subscription journals with 'transformative' agreements in place or that permit accepted manuscripts to be deposited immediately with a Creative Commons Attribution licence, such as Royal Society titles
The guidelines cover questions of cost, licensing and timing, with expectations for all stakeholders including researchers, research organisations, and their funders. There are also a range of technical requirements listed for journals, publishers and repositories.
In addition, cOAlition S members intend to subscribe to the principles on research assessment set out in the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and there will be an expectation for institutions to commit to similar principles.


The survey for feedback consists of 2 questions:
  1. Is there anything unclear or are there any issues that have not been addressed by the guidance document?
  2. Are there other mechanisms or requirements funders should consider to foster full and immediate Open Access of research outputs?
Feedback can be provided up to 1 Feb 2019

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Your Open Access - statistics and usage

It's Open Access Week again, and this year the theme is 'Open in order to...' This year's theme is designed to shift discussion away from wider issues of 'openness', and instead direct attention to the tangible benefits of open access. This week we will be publishing a series of posts aimed at  highlighting some of these benefits. In this post we will look at some of the statistics we gather about the open access content in our Repository, and specifically the statistics that we've chosen to highlight in our new Infographic.
Given the theme of this year's Open Access Week, the subject of this post could be appropriately described as 'Open in order to boost downloads' For years we have been collecting usage statistics about the content held in our repository. Up until now this data has been collected and, for the most part, discussed internally; but not any more. Now we want to show the academic community here in St Andrews, whose work populates …

The Great Science Publishing Scandal

For centuries academic journals have been the custodians of scientific knowledge. But in the past few decades this has become increasingly contentious, as publishers continue to boast high profit margins, and their customers, largely academic libraries, continue to face squeezed budgets. Some libraries have cancelled subscriptions, some countries have been in deadlocked negotiations with publishers for months and even years, and many researchers have resorted to illegal means to access research.

But how did it get this way? And is there anything that can be done? In the BBC Radio 4 programme 'The Great Science Publishing Scandal' Matthew Cobb, Professor of Zoology at the University of Manchester, discusses the history leading up to the current crisis, and looks at the ways in which academia can change to redress the balance of power in academic publishing. One such change advocated by professor Cobb is to break the link between prestige journals and academic promotion, and an…

Open Access books: Tony Crook's new book is published OA

This week is Open Access week, and the theme is set to look at the foundational work that is needed to underpin a transition to a world where research results are free and open by default. Recent moves by the open access publisher Knowledge Unlatched have shone a spot light on the need for better cooperation in achieving an open access default for books. Where KU has gone in the direction of commercial proprietary infrastructure, others such as Open Book Publishers have called for more open and transparent cooperation that isn't tied to proprietary commercially driven software. Open Book Publisher's reaction to Knowledge Unlatched is here.

"Academics need to know that there are benefits too, and that the expense of publishing OA is worth it in the long run"
While the debate about the nature of the infrastructure rumbles on, presently we must keep our minds focussed on the individual examples of open access books. Indeed the appetite for open access books is unlikely…