Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
CONDITIONS FOR USE OF TRANSCRIPTS: This document is intended to provide a timely reference for interested parties who are unable to attend the event to which it refers. Some portions are based on transcripts of proceedings and others consist of text submitted by speakers or authors, and are clearly marked as such. As such, apart from where it is indicated that the text was supplied by the speaker, it has not been possible for the transcript to be checked by speakers and so this portion of the document does not represent a formal record of proceedings. Despite best endeavours by Westminster Forum Projects and its suppliers to ensure accuracy, text based on transcription may contain errors which could alter the intended meaning of any portion of the reported content. Anyone who intends to publicly use or refer to any text based on the transcript should make clear that speakers have not had the opportunity for any corrections, or check first with the speaker in question. If in doubt please contact the forum first.
Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Contents
About this Publication 3
Agenda 4
opening remarks David Amess MP, Member, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing (transcript) 6
An academic spring? Encouraging public engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access Dr Tony Peatfield, Director of Corporate Affairs, Medical Research Council (transcript) 7 Stefan Delplace, Secretary General, EURASHE (European Association of Institutions in Higher Education) (transcript) 9 Frederick Friend, Honorary Director Scholarly Communication, University College London (transcript) 11 Maja Maricevic, Head of Higher Education, British Library (transcript) 13 Dr James Milne, Managing Director for Publishing, Royal Society of Chemistry (transcript) 15 Questions and comments from the floor (transcript) 17
The way forward for the academic publishing industry Mark Hahnel, Founder, figshare (transcript) 22 David Prosser, Executive Director, RLUK (Research Libraries UK) (transcript) 24 Professor Nigel Vincent, Professor Emeritus of General & Romance Linguistics, University of Manchester and Vice- President for Research and HE Policy, The British Academy (transcript) 26 Professor Sheila Anderson, Professor of e-Research, Centre for e- (transcript) 28 Dr Jonathan Tedds, Senior Research Fellow, D2K Data to Knowledge, University of Leicester (transcript) 30 Questions and comments from the floor (transcript) 32
Neither Green nor Gold Professor Martin Hall, Vice-Chancellor, University of Salford and Chair, UK Open Access Implementation Group (transcript) 38 Questions and comments from the floor (transcript) 42
closing remarks David Amess MP, Member, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing (transcript) 46
opening remarks Tristram Hunt MP, Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing (transcript) 47
Implementing the open access research model Professor Tom McLeish, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, Durham University (transcript) 48 Mark Thorley, Head of Science Information and Data Management Coordinator, NERC (Natural Environment Research Council) (transcript) 50 Dr Michael Jubb, Founding Director, Research Information Network and Secretary, Finch Committee (transcript) 52 Ziyad Marar, Global Publishing Director, SAGE Publications (transcript) 54 Dr Malcolm Skingle, Director, Academic Liaison, GSK (transcript) 56 Questions and comments from the floor (transcript) 58
Open access policy Ron Egginton, Head, BBSRC and ESRC Team, Research Funding Unit, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (transcript) 63 Questions and comments from the floor (transcript) 67
and Westminster Higher Education Forum closing remarks Tristram Hunt MP, Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing (transcript) 69 Jonny Roberts, Senior Producer, Westminster Higher Education Forum (transcript) 70
Comment 71 Dr Krishna Chinthapalli, Reporter, BMJ
List of Delegates Registered for Seminar 72
Contributor Biographies 80
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 2 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
About this Publication
This publication reflects proceedings at the Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing held on 5th February 2012. The views expressed in the articles are those of the named authors, not those of the Forum or the sponsors, apart from their own articles.
Although Westminster Higher Education Forum is grateful to all sponsors for the funding on which we depend, participation in events and publications is never conditional on being a sponsor. As well as funding ongoing operations, sponsorship enables the Forum to distribute complimentary copies of publications, and offer complimentary tickets for events, to Government ministers, parliamentarians and officials most involved in policy.
This publication is copyright. Its copying, in whole or in part, is not permitted without the prior written consent of the publishers. However, extracts of the text may be reproduced for academic or review purposes, subject to the conditions of use outlined in the previous page, providing they are accurate, are not used in a misleading context and the author, their organisation and the Westminster Higher Education Forum are acknowledged. We would also appreciate being informed.
Westminster Higher Education Forum 4 Bracknell Beeches Old Bracknell Lane West Bracknell Berkshire RG12 7BW
T: 01344 864796 F: 01344 420121 [email protected]
Directors Peter van Gelder Chris Whitehouse
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 3 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar Open access research and the future for academic publishing Timing: Morning, Tuesday, 5th February 2013 Venue: Wellcome Trust Lecture Hall, Royal Society, 6-9 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5AG
8.30 - 9.00 Registration and coffee
9.00 - 9.05 opening remarks David Amess MP, Member, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing
9.05 - 9.55 An academic spring? Encouraging public engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access -in access to journals in public libraries improve public engagement with research? To what extent should the rules on use and re-use of content be relaxed, and would greater relaxation of these restrictions encourage new models for organising research, for example online encyclopaedias? Will the adoption of
development? How can repositories be re-structured to make them better integrated and interoperable? Dr Tony Peatfield, Director of Corporate Affairs, Medical Research Council Stefan Delplace, Secretary General, EURASHE (European Association of Institutions in Higher Education) Frederick Friend, Honorary Director Scholarly Communication, University College London Maja Maricevic, Head of Higher Education, British Library Dr James Milne, Managing Director for Publishing, Royal Society of Chemistry Questions and comments from the floor
9.55 - 10.45 The way forward for the academic publishing industry arned societies and other organisations that rely on publishing revenues to fund their core activities? What are the incentives for engaging with open access publishing? What are practical challenges for extending the current licence arrangements that grant universities , as proposed by Government? open the possibility of wider readership of journals, and if so, what steps could publishers take to engage more readers? What is the outlook for further investment in specialist and educational digital content and what models are publishers adopting to finance these ventures? What is the future for open source software such as Open Journal System as an alternative publication platform? Mark Hahnel, Founder, figshare David Prosser, Executive Director, RLUK (Research Libraries UK) Professor Nigel Vincent, Professor Emeritus of General & Romance Linguistics, University of Manchester and Vice- President for Research and HE Policy, The British Academy Professor Sheila Anderson, Professor of e-Research, Centre for e- Dr Jonathan Tedds, Senior Research Fellow, D2K Data to Knowledge, University of Leicester Questions and comments from the floor
10.45 - 11.10 Neither Green nor Gold Professor Martin Hall, Vice-Chancellor, University of Salford and Chair, UK Open Access Implementation Group Questions and comments from the floor
11.10 - 11.15 closing remarks David Amess MP, Member, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing
11.15 - 11.35 Coffee
