Understanding the new wave of the open access movement

Sunshine Carter Jodi Carlson Grebinoski Allison Langham-Putrow Presented on October 4, 2019 at Electronic Resources Minnesota (ERMN) Silvia template from SlidesCarnival in St. Paul, MN Agenda for today

◦ Overview of open access ◦ Waves of open access ◦ Plan S ◦ Transformative Models Overview of Open Access What is Open Access?

“Open-access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions. What makes it possible is the internet and the consent of the author or copyright-holder.”

—Very Brief Introduction to Open Access by Peter Suber Types of Open

◦ Journals ◦ Books ◦ OER (Open Education Resources) ◦ Open Science/Open Research ◦ …and more Open Journals

◦ Fully OA journals ◦ All articles are OA ◦ Find them in Directory of Open Access Journals (13,771 journals; 130 countries; 4.3 million articles) ◦ “Hybrid” OA journals ◦ Subscription journals with an option for authors to pay an article processing charge (APC) to make their individual article open. ◦ Most subscription journals from large publishers have a hybrid option Understanding the “Colors” of OA

◦ Green ◦ Materials made openly available somewhere other than the original place of publication ◦ Gold ◦ “Born open” ◦ May or may not require author to pay ◦ Fully Gold OA v. Hybrid OA ◦ Diamond/Platinum ◦ “Born open” ◦ Does not require authors to pay ◦ Bronze ◦ Free to read from publisher site, but not really OA because of lack of re-use rights Where does the money come from?

◦ Authors pay an article processing charge or book processing charge ◦ Can be as high as $5,200 for a single article! ◦ Libraries pay processing charge ◦ Some universities have a fund to pay on behalf of authors ◦ Libraries, research funders, universities pay to build and operate publishing infrastructure Open Books

◦ E-books, with permissions to reuse ◦ Find them in Directory of Open Access Books ◦ 19,193 Academic peer-reviewed books and chapters from 320 publishers ◦ Examples of open book publishers & initiatives ◦ Knowledge Unlatched ◦ Punctum Books ◦ Open Book Publishers ◦ Luminos Open Education Resources

“OER are free and openly licensed educational materials* that can be used for teaching, learning, research, and other purposes.”

—https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/What_is_OER *Materials may include course content or materials, textbooks, videos, software, etc. Open Education Resources

◦ OER Commons ◦ http://oercommons.org ◦ Merlot (Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning and Online teaching) ◦ http://merlot.org ◦ Open Stax Connexions ◦ http://cnx.org ◦ Open Textbook Library ◦ http://open.umn.edu Open Science/Open Research

Open Science is the practice of science in such a way that others can collaborate and contribute, where research data, lab notes and other research processes are freely available, under terms that enable reuse, redistribution and reproduction of the research and its underlying data and methods.

—Foster Open Science https://www.fosteropenscience.eu Waves of Open Access 1st Wave: 2002-2008

“B” definitions of open access — driven by electronic publication ◦ Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002) ◦ Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) ◦ Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) 2nd Wave: 2008-2014

◦ National Institutes of Health (NIH ) ◦ Public Access Policy (2008) ◦ Compliance Monitor (2013)

◦ Federal public access policies ◦ White House Office of Science Technology Policy (OSTP) Memo (February 2013) 3rd Wave: 2015-2017

◦ Max Planck Digital Library white paper (2015) ◦ “[T]he money already invested in the research publishing system is sufficient to enable a transformation” ◦ Open Access 2020 (2015) ◦ Convert “resources currently spent on journal subscriptions into funds to support sustainable OA business models” ◦ Pay It Forward (2016) ◦ For Research-intensive institutions, library budgets are not enough to fund APC-driven OA ◦ The cost difference can be covered by research grants ◦ APCs costs will be constrained if authors have “some skin in the game” 4th Wave: 2018-current

◦ Plan S (2018) ◦ Society Publishers Accelerating Open Access and Plan S (2018-2019) ◦ Projekt DEAL/Wiley (2019) ◦ UC/Elsevier (2019) Plan S “Making full and immediate Open Access a reality” Plan S

Accelerate the transition to open access for published research.

Immediate online access to scholarly publications, free of charge to the reader, and accompanied by licenses that enable re-use. Key Principle

“With effect from 2021, all scholarly publications* on the results from research funded by [cOAlition S] must be published in Open Access Journals, on Open Access Platforms, or made immediately available through Open Access Repositories without embargo.”

