Open Access policies: An Overview.

The OpenDOAR Policy Tool. Copyright management.

Iryna Kuchma, eIFL Open Access program manager, eIFL.netPresented at Open Access: Maximising Research Impact, April 24 2009,

New Bulgarian University Library, Sofia

Berlin Declaration in Support of Open Access

‘Our mission of disseminating knowledge is only half complete

if the information is not made widely and readily available to society.’

Issued on 22nd October 2003http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html

Berlin Declaration in Support of Open Access

Signatories should promote open access byencouraging researchers/grant recipients

to publish in open access.- encouraging the holders of cultural heritage

to support open access by providing their resources on the Internet.

- developing means to evaluate open access contributions and online-journals

in order to maintain the standards of quality assurance and good scientific practice.

- advocating that open access publication be recognized in promotion and tenure evaluation.

Open Access policies

Increasing number of Open Access policies from:

Research groupsResearch centers

UniversitiesFunding bodiesGovernments

National and international bodies

Funder policies - mandatesAustralian Research Council

National Health and Medical Research Council, AustraliaFonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Research Foundation Flanders)

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)European Research Council (ERC)

Agence Nationale de la recherche (France)Health Research Board (HRB) of Ireland

Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering & TechnologySwiss National Science FoundationArthritis Research Foundation, UK

Arts and Humanities Research Council, UKBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), UK

British Heart FoundationCancer Research UK

Chief Scientist Office (Scottish Executive Health Department)Department of Health (UK)

Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), UKJISC (Joint Information Systems Committee), UK

Medical Research Council (MRC), UKNational Environmental Research Council (NERC), UK

Science & Technology Facilities Council, UKWellcome Trust, UK

National Institutes of Health (NIH), USAHoward Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)

The Wellcome Trust, UKFrom October 1 2006,

it became a condition of funding that copy of any original research paper

published in a peer-reviewed journal must be deposited into PubMed Central.

http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTX022827.html

National Institutes of HealthThe U.S. National Institutes of Health, the single largest funder of research in the U.S with an annual budget of $28.9 billion USD, implemented a policy

requiring that its grant recipients make articles resulting from any NIH funding publicly available

within 12 months of publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

This policy, passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by the President, went into effect in April of

2008. (Alliance for Taxpayer Access, Worldwide momentum for policies supporting public access

to publicly funded research)

The European Research CouncilIn January of 2008 The European Research Council (ERC) implemented a mandatory public access policy

for its funded researchers. The policy states:

“Requires that all peer-reviewed publications from ERC-funded research projects be deposited on

publication into an appropriate research repository where available, such as PubMed Central, ArXiv or an

institutional repository, and subsequently made Open Access within 6 months of publication.”

(Alliance for Taxpayer Access, Worldwide momentum for policies supporting public access to publicly funded research)

Proposed Funder mandates

European CommissionEuropean Research Advisory Board (EURAB)

European University Association (EUA)Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA), USA

European University AssociationUniversities should develop

institutional policies and strategies that foster the availability

of their quality-controlled research results for the broadest possible range of users, maximising their visibility, accessibility

and scientific impact. The basic approach …should be

the creation of an institutional repository or participation in a shared repository..

http://www.eua.be/fileadmin/user_upload/files/Policy_Positions/Recommendations_Open_Access_adopted_by_the_EUA_Council_on_26th_of_March_2008_final.

pdf

European University AssociationUniversity institutional policies

should require that their researchers deposit (self-archive) their scientific publications

in their institutional repository (IPR) upon acceptance for publication.

Permissible embargoes should apply only to the date of open access provision

and not the date of deposit....It should be the responsibility of the university

to inform their faculty researchers about IPR and copyright management…

http://www.eua.be/fileadmin/user_upload/files/Policy_Positions/Recommendations_Open_Access_adopted_by_the_EUA_Council_on_26th_of_March_2008_final.

pdf

IrelandThe

Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology

(IRCSET) has adopted an ideal OA mandate.

From the policy:...Where a research publication arises in whole or in

part from IRCSET funded research..., the following policy will be adhered to

with effect from 1st May 2008.....1. This publication policy confirms

the freedom of researchers to publish first wherever they feel is the most appropriate.