11.35 - 11.40 Se opening remarks Tristram Hunt MP, Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing
11.40 - 12.30 Implementing the open access research model What will be the impact on the academic community, university finances and academic publishers of access model, where authors pay an Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in journals? What are the benefits and challenges distributed freely through repositories? Will the nd what support should be available for other universities? Will HEFCE plans to require open access to research submitted to the Research What steps need to be put in place by universities, research
period when funds are not available for APCs, as recommended by the Finch report? Will the current levels of research council block grant to universities sufficiently allow institutions to cover APCs? Professor Tom McLeish, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, Durham University Mark Thorley, Head of Science Information and Data Management Coordinator, NERC (Natural Environment Research Council) Dr Michael Jubb, Founding Director, Research Information Network and Secretary, Finch Committee Ziyad Marar, Global Publishing Director, SAGE Publications Dr Malcolm Skingle, Director, Academic Liaison, GSK Questions and comments from the floor
12.30 - 12.55 Open access policy Ron Egginton, Head, BBSRC and ESRC Team, Research Funding Unit, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills Questions and comments from the floor
12.55 - 13.00 and Westminster Higher Education Forum closing remarks Tristram Hunt MP, Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing Jonny Roberts, Senior Producer, Westminster Higher Education Forum
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 4 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Westminster Higher Education Forum Jonny Roberts, Senior Producer
Good morning ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for joining us this morning at the Westminster Higher Education Forum. We are still waiting for a few more delegates to arrive, so please do help them get through to the rows when they do.
Before we start, can I just quickly run though a few things that are in your delegate packs.
Firstly to mention that in addition to obviously biographies of all the speakers and Chairs this morning, and the that runs now through into about June or July this year, and a whole range of things we are looking at across HE policy, so please do take a moment to look through that.
And also I wanted to mention about the transcript. Everything that is said in the room this morning is going to be recorded and then transcribed, and that will be sent out to you in a pdf file in about 10 working days after the microphone to reach you and then second of all, if you could say your name and the organisation that you are representing here today, that would be a great help for listing that in that transcript.
And also, there are details in this pack of how you can submit an additional article or comment to the transcript, the transcript is sent out to all of yourselves, but also to all the speakers, the Chairs from today, as well as Members of Parliament, Members of the House of Lords, as well as officials in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and HEFCE. So if there is anything you want to add to the discussion today and t a chance to say, then there are details on how you can do that in your delegate packs.
I w to our first half Chair, David Amess MP.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 5 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
opening remarks David Amess MP, Member, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing
Well good morning, and welcome to you all.
This is the graveyard slot. This is when people tend to be thi body or gay marriage, whereas they really should be thinking about Higher Education. So this, ladies and in spite of them apparently going to show us slides.
So would the following people join me: Dr. Tony Peatfield; Stefan Delplace; Frederick Friend; now am I going to be able to pronounce this, Maja Maricevic, is that okay; and Dr. James Milne.
Now this session is going to last until 5 to 11, if speakers go over their time, we are not going to mess about with this, we are probably going to shoot you or execute you in some way, so please be brief and succinct so that we can have some questions.
An ac these buzz words. Encouraging pubic engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access. How can open access reform and the Gover -in access to journals in public libraries improve public engagement with research? To what extent should the rules on use and re-use of content be relaxed, and would greater relaxation of these restrictions encourage new models for organising research, for example online encyclopaedias? This is just, by the way, to prove that I can read. Will the programme influence a global shift towards open access? What effect might open access have on the UK and be re-structured to make them better integrated and interoperable?
Affairs at the wonderful Medical Research Council. Tony.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 6 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
An academic spring? Encouraging public engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access Dr Tony Peatfield, Director of Corporate Affairs, Medical Research Council
Thank you, and good morning everybody. I hope you have all had a cup of coffee and so are going to stay awake.
minutes so I shall be quite quick.
do is programme.
context of RCUK, and my colleague, Mark Thorley will speak about the implementation side later this morning.
The Research Councils, and there are seven of them, collectively will spend, during the current spending review period, about £11.2 billion of public money, so this is a very large commitment and we are very keen to get the maximum out of it.
Why do we want open access? This is a quote from Doug Kell who is the RCUK Executive Group champion for - make the outputs and outcomes from our research as widely useful as possible.
Government has a commitment to openness and transparency and we want to make the results, of publicly funded research, open, accessible and exploitable. The public have paid for it, and therefore the public should have access to it without having the barriers put in the way.
The Gove innovation and growth are likely to lead to benefits for society and an increased trust in research.
published on the RCUK website, but at that time the policy was not mandatory for the researchers that we fund, except from the MRC which did make its policy mandated in 2006.
What does this mean? Well it means that research outputs much be accessible to enable exploitation. Research funders have a responsibility to ensure accessibility, especially publicly funded research funders. Dissemination is part of the research process, and has to be paid for, we recognise that there is a cost to this, and hence journals, libraries and publishers also have a key role to play in the process.
The RCUK policy was updated in July last year, following the publication of the Finch Report, it defines what we mean by op them. It sets out criteria for assessing whether any particular journal complies with the policy, and it applies to all peer reviewed research publications submitted for publication from the 1st April 2013, those that acknowledge Research Council funding.
funding to acknowledge the source of that funding. We expect applications for grant support to include statement on access to the underlying research materials, and this helps support the transparency, integrity and robustness of the research process. It also, as part of that, allows the research to repeat it, so that people can clearly see whether the outcomes of the research are built upon the rigor of the data.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 7 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
research papers, specifically the user must be able to do the following free of any publisher imposed access charge. They must be able to read published research papers in an electronic format, and search for and
We expect, when we pay for publications through the Gold route that it will be freely available for reuse, people can do what they like with it, and it will be available immediately. If there is an embargo period through the Green route, the RCUK insist that that should be no more than 6 months for most research, and 12 months for research funded by either ESRC or AHRC, and there the licence can be non-commercial.