*Peer-reviewed publications, but not monographs and book chapters (yet) cOAlition S

◦ Science Europe ◦ 16 national funding agencies ◦ European Commission ◦ European Research Council ◦ Wellcome Trust ◦ Gates Foundation ◦ World Health Organization ◦ Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR)

https://www.coalition-s.org/funders/ Why should we care?

◦ Applies to research funded in whole or in part by cOAlition S members ◦ USA is (in absolute terms) the second largest producer of papers that acknowledge cOAlition S funding ◦ cOAlition S has and may continue to grow ◦ China announced support for the goal of Plan S and that it will implement a requirement for immediate open access “soon” ◦ India’s Principal Scientific Adviser announced that India will “very likely” join cOAlition S is serious about Plan S!

◦ cOAlition S members will align their agreements/contracts with Plan S and monitor compliance and sanction non-compliance by: ◦ Withholding grant funds, discounting non-compliant publications from grant applications, excluding non-compliant grant holders from future grants All paths to OA are acceptable

“The funders support the diversity of business models for Open Access journals and platforms.”*

“Authors (or their institutions) retain copyright of their publications. All publications must be published under an open license.”

*Green OA is allowed with a zero-month embargo. All business models are okay, except!

Hybrid journals are only tolerated as a temporary, transitional measure Funding for hybrid journal APCs stops in 2024

...unless there is a transformative arrangement with a defined timeline for full transition to OA. Criticisms of Plan S

◦ Implementation guidance focuses on APC model ◦ Green and diamond/platinum OA are mentioned in the final version ◦ Final guidance weakened language around APC caps ◦ Caps “may” be instituted in the future ◦ Might further entrench commercial publishing systems ◦ Scholarly society publishers may face insurmountable challenges moving to fully OA models (fast enough) ◦ Reinforces focus on research from the “Global North” Global open access Publishing has been

◦ Eurocentric ◦ Elsevier (Netherlands) ◦ Wiley (US) ◦ Springer (Germany) ◦ Taylor & Francis (UK) ◦ Sage (US) ◦ Anglophone ◦ “English is the language of research” “The sun never“ set on the British empire.”

Charlotte Roh, Scholarly Communications Librarian, University of San Francisco

Publishing and the Gatekeepers: https://youtu.be/Yp7T_x6gmVM Latin America has “created and maintains a non-commercial structure where the scientific publication belongs to the academic institutions and not to large publishers.

Arianna Becerril-García, SciELO

http://amelica.org/index.php/en/2019/02/10/amelica-vs-plan-s- same-target-two-different-strategies-to-achieve-open-access/ OA in the “Global South”

◦ SciELO and Redalyc ◦ Bibliographic databases, digital libraries, and a cooperative electronic publishing model of open access journals ◦ SciELO (Brazil) dates back to 1997 “0th” wave of ◦ Redalyc (Mexico) dates back to 2002 Open Access ◦ AmeliCA ◦ “AmeliCA revolves around strengthening editorial teams within academic institutions through providing technology and knowledge to ensure low costs in scholarly publishing which guarantees Open Access sustainability without APCs” ◦ Contrast to Plan S Transformative Models “Repurpose existing spend to open content” Transformative Models

◦ Repurpose existing spend to open content ◦ Rebalancing from pay-to-read to pay-to-publish (which can be shocking) ◦ Consortia play important role (leverage) ◦ Many different models……….

Offsetting Subscribe to Open What institutions pay

Subscription costs (library paid; to read) +Article processing charges (author paid; to publish) +Administration and management (staff time) Total institutional cost

“Double dipping”: double payment by an institution for the exact same content (library + APC for same article) Transformation —Offsetting What is an offsetting agreement

◦ Publisher and library arrangement ◦ Incorporates reading and author publishing costs ◦ Intended to support transition to fully gold open access

*Note: Offsetting agreements may end up not costing less than current institutional spend. Offsetting benefits ◦ Immediate OA upon publication ◦ Reduced author barriers ◦ Not paying twice for content (maybe?) ◦ Increased transparency and accurate record keeping ◦ Moves publishers towards tipping point ◦ Often considered to be when more than 50% of articles are OA ◦ Sparks discussion and deep dive into the details

JISC's Principles for Offset Agreements https://www.jisc-collections.ac.uk/Global/News%20files%20and%20docs/Principles-for-offset-agreements.pdf 37 Offsetting critiques

◦ From "big" deal to "bigger" deal; ties up money ◦ No access to monies used for APCs ◦ No challenge to APC revenue stream ◦ Difficult to achieve impact without centralization ◦ Corporate subscribers contribute little to APC flow