Ireland2. The effect of the policy is intended to increase

the visibility of, and improve access to, the research funded by IRCSET and the State,

where such research is intended to be published by the researcher(s) concerned.

3. The policy is based on recognised best practice. It is in keeping with the recommendations of the European

Research Advisory Board (EURAB) Policy in relation to scientific publication. It is also in keeping with the combined

OECD Ministers’ Declaration entrusting the OECD to work towards commonly agreed Principles and Guidelines on

Access to Research Data from Public Funding.

IrelandConditions to which IRCSET funded Award Recipients

should adhere:1. All researchers must lodge their publications

resulting in whole or in part from IRCSET-funded research in an open access repository

as soon as is practical, but within six calendar months at the latest.

2. The repository should ideally be a local institutional repository

to which the appropriate rights must be granted to replicate to other repositories.

Ireland3. Authors should deposit post-prints (or publisher’s version if permitted)

plus metadata of articles accepted for publication in peer-reviewed journals

and international conference proceedings;4. Deposit should be made upon acceptance

by the journal/conference. Repositories should release the metadata immediately,

with access restrictions to full text article to be applied as required. Open access should be available

as soon as practicable after the author-requested embargo, or six month, whichever comes first.

Ireland5. Suitable repositories should make provision

for long-term preservation of, and free public access to,

published research findings....

HarvardHarvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences voted to adopt a policy under which (1) faculty are required to deposit

a copy of their scholarly journal articles in an institutional repository and

(2) automatically to grant to the University a University License to make those articles

openly accessible on the Internet.

HarvardThe Faculty of Arts and Sciences of Harvard University

is committed to disseminating the fruits of its research and scholarship

as widely as possible. In keeping with that commitment,

the Faculty adopts the following policy: Each Faculty member grants to the President and

Fellows of Harvard College permission to make available his or her scholarly articles

and to exercise the copyright in those articles.

HarvardIn legal terms, the permission granted by each Faculty

member is a nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright relating to each of his or her

scholarly articles, in any medium, and to authorize others to do the same,

provided that the articles are not sold for a profit.

RussiaCentral Economics and Mathematics Institute

of Russian Academy of Sciences (institutional-mandate)http://www.cemi.rssi.ru/

http://socionet.ru/index-en.html http://cemi.socionet.ru/

http://www.cemi.rssi.ru/rus/news/initiat-eng.htm All researchers of the Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of

Russian Academy of Sciences are mandated by director's decree to immediately deposit

their papers/articles in the institutional Open Archive. ["...mandate researchers of CEMI RAS to deposit all completed research (in working paper form), including the full text, in institutional OA

(repository) not later than 6 months after completion."]

UkraineSince January 2007 Ukraine has a law - proposed

mandate for open access to publicly funded research.

The Law of Ukraine On the principles of developing information society in Ukraine for 2007-20015 at

www.rada.gov.ua

UkraineAnd the most recent open access policy

adopted by Ternopil State Ivan Pul'uj Technical University (TSTU)

mandates that all published journal articles and conference papers

must be deposited in Electronic Archive of TSTU (ELARTU http://dspace.tstu.edu.ua)

if there are no legal objections by publishers. ELARTU also encourages and fully supports

self-archiving of other research outputs produced by scientists and students of the university as

well as other members of the scientific community.

Open Access – A Policy IssueOpen Access policies are:

Welcomed by authorsComplied with by authors

Compatible with copyright and respect authors’ moral rights

Compatible with patent registrationRespectful of academic and intellectual

freedomsAligned with the aims of most funding bodies

and institutionsEffective!

Appealing to All the Major Stakeholders

To the funders of researcher – both as a public service and as an increased return on their

investment in research

To the authors – as it gives wider dissemination and impact

To readers – as it gives them access to all primary literature, making the most important

‘research tool’ more powerful

Appealing to All the Major Stakeholders

To editors and reviewers – as they feel their work is more valued

To the libraries – as it allows them to meet the information needs of their users

To the institutions – as it increases their presence and prestige

To small and society publishers – as it gives them a survival strategy and fits with their central remit

Repository policies

The OpenDOAR Policy Tool

Thanks to the SHERPA Team

Especially Peter Millington, Technical Development Officer

for the slides

OA policy optionsOpen access policy options for funding

agencies and universities

(Based on The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #130 and The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #127,

by Peter Suber: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/02-02-

09.htm and http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/11-02-

08.htm)

Request or require?Recommendation:

If you're serious about achieving open access for the research you fund,

you must require it.