So this is the policy in a nutshell. Authors much publish in an RCUK open access compliant journal, achieve compliance through Gold CC BY or else post-print by CC BY-NC. RCUK preferences for Gold over the choice remains with authors and their institutions, and we are expecting there to be a 5 year transition between now and when we expect to have 100% open access c to take time, and will require some culture change.
Some further information will be in the slide pack, and I will leave you with a couple of quotes from David Willetts in his speech to the Publishers Association last year.
Thank you.
http://www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/forums/slides/Tony_Peatfield.pdf
David Amess MP: Thank you for getting us off to such a good start Tony, and the red card just came right at the end, so you did well. We are now going to hear from Stefan Delplace. I misread this, I thought at first he
European Association of Institutions in Higher Education. Stefan.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 8 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
An academic spring? Encouraging public engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access Stefan Delplace, Secretary General, EURASHE (European Association of Institutions in Higher Education)
My contribution I called Open Access Models for Education Resources and Research Output, a European perspective. So I would like to put open access in the broader perspective than just research.
Open access to research publications cannot be seen as separated from the wider context in Europe and beyond in which societal challenges expect a supra national response to which open access of resources including research results may also contribute.
Organisations like UNESCO, OECD and also the European Commission, each from their own perspective, share this insight, and especially the latter, through its EU growth strategy called Horizon 2020, has managed to put the issue in concrete terms, while also involving broad groups of stakeholders.
broader than just open access for research publications. From the perspective of the European Commission, Europe has everything to gain from an open access policy which includes other results than open access for research publications. The European Union has been an early advocate of open access. Already in 2008, the European Commission launched the Open Access Pilot in the 7th Framework Programme, intended to provide researchers and other interested members of the public with improved online access to EU funded research results. For the European
Perfo improve its capacity to compete through knowledge. Open access can also boost the visibility of European research and in particular offer small and medium sized enterprises access to the latest research for exploitation. The European Commission believes that both routes, Green and Gold open access, are valid and ive and
Open access in research (is to be seen) as part of European policies to meet global challenges. The European Union says they are ready to address the grand societal challenges, also on a global level, and therefore the new policy strategies and the flagship initiatives, such as Europe 2020 and the Innovation Union Initiative, also focus on international cooperation, including in the area of research.
Why is open access beneficial for societ including EURASHE, my organisation?
Open access will lead to involvement of the broader society in research and its applications, which is beneficial for the entire society. This i
throughs into innovative products that provide opportunities for business, and also for the wider society. The rationale behind this is that services, and business models. While Europe 2020 aims at achieving smart growth, the Innovation Union sets out measures to contribute to this aim, including increasing on major societal challenges, and strengthening the links from basic research right through to between academia and the market must be bridged, thus stimulating the transfer of technology to SMEs. Open access will directly contribute to this by making research results and data widely available to more and diversified end-users.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 9 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The rules of participation in Horizon 2020 rightly focus on three evaluation criteria: excellence; impact; and implementation. If we want to realise the major goals of Horizon 2020, namely to foster innovation by transferring knowledge to the market and the wider community, in the most efficient and useful way, impact and dissemination of results become equally important criteria as excellence.
It is, however, true that innovation needs a wider interpretation than to be seen as the logical step to commercial exploitation. The whole spectrum of sciences, from engineering, technical sciences, medical and life sciences, to the social sciences and art and humanities, contribute to an innovative society. Only in this way can the societal grand challenges be tackled. It is especially from the interdisciplinary perspective that social sciences and humanities play an invaluable role in the Innovation Strategy.
are the effects of broadening research results through the method of open access greater than through a focus on basic research only. Indeed by using this method we allow for research applications and technological and experimental developments, next to basic research.
Thank you very much.
David Amess MP: Thank you very much indeed Stefan, for that presentation. Well now we will hear from Frederick Friend who is the Honorary Director Scholarly Communications at the University College of London. Frederick please.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 10 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
An academic spring? Encouraging public engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access Frederick Friend, Honorary Director Scholarly Communication, University College London
Thank you and good morning.
In order that I do not get shot for exceeding my time, I shall only attempt to answer one of the questions on nd there is a very straightforward answer to that question in my view, that the UK prioritised APC funded Gold policy will have no influence on the global shift to open access, but rather, yes, the influence in the global shift to open access will come from the European Union combined Gold and Green policies.
And the reason is also quite straightforward, if you look back at the growth in open access over the last 10 years or so, the EU policy of combining Gold with Green has had a major effect upon the growth in open access to date, whereas the UK policy places a priority upon APC funded Gold OA which is not found in policies in years, but I do not believe it has any chance of getting near the 100% figure that we would aim for. The evidence for this comes through the two major research groups who have been assessing the growth in open access, the Bjork group and the Gargouri group., and both have come up with very similar messages that up to date, the Green route has contributed more open access than the Gold route, and even though the Gold route So we do need both combined Gold and Green and the basic flaw in the UK policy is in prioritising the Gold route.
Why has the UK Government gone down this route? The answer appears to be that Green OA is perceived to put high quality journals and the societies that produce those journals at risk. There is no evidence of any journal ceasing publication as a result of Green OA. Of course, there may be a risk in the future, but we have time to assess that risk as the combined policy develops. And because of this risk that was perceived by the Government, they have been prepared to put additional funds in this time of austerity, put additional funds into publishing and into academic societies. Now the point is that the big publishers particularly are still getting very high profits, 30, 40% from library subscriptions, and the Government has allowed the publishers to keep those profits when they could have been used to fund the transition to open access.
-retired, my position as a taxpayer, I ask how can been analysing the funder policies from different countries across the world, and there is no evidence that any country is going to follow the UK Government in its prioritised Gold OA policy.