38 Germany: Projekt DEAL & Wiley (2019) ◦ Projekt DEAL: Initiative of Alliance of Science Organisations in Germany ◦ Nationwide licensing agreements for journals ◦ Change the status quo for negotiations, content and pricing ◦ Open access component planned ◦ 3-year Publish & Read agreement (2019-2021) ◦ Eligible institutions: ◦ Higher Ed institutes (private/public) ◦ German National Library, et al. ◦ Publicly funded German research libraries ◦ Government funded research institutes ◦ Other agreed upon institutions 39 Projekt Deal Wiley Contract (1/15/19): https://www.projekt-deal.de/wiley-contract/ Germany: Projekt DEAL & Wiley (2019) ◦ Costs calculated yearly, based on:

◦ Plus one-time payment of €2M for perpetual access to all journals 1997-2021 ◦ 20% discount for Gold OA journal APCs ◦ Central management of APC billing to institutions ◦ No additional costs for authors “...the overall costs remain within the range of the

previous total subscription expenditure” -https://www.projekt-deal.de/faq-wiley-contract/ 40 Germany: Projekt DEAL & Wiley (2019)

41 US: University of California & Elsevier (2018-19)

◦ California Digital Library (CDL): UC body responsible for systemwide online journal subscriptions ◦ 2018/19 offsetting negotiation for journal content ◦ Increased communication with faculty and their senate ◦ Negotiation team consisted of librarians and faculty ◦ UC stopped negotiations after Elsevier contacted faculty members directly ◦ UC’s direct access to 2019 Elsevier articles (and older articles in some journals) was discontinued in July

*Office of Scholarly Communication. University of California. “UC and Elsevier: Overview.” *Office of Scholarly Communication. University of California. “Fact check: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier.” *Office of Scholarly Communication. University of California. “Negotiating with scholarly journal publishers: A toolkit from 42 the University of California” US: University of California & Elsevier (2018-19) ◦ Elsevier’s proposal: ◦ Increased costs by 80% ◦ UC OA output would go from from 6% to 30% ◦ UC’s counterproposal: ◦ OA publishing for all UC corresponding authors ◦ Payment (reading+APC) would be 10 percent less than the current total UC payment. ◦ 2%± cost adjustments based on publishing levels— stability and risk protection for both UC and Elsevier. ◦ Reduced APCs to accommodate the total payment ceiling. ◦ Split APC payment model ◦ Library pays up to $1,000 ◦ Authors using research funds to pay the balance ◦ But if sufficient research funds not available, Library pays full APC 43 Transformation —Subscribe to Open What is “Subscribe to Open” (S2O)?

◦ “Subscription-like” payments are used to make all newly published content immediately OA ◦ No APCs or other author fees ◦ Incentives for subscriber participation ◦ Only with participation can the model succeed ◦ If too many subscribers drop off, the journal(s) revert to subscription-based closed access ◦ Yearly renewal process S2O benefits

◦ Publishers can implement in phases ◦ Uses same library/publisher workflows and systems ◦ Addresses “free riders” issue ◦ Reasonable cost increases/decreases for libraries S2O critiques

◦ Commitment deadlines necessary ◦ Consequences when S2O commitment levels not reached ◦ S2O fatigue and competition? ◦ Decreasing buying power could impact OA ◦ Publishers that rely increasingly on APC revenue streams may be unable to create reasonable S2O price points Annual Reviews (2020)

◦ Reviews are invitation only, so APCs not appropriate. ◦ "Annual Reviews’ income from subscriptions closely matches our costs.” ◦ 2020, 5 AR titles in initial S2O pilot. ◦ 5% discount on S2O titles. ◦ Published w/CC BY if all subscribers renew ◦ Will add more journals if the pilot succeeds. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/04/02/subscribe-to-open https://www.annualreviews.org/page/subscriptions/subscribe-to-open Berghahn Journals S2O

◦ 2020 model for 13 journals ◦ Partnership with Libraria and Knowledge Unlatched ◦ 5% increases in journal costs, but 5% discount if subscribe to entire collection ◦ COUNTER 5 usage statistics ◦ “...... authors in social sciences and humanities generally lack funding” for APCs https://www.berghahnjournals.com/page/boa-faq/ Sunshine Carter Interim Collection Development Officer [email protected] Jodi Carlson Grebinoski Scholarly Communications Librarian Thank you! [email protected] Allison Langham-Putrow Scholarly Communications Librarian [email protected]