Green or gold?Recommendation:

If you decide to request and encourage open access, rather than a mandate it,

then you can encourage submission to an open access journal and encourage deposit in an open access repository as well, especially when researchers

publish in a toll access journal. But if you decide to mandate open access,

then you should require deposit in an open access repository, and not require submission to an open

access journal, even if you also encourage submission to an open access journal.

Which repository?Recommendation:

Because there are advantages to each type of repository, and because each provides bona fide open access, the

stakes are low in the choice between them. That is, you can't go seriously wrong by preferring one to the

other. One path, then, is simply to make a choice. Another is to support both types in ranked order, for

example, requiring deposit in an institutional repository, when the grantee's institution has one, and otherwise requiring deposit in the funder's repository

or in a designated disciplinary or multi-disciplinary repository.

Another path is to shift the choice to authors.

Deposit what?Recommendation:

Require the deposit of the final version of the author's peer-reviewed manuscript, not the published

version. Require the deposit of data generated by the funded

research project. In medicine and the social sciences, where privacy is an issue, open access data

should be anonymised. A peer-reviewed manuscript in an open access

repository should include a citation and link to the published edition.

Deposit what?Recommendation:

Allow the deposit of unrefereed preprints, previous journal articles,

conference presentations (slides, text, audio, video), book manuscripts, book metadata (especially when the author cannot or will not deposit the full-text), and the contents of journals edited or published on

campus. The university itself could consider other categories as

well, such as open courseware, administrative records, and digitization projects from the library,

theses and dissertations

Scope of policy?

Recommendation: For simplicity and enforceability,

follow the example of most funding agencies: apply your open access policy

to research you fund "in whole or in part"

What embargo?

Recommendation: Cap the permissible embargo at six months. Any

embargo is a compromise with the public interest;

even when they are justified compromises, the shorter they are, the better.

What exceptions?Recommendation:

Exempt private notes and records not intended for publication.

Exempt classified research. Either exempt patentable discoveries or allow an

embargo long enough for the researcher to apply for a patent. (This could be a special embargo not

allowed to other research.) And unless you fund research, which often results in

royalty-producing books, exempt royalty-producing books.

Managing rights for OAAs content producers

(responsible for licensing- out), universities need to deal

with ownership of rights in material produced by academics, researchers etc

- rights to be granted to others publishers;

- users and re-users

Copyright ManagementProvide Intellectual Property Rights support by

a. Admitting to the challenges and fears surrounding IPR; empathise with the author

b. Emphasising what can be done rather than what not

c. Analysing the publisher challenges within your specific subject communities where different

challenges will be apparent From Proudman, V. (2007) The population of repositories. In Eds. K.

Weenink, L.Waaijers and K. van Godtsenhoven, A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (pp.49 - 101)

Copyright Managementd. Ensuring that your IR team liaising with the

author is informed and up-to-date on self-archiving and related publisher policies

e. Utilising and monitoring tools such as Sherpa/RoMEO to support you in your

informationf. Liaising with publishers on a case by case basis

if time and resources allowFrom Proudman, V. (2007) The population of repositories. In Eds. K.

Weenink, L.Waaijers and K. van Godtsenhoven, A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (pp.49 - 101)

Copyright managementg. Encouraging your authors to liaise with publishers on

the self-archival of their own work, striving for the immediate deposit of publications in repositories in

the futureh. Discussing with your authors how to improve the

dissemination of their work in the future and experimenting with them on making more material

open accessi. Securing agreements between Library and author

where possible– From Proudman, V. (2007) The population of repositories. In Eds. K. Weenink,

L.Waaijers and K. van Godtsenhoven, A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (pp.49 - 101)

Repository Deposit Licenceensures that depositors own copyright in the

material they are depositing or have permission from the copyright owner to

deposit; - and grants to the repository the necessary

rights to make the material available to end-users

(from A Guide to Developing Open Access Through Your Digital Repository by Kylie Pappalardo and Dr Anne Fitzgerald, Open Access to Knowledge Law

Project: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00009671/01/9671.pdf)

Author Distribution AgreementDo you want to provide a facility to enable authors to

enter into an Author Distribution Agreement with end-users, for example by attaching a Creative

Commons licence to their work?