The big international publishers could effect this transition by using their current high profits. Academic societies, I have more sympathy with, they do use their surpluses in a sensible way, but they also have different sources of income which they could use to fund the transition.
Why do we need to find the best route to open access, surely all open access is good? Yes, but some routes to open access are much more cost effective than others, both the Finch Group and the Government were correct in recognising the economic importance of open access and we should pursue open access 100%, but the Finch Report itself is clear that a transition to Gold OA alone, is only cost effective if the transition is his conclusion is supported by Houghton and Swan who also conclude that when the transition to Gold OA is not worldwide, then Green OA is more cost effective.
So if the UK Government wishes to move as quickly as possible to an OA environment, in collaboration with the rest of the world, then researchers should be required to deposit their work in an open access repository
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 11 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Thank you.
http://www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/forums/slides/Fred_Friend.pdf
David Amess MP: Well Frederick, thank you for putting your case so well, certainly as an MP I have not been lobbied on that particular issue until now. I
you next, an Education at the British Library.
Maja Maricevic: Thank you, it is indeed wonderful.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 12 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
An academic spring? Encouraging public engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access Maja Maricevic, Head of Higher Education, British Library
Good morning everyone.
At the British Library we sit very much in the middle of all different players that are involved in open access agenda. And also it is a place where we are very much aware of different balances that need to be achieved for this to actually work out.
On a day to day basis, we work with academic researchers on one side, with publishers on the other side. We know that within both of these groups there are those who champion and embrace open access, and the ones who are struggling and working towards it.
We work with university libraries, with funders of research and Government, we have very much a common commitment to the principle of public access to publicly funded research.
We also work with businesses and public who sometimes might, or sometimes might not, have a view of how much research matters for their everyday challenges.
In addition to physical objects, our statutory duty at the British Library, as a national library, is to collect, store tends into the digital environment. Within this task we consider the open agenda in its broadest sense, including the issues as diverse as Government and scientific data, digitised historic content, even seemingly transitory web content, it all affords new research possibilities in the digital environment.
Within this, scholarly publications are very important to us. Among other things, we subscribe to over 45,000 journals. This is a lot of taxpayer money, specifically to provide UK research with access to scholarly articles. diminishing budgets.
- first of all is it about Green or Gold? We would say both, and it is not necessarily maybe only about Green or Gold, but it is almost certain that we will see many other models emerging as both the research community and publishers innovate, as this agenda is developed further.
We are go implement Gold model. Also, universities are developing a repository system, there are subject repositories. We already see it, we are working in this environment on a day to day basis, and these developments are very diverse. So on the one hand we are partners in something called Europe PubMed Central, which is a free access biomedical information repository. On the other hand, we are engaged, in still emerging thinking of how to find an open access model for monographs in humanities and social sciences. We do not see a contradiction. There is no reason whatsoever why these models should look the same or even similar. They might happen at a different pace and face different issues, but at the same time they can ultimately lead to more open access to outcomes of research.
I think our concern and hope in relation to the current implementation of open access is that we see gradual and flexible approach to allow for this diversity to happen.
And I want to just talk for a bit also about the Green side, where universities are just starting to truly develop their own repositories, and at the British Library we are also just starting to understand their full potential. So, for example, we collaborate with universities and JISC that provide a national aggregation of PhD thesis, that is
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 13 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013 called EThOS. PhD thesis are increasingly held in institutional repositories and through this service we have developed ourselves, for the first time, a capability to link with the institutional repositories - that is where the institutions actually do have repositories, and then when they do have them, we are currently working on the principle that we have to link to nearly every sing with lots of work to do, yet even with the current imperfect system, we are starting to see a potential for an interlinked system which could have wider national implications for collection, connection and conservation of open content.
At the British Library we like to focus on our users. I would like to speak in many ways to spend my time to talk about researchers in particular, because we believe that the area of training and information in the research going to use my last minute to say a little bit more about business and public. They are quite different to each other.
Business will definitely benefit from open access to research. I will give you an example, we recently did a session with the Technology Strategy Board, with businesses of different sizes from environmental industries, focusing on how changes in information and research environment are affecting them. Those businesses certainly want open access to research outputs, to content such as journal articles as well as data, but in many ways open access for them was only a start. At the point of use, unmediated open access was potentially not kite mark of authority that guarantees quality of research.
And with public, for real engagement there is even more need for further interpretative wrappers around open access research, including appropriate information and guidance, use of more interactive communication channels, as well as a lot of more imaginative engagement and even marketing.
k race through various issues of how this agenda affects us.
David Amess MP: Maja, thank you very much indeed for your positive contribution. And then a bit of an in-house contribution here, our last speaker in this session is Dr. James Milne who is the Managing Director for Publishing at the Royal Society of Chemistry.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 14 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
An academic spring? Encouraging public engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access Dr James Milne, Managing Director for Publishing, Royal Society of Chemistry
Good morning ladies and gentlemen, delighted to be here.
heard that the move to for publishing, my role is to ensure the sustainability and success for RSC journals, so that we can disseminate the information as widely as we can, worldwide, to the research community for the advancement of the
sustainable, and by that I mean that we can support fully the Gold open access model, and so long as the embargoes are appropriate, we can support Green. What I cannot accept is when embargoes are reduced beyond the recommendations of the Finch Report to 6 months or even shorter because that would mean that our journals would not survive, and the society would then be in peril too. And we have seen evidence the journals have lost significant amounts of revenue from Green open access when the embargoes are short, and woul accept that from the chemistry point of view, but we can accept Green open access, with a suitable embargo, s that we will see.
as we can. Last year we provided a million pounds worth of credits towards Gold open access within our repeated that this year, to engage the community in Gold open access and how the implementation of open access can go forward.
But just to say a little bit about public engagement really means? Well if you start with the research articles, the research papers, we published about 24,000 last year and these are largely read by scientists, both in industry and academia and these papers. We receive about 2 to 3 million downloads a month from these papers, they are very widely accessible, and I should say that in our Royal Charter, the first objective is dissemination of research content, so this really backs up our objective.
magazines that are available online, but also sent out to our members, for instance Chemistry World, Education in Chemistry, where we write up 100 of our articles and probably another 200 or 300 articles from other journals into about half page to one page, easier to read but still very scientifically focused articles for journals.
Beyond that, we press release a number of our stories as well, and we released probably press release 6 or 7 articles a week, but in terms of the media and the interest to the public, typically 2 to 5 of these stick each year, and by that I mean they go global and they get column inches within the Telegraph and such like. And to give you a case study of this. Last year we had an article in Food and Function, one of our journals, it was to do with the caffeine levels found in coffee shops in the Glasgow area, and it was quite an interesting story because it showed that when you get a coffee, whether i get different caffeine levels. So this was written up in Chemistry World into a way that could be read, and you can see the article there online, free to access by the public, and this was press released very successfully, it the story from the Daily Mail, it says, Mothers to be should avoid high street coffee to protect their unborn
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 15 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013 babies, so they take the sensational approach there, so nothing like the original story. But this shows how
interviewing people about these levels of caffeine and they said Costa coffee has three times the level of caffeine compared to Starbucks, the person just looked to camera and said, I always wondered why I preferred Costa over Starbucks, so this is the way to get the stories into the news.
So public engagement, which I think is what we are talking about in this session, is all about getting appropriate level of information to the people. That does mean that within open access, which we are talking about at a
you will gain an equal competitive advantage, because everyone can gain access to the papers. So I think
I like this picture because it actually shows the Facebook traffic a couple of years ago, and it also shows how environment that we have, the landscape that we have, has to mindful of the international perspective and what comes with that.
So my time is up, so thank you for your time, and I think I will hand back to the Chair.
David Amess MP: Well thank you very much indeed James for closing the session and thanks to all the speakers for acknowledging their time constraints.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 16 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
An academic spring? Encouraging public engagement with research and the potential for worldwide open access Questions and comments from the floor
David Amess MP: want to ask a question or make a comment, entirely up to your goodselves. So who would like to start things off? Yes, the lady there.
Helena Djurkovic: From Political Studies Association. I have to endorse the concerns about the Gold model. Maja said maintaining quality was extremely important and there is a sort of perverse incentive under the Gold model for publishers to publish a whole lot more articles, because they are being paid article processing charges, and how you are going to maintain the level of peer review in those circumstances is not at all clear. So quality is a real issue that we are concerned about, and I think I should say at this meeting, probably a lot of people here are aware that because there is such a high level of concern about the Gold model and also embargo periods, actually there have been two inquiries, Select
Technology inquiry into open access where submissions closed, I think, about 2 weeks ago, but now also the BIS Select Committee has got an inquiry and submissions have to be made by Thursday. So there is a lot of concern, and if you read submissions to the House of Lords inquiry, I think there are 300 pages worth of submissions, and the vast majority express real concerns, and I think repeatedly that the rest of the world is moving in this direction, because if they are moving to open access, which again, we as a learned society cannot have any objections to that, if the rest of the world is not moving to Gold, then the UK could find itself in a position where actually money that should be going into research is going into APCs and we will be at a distinct disadvantage
David Amess MP: Would any of the panellists wish to disagree with what was just said? Yes.
Dr. Tony Peatfield: I think the comments about Gold you could turn round, and although there might be an incentive for publishers to publish more,
ecessarily think that will follow. Just to comment on the reasons why the Research Councils prefer Gold, it
freedom to reuse in why we prefer Gold, it is true open access and Green, I agree, is
information.
Dr. James Milne: Maybe if I could follow up. I totally agree with Tony, in terms of
the article, it also recognises that the public is funding research, and also funding the publication of research, and that means they gain
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 17 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
the publication process, hence the suitable embargo period, which is of course very sensitive. And I think the other thing to say is that in terms of hybrid journals, the decision to go Green or Gold is done
influence in terms of whether you accept or reject the paper in a
agreed u the hybrid journals, the decision to go Gold is made only after peer
perspective, are made based on absolute quality.
David Amess MP: Fred.
Frederick Friend: And many of the articles that go into repositories, go in after the peer review process. So in effect there is very little difference in
copy.
David Amess MP: Well thank you for that. Who would like to ask the next question or make a comment? Yes.
Gemma Hersh: From the Publishers Association. A question really for Tony Peatfield. You outlined two routes to open access, the Green model and the Gold model. I just wondered whether you would like to comment on the Publishers Association Decision Tree that sets out an alternative route to Green that was endorsed by RCUK and by BIS, regarding embargo periods when an APC is not available?
Dr. Tony Peatfield: Yes, the policy, as you know, is that a paper should be made open access within 6 months for research funded by most Research Councils, and for up to 12 months for research funded by AHRC and ESRC and that was to recognise there are disciplinary differences and this needs to be reflected in our policy. As I said our preference is for Gold, so when we fund researches we would prefer them to
we put money into the system to enable that to happen, there is a
out gradually as the policy becomes implemented. So the Decision Tree is fine, except that wherever possible we would prefer people to publish through the Gold route or through a Green route that meets our 6 or 12 month embargo period.
[Inaudible from the floor]
Dr. Tony Peatfield: We will, we will be publishing guidelines all into February, and to some extent these will reflect our written evidence to the House of Lords.
David Amess MP:
Professor Martin Bull: European Consortium of Political Research and University of Salford. I just wanted to follow up on the international implications. Open access, yes, very good in that it disseminates very quickly for UK
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 18 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
researchers, but actually publication is also about where things are
situations where other countries have not gone down the open access route, even say the Green route, does that not mean that UK researchers will no longer be able to publish in international journals of prestige. If we take one single rth American market, what happens to researchers who are funded by your Councils, who wish to publish in North America, is it not excluded from there on?
David Amess MP: Who would like to take that one?
Tony Peatfield: ome extent. I think theirs is a market in publishing and publishers and this market is changing and will change, I suspect, quite substantially in the next 5 years, certainly from the medical perspective which I am most familiar with, and when we introduced our mandatory policy in 2006, a lot of journals did change their policies to meet the policy of the MRC and the Wellcome Trust. So I think there will be changes in the behaviour over changes to the publishing policies over the coming 5 right that the UK should be taking a lead in this. If nobody took a lead then the change might take many many years to come about, and our view is the quicker it happens the better.