Required end-users to agree (through a click-wrap agreement) to the terms of the Author Distribution

Agreement or the Repository Distribution (End-User) Agreement?

(from A Guide to Developing Open Access Through Your Digital Repository by Kylie Pappalardo and Dr Anne Fitzgerald, Open Access to Knowledge Law Project:

http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00009671/01/9671.pdf)

Plagiarism

If articles are easily available, then plagiarism will be made easier?

“In fact, plagiarism is diminished as a problem. It is far easier to detect if the original, date-

stamped material is freely accessible to all, rather than being hidden in an obscure

journal.”(http://www.driver-support.eu/faq/oafaq.html )

PlagiarismHow can I protect myself from plagiarism, or from

someone altering my paper and using it in a way I disapprove of?

“It is easier to detect simple plagiarism with electronic than with printed text by using search engines or other services to find identical texts. For more subtle forms of misuse, the difficulties of detection are no greater than

with traditional journal articles. Indeed, metadata tagging, including new ways of tracking the provenance of electronic data and text, promise to make it easier.”

(JISC Opening up Access to Research Results: Questions and Answers, www.jisc.ac.uk/publications )

PlagiarismIn the early days, some authors worried that OA would increase the incentive to plagiarize their work. But this

worry made no sense and has not been borne out. On the contrary. OA might make plagiarism easier to commit, for people trolling for text to cut and paste. But for the same reason, OA makes plagiarism more hazardous to commit.

Insofar as OA makes plagiarism easier, it's only for plagiarism from OA sources. But plagiarism from OA

sources is the easiest kind to detect. Not all plagiarists are smart, of course, but the smart ones are steering clear of

OA sources. http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/10-02-

06.htm#quality

PlagiarismFor the same reason, they'll avoid OA dissemination for any

of their own works containing plagiarized passages. Because OA will only reduce plagiarism by smart plagiarists,

the effect may be small. And today the effect is small in any case because so little of the literature is OA. But just as we can expect good things from a pest-resistant strain of wheat, even when we've just introduced it in one field, we can expect good things from this plagiarism-resistant

strain of research literature.http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/10-02-

06.htm#quality

PlagiarismDiscovering and deterring duplicate publications

A study in the January 24 issue of Nature turned up 200,000+ duplicate articles in journals indexed by

Medline.As the OA percentage of the literature continues to

grow, journals wishing to avoid publishing a duplicate or plagiarized article will find it easier to

discover potential problems in advance of publication. Likewise, journals that don't care, or

with the opposite desire, will find it harder to publish duplicates undetected.

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2008/01/discovering-and-deterring-duplicate.html

Action Steps ChecklistHere is a summary of key steps to implementing a

University License policy at your institution:1. Identify key internal supporters and champions.

2. Research your institution’s rules and procedures to understand the right process

for initiating the policy change.3. Work with provosts, faculty governance, and the

general counsel’s office to determine critical policy and legal requirements that must be met by the

policy.

Action Steps Checklist4. Work with an existing faculty committee or create an

ad-hoc committee to study your institution’s scholarly communications policy.

5. Communicate the plan to faculty and key stakeholders and conduct surveys or obtain other

feedback to determine faculty support.6. Identify and take advantage of events for education

and awareness building, such as seminars, discussion panels, presentations, and colloquia. Consider

holding a workshop to discuss open access.

Action Steps Checklist7. Develop a set of policy recommendations, including

the scope of the University License, the deposit requirement, and opt-out provisions.

8. Identify critical resources and support that will be needed to implement the policy, including

responsibility for maintaining an institutional archive. Prepare to provide resources to assist faculty in

complying with the policy and working withpublishers.

Action Steps Checklist9. Plan for success: work with the institution library to

make sure there is a repository to maintain and allow download of deposited articles and that it has

sufficient capacity – or that there is a plan to create one.

10. Find the faculty who already are posting their work on the Internet by searching the Web and asking

around. By their actions, they are signaling an understanding of why open access is important. Do the librarians have stories of access problems faced

by faculty or other researchers?

Thank you!Questions?

Iryna Kuchmairyna.kuchma[at]eifl.net; www.eifl.net

The presentation is licensed with Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License