David Amess MP: Does anyone e
Frederick Friend: As often in such discussions with taking a UK, US, European view of the situation, the questioner raised the issue of open access right across the world and in many countries, solutions are being found to the future of publishing and the future of open access, which are very different to the solutions that are being looked at here and many countries have very active open access publishing programmes which are not dependent upon the payment of APCs, so it is a very mixed pic that open access is coming in, open access does not depend upon the kind of solutions that we are finding here.
David Amess MP:
Maja Maricevic: s interesting that the discourse you are having is very much about a particular policy and funding but nobody has mentioned technology or the grass roots open access movements in the research community, so I very much mirror, in many ways, what Frederick says that there will be much more to happen internationally, I think we will see mushrooming of all sorts of different models.
Dr. James Milne: There may be one thing after that is that the UK in some ways has led the field and the Finch Group was actually one of the most comprehensive reviews of open access internationally and their
comprehensively, but the Finch Group before was incredibly thorough. The slight disappointment is it sounds like RCUK is not applying the Finch recommendations in full when APCs are not
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 19 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
available, the Finch recommendation was that it would be a 12 unding available, but if there are APCs available then you go to the Gold
that in the weeks ahead.
David Amess MP: Stefan.
Stefan Delplace: I would agree to this that the UK really takes a prominent role in this and I cannot see that in other countries, and when you look at the European instances, the European Commission etc. they are very careful in that they talk about complementary models and they make no choice between the open and the Green access modes and that is, I think, because they want to see how things catch on with the Gold model.
David Amess MP: Frederick.
Frederick Friend: The Finch Report may have been incredibly thorough, it was also incredibly flawed. In addition to the point about the overseas, I think the main problem was that the recommendations in the Finch Report did not always follow through from the text of the Finch Report and to give you one example, one point in the Finch Report success is clearly more successful than another, and yet in the
into some great detail of this now, but I would encourage people to read the Finch Report in detail.
David Amess MP:
From the floor:
Ross Mounce:
research. So I would just like to say that I can clearly see why the UK prefers Gold open access, because Gold open access, especially under the creative commons attribution licence, actually ensures that text mining is permitted, and this is an extremely useful research technique and it will be increasingly useful in the future, because, you know, there are already 50 million scholarly articles
publications per minute being released right now, and Green open access does not ensure this. Often when you look at self-archived articles, there are a very mixed set of lic
without permission. So I can actually strongly support the RCUK policy there and that Gold should be preferred for these reasons.
David Amess MP: Well there we are, a very interesting comment from someone studying at Bath. Did anyone from the panel wish to comment?
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 20 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Frederick Friend: Well I mean text mining is possible if the right format is used in a repository and I think UK PMC or Europe mine that is a big repository. [Inaudible from the floor]
Dr. Jo McEntyre: Manager for Europe PubMed Central. Europe PubMed Central has about 2.6 million full text articles in the life sciences and actually you can text mine about 500,000 of them,
ones.
Frederick Friend: I was referring to the technical aspect, you are referring to the business aspect of it, is that right.
Dr. Jo McEntyre: gain.
David Amess MP: Simon Cowell position on this panel, but I do thank you for your contribution. And ladies and gentlemen, can we show our appreciation for all our speakers who I thought got us off to an excellent start. So if we could now change places with our speakers and call up Mark Hahnel, David Prosser, Professor Nigel Vincent, Professor Sheila Anderson and Dr. Jonathan Tedds.
Well ladies and gentlemen I think we are now all wide awake, thanks to our excellent contributors to the last session. The next matter we are going to discuss is the way forward for the academic publishing
hopefully during this session we will hear the solutions. And our first contributor is Mark Hahnel who is the Founder of figshare. Mark.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 21 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The way forward for the academic publishing industry Mark Hahnel, Founder, figshare
Hi everybody.
is a start- their research outputs in a citeable manner. So if you think about the ways that we disseminate different types of content on the internet, you look at things like YouTube or Flickr or things like this, these are very different from the way we disseminate research content, and that is because this level of peer review has to be laid over it. There is ways that we can be handling the way that we disseminate papers, different types of publications better, and this is by following the lead on what these things that have been successful taking advantage of the internet and the tools that the web provides.
So there is new space for innovation. The Royal Society report last year did focus on a few areas where there are places to innovate in this space. The NSF in the States has just gone from measuring researches based on publications to measuring researches based on products, and this is the whole idea that papers are the researcher over a year ago, and so much of my research never saw the light of day for many reasons.
As Stefan Delplace mentioned in the last session, small to medium enterprises are the largest employers in Europe, and so there is a lot of areas where we can focus on this different ways to innovate as a publisher. The the way we were told to focus on the Gold section here, Gold open access does make that possible, the discovery, the metrics, different areas of these areas of innovation, but this could lead to the decoupling of the scholarly journal.
journal which is going for some unusual kind of membership fee. So how can other publishers who are existing, you know, deal with this new entrant into the area?
So as one of these place where we are looking to innovate, and as I say we look at the dissemination of all different types of research content, we do work with publishers, last week we partnered with PLoS and for PLoS ONE is the so-called mega open access, a good example of Gold open access The question from the lady in the last section there about publishers publishing
complaining that more and more people are publishing, therefore the publishers are getting more money, that that prestige journals need to be treated as a separate aspect in this respect. Prestige journals are going to do well, no matter what. If I was a researcher still and I was getting publications in nature, and I was concerned
again I think you are going to be able to find the
So if we are looking at different ways that the publishers can work on this, you know the discoverability and the level of filters that we are applying to this research can be done. The power with the publishers right now looking at, as I say, decoupling the scholarly journal and providing these services for them. But if you were concerned, as a publisher, your peer review is not enough to charge these prices, then you need to be innovative, you need to be thinking of new ways, this is a new way where the author suddenly has control. If they are choosing where to publish their papers because they have this pot of money and they need to choose
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 22 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013 where to go, they are going to publish in the places that (a) either benefit their career; or (b) boost their ego or provide them some simple tools to work with.
And publishers need to adapt to make sure that they are one of these places where people want to publish. altmetrics coming in now. Ironically I mentioned PLoS, PLoS had 3% of they got a good impact factor, it hockey-sticked when they got an impact factor over 5.
are looking to provide a good service, peer review is one thing, the prestige journals are going to do okay, the academic publishers should be looking that these new tools, these new areas of innovation and seeing what can I do to provide a good product for an author so that they will want to publish with us? And if you can do that, then I guarantee you will survive this and you will be sustainable, and you will be profitable, as you have been before.
David Amess MP: become as wealthy and successful at the other Mark. Now can we hear from David Prosser, who is the Executive Director of Research Libraries UK. David.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 23 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The way forward for the academic publishing industry David Prosser, Executive Director, RLUK (Research Libraries UK)
Thank you very much.
perspective.
institutions and we are part of obviously the UK Higher Education environment, which spends something round about £160 million a year on purchasing access to journals and databases.
The problem that we have is that library budgets do not scale with the increase in research budgets, and they more material gets published by countries such as those in South America, India, China and such like, as they ramp up their research efforts. So we have a real information gap where no library can provide all the year, Harvard Library was saying that they could no longer afford all the information they need, and they are
funded resea most effective way in which the research funders are spending their money. We think the funders have a right to be interested in the dissemination of the research they fund. In fact I would say they have a duty to take great care about the dissemination of the research that they fund.
So one of the questions we were asked is whether or not open access provides a greater dissemination of research, and we know that it does. It is undisputed that if you make a paper open access, it potentially has greater readership than a paper that is only published in a subscription based journal. There is a lot of evidence that the papers in open access also gain greater citations, although I have to point out that the ibly greater citations.
So open access is good from the dissemination point of view, let me give you two facts about open access publishing.
The first is that Gold open access publishing can be a profitable endeavour, you can make money as a Gold open partly because they have been doing it for longer so they have had time to ramp up, and they have become profitable, but also societies such as the European Geophysical Union run profitable publishing outfits in open access.
The other fact is that no journal has ever been damaged by Green open access. We heard some evidence of damage a little bit earlier, a few surveys of librarians. You can do all actually point to journals that have been damaged by moving towards open access, so when we are talking have been plucked pretty much from the air, and they have no basis in evidence whatsoever. And when an evidence based point of view.
So you can make a profit and succeed as an open access publisher, and you can coexist with Green open access.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 24 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Now publishers are in an interesting business in many ways, because they have two sets of customers. They have their authors, so they are competing for authors based publishers, they have libraries to whom they are selling their products. Those who provide good author based services should do well in an open access environment, because obviously they are competing for authors, and if the authors are bringing with them publication charges, then they should be able to do well in relationship with their academic community and with their scholars. So a lot of society publishers should be well placed to take advantage of this move that we are engaged in towards Gold open access and APCs.
We all need to change, publishers need to change, societies need to change, libraries need to change, and we back to the House of Commons Science and Technology inquiry into open access in 2004, and looked at the quite a lot of time to think through the issues, to work out how we can thrive in an open access environment, and to move forward into the new way of working.
Thanks very much.
David Amess MP: Well David, thank you very much indeed for your contribution, very interesting indeed. Our next contributor is Professor Nigel Vincent, Professor Emeritus of General & Romance Linguistics, fascinating, University of Manchester, and Vice-President for Research and HE Policy at The British Academy. Nigel.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 25 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The way forward for the academic publishing industry Professor Nigel Vincent, Professor Emeritus of General & Romance Linguistics, University of Manchester and Vice-President for Research and HE Policy, The British Academy
Thank you very much.
-President for Research and Higher Education Policy at The British academy which represents the whole range of humanities and social sciences. So disciplines from history, languages, linguistics, philosophy, musicology, through to law, economics, anthropology, psychology. And through just some of the basic issues that affect, particularly humanities and social sciences, but I want to concentrate on two main points, one of which, and I will provide some, I think, new evidence, is about the diversity of publishing profiles in humanities and social sciences, and the consequences that has, and then say something at the end about the issue of monographs, which ca
The Academy fits both sort of panels, as it were, in the sense that we are both an academic society, a scholarly launch described as platinum in the sense that it has no APCs and it has immediate access, and I know at least one journal in the United States that I would be very honoured to publish in, which is of the same kind. So there are other kinds of things out there that we should think about.
So some of the issues that matter for the humanities and social sciences, the individuality of research is very i important that we understand that that kind of loan scholar research is the international benchmark. If what we care about is international, not in the sense of wide dissemination, but international in the sense of the outperform, as it were, per head to head or pound to the pound, we need to make sure we know what is the journals when we are talking about small learned societies, former President of something called the Theological Society, which is a very small body, but publishes a well-respected journal called the Transactions of the Theological Society, very different kind of problem from the problem of the Royal Society of Chemistry.
e preferred output types and the interface between academic and general publishing, which is perhaps more obvious when you move into the book area than in the journal area.
I would say, in response to what David just said about there being no evidence for historians wanting 36 cited over much longer periods of time than in the natural sciences.
e to dare I say, Emeritus scholars.
ge body. It shows you the different pattern of publication here in a range of humanities disciplines, you can see that basically two-
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 26 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013 disciplines as evaluated in t - the way in which philosophy has a different publication profile from literature and history.
Social sciences, sociology is quite similar to philosophy and the law, politics, a bit stronger on the book side. As soon as you come to something like economics, then you get something which is much more like the kind of publication profile that you would associate with a natural science.
Here's a nice minimal pair, a nice minimal contrast. One institution made two submissions to the anthropology , like other biologists, social anthropology is two thirds non journal publication, which is typical of other humanities and social sciences.
these profiles are relatively constant over time and institution, and these profiles are typical of the way those disciplines work, both in Europe and in the United States, and defining the benchmark then for international research reputations.
When we come to monographs, tend to be single authored, not always, they are not captured by the usual bibliometric methods, they are the international gold standard, in another sense of gold, in fields like history and literature, and what they do is to create a difficult boundary because when you start to look at the models scholarly sense, but also turns out to be a big seller in a more general sense, I would cite something like, for absolutely excellent top range academic research which is also very successful in the wider publishing area.
So when y draw the standard kinds of distinctions.
Okay, so those were the points that I wanted to make and the data I wanted to share.
David Amess MP: Well thank you very much indeed Nigel for your contribution. We now move on to Professor Sheila Anderson, who is the Professor of e-Research at the Centre for e- College London. Sheila.
PowerPoint presentation can be downloaded from the following link: http://www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/forums/slides/Nigel_Vincent.pdf
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 27 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The way forward for the academic publishing industry Professor Sheila Anderson, Professor of e-Research, Centre for e-Research,
Thank you very much.
Maja about the lack of conversation about technology, and the potential for transformative approaches to publication, and I find it somewhat ironic that the AHRC has a major research theme called digital when we are thinking about publication.
And there has been a project, an EU funded project through the eContentplus programme called the Peer Project, which was set up as an observatory to monitor the effects of systematic archiving over time, and creating a substantial body of evidence, and I just want to highlight a couple of things that have come out of that particular project, which finished last year, it ran for four years and finished last year. It involved both national and local repositories, it involved publishers and it involved scholars in the research community, and I rch come out of that, which is evidence based, and we need to be making evidence based decisions as we move forward.
General support for open access across research, the Fry et al report demonstrated general support for open access but so long as you retain the authority and citeability of research, absolutely essential for the research communities. But there were big differences in the way that people thought about open access. So, for example, the physical sciences, maths, social sciences and humanities, tend to think about open access in terms of self-archiving, through either subject based repositories or local repositories, whereas the life sciences and the medical sciences tended to think about open access Gold, and some seemed to consider that open they managed to get that done, so long as they could get that done.
Digital visibility, absolutely essential. Quite clear that a lot of the publisher downloads, there is evidence now that publisher downloads went up when information about publications, and publications themselves were more available. Now statistical variations, quite clearly, life sciences, physical science, statistically significant increases. Less significant findings in medicine, social sciences and humanities. So what we are starting to see thinking within those domains about open access.
And we are starting to see diversity in take up and complexity as well, and we are starting to see experimentation, so we have mathematicians and the recently announced Episciences Project, where they are going to start providing overlay journ initiatives, Harvard metaLAB are doing experimentations, but of course many still remain conservative and will follow institutional and funder mandates, and I think a key point here that has retireme about how career progression is decided within the academy, and the impact of the REF on open access possible by the technology.
So what we have is a very complex picture, and I think that our approach to open access should reflect that complexity, should reflect that diversity, should enable publishing models to emerge from different domains
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 28 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013 and different disciplines that are appropriate to those disciplines. One size does not fit all, open access Gold does not fit all, and there are other models.
And, I have to say, yes maybe we tend to pat ourselves on the back about the UK taking the lead, but actually lots of others are doing really interesting thinking about this and Geneviève Fioraso, the French Minister for Higher Education and Research recently gave a presentation talking about providing a mixed model, and also talked about what she has called a platinum model, which is about thinking, deconstructing what we are doing when we are publishing, and that we have layers of infrastructure that manage digital technology, that we have a range of tools and technologies and work flows that allow us to do different things when we are publishing, and we have products, and some of those can be publicly funded, some of those can be not-for- bit and start to think about those different layers, and then think about who needs to make money from what, who needs to provide what, what is best provided by publicly funded money.
Thank you.
David Amess MP: Well Sheila, even if you are an old timer, we certainly applaud your enthusiasm and your passion. Now our last contributor to this section is Dr. Jonathan Tedds, who is a Senior Research Fellow at Data to Knowledge at the University of Leicester.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 29 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The way forward for the academic publishing industry Dr Jonathan Tedds, Senior Research Fellow, D2K Data to Knowledge, University of Leicester
Thank you.
Right I ho discipline specific, and hopefully you will get a sense of that in the next couple of slides.
. We are going to be required, post REF, the data under the graph, so to speak, has to be made available if you are going to submit your articles for the post derlying research data.
-known data publication pyramid and this is kind of where I think we are now. There are a small number of data publications, a bit more about that in a second, typically some journals have supplements, the possi data? Then you have data archives, but pretty narrowed down to just a few disciplines, typically in the large sciences, so-called big data. Most data, as everyone knows, or perhaps should know, resides on discs, under
I am going to refer to this terrific Sciences and Open Enterprise Report from the Royal Society, and in particular techn spectrum of requirements in this area, but clearly when it comes to career progression, as has just been discussed, and appropriate credit, the traditional model of peer reviewed articles are still going to be very important too, but I think that the crucial issues about linking data to scientific record, are around the persistence, what kind of repositories do you trust or not, data and metadata quality, big onus on researchers reuse it. And then finally, attribution and credit for the data producers, this is crucial, as has just been said.
my original research area, there are now more papers based on reuse of data taken originally for a different project, than from the original use, if that makes sense. So more clear evidence, it takes decades, 20 years or so in this case, to show it, but there is a growing body of evidence showing that if you make data available and link to articles that describe it properly, then you will get ever more, ever growing numbers of research articles based on that.
at a pragmatic solution in the earth sciences. One of these disciplines t data, and what we want to do is not only look at can we come up with something called a data journal, where people describe data and get citations through the traditional model, and then other people can write tradit described earlier, which this kind of approach may well not be suitable for, but I think we can learn, you know, the big science areas have been doing this kind of data creation for a long time, many decades, using remote facilities, so they have had to. So this is the Geoscience Data Journal just launching, the first couple of articles are going into press shortly, and there an article describing the dataset, and in JISC funded project that I lead, called PREPARDE, we are looking at capturing those processes and what are the real challenges, should you be doing peer review of this, how much technical peer review, how much scientific peer review, and what do you do before publication, or do you get the community to do it afterwards. So we are looking at approaches s, the California Digital Library and so on.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 30 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
So my last slide just goes into the challenges really. I believe that research is heavily context specific and it often will need to remain so in order to address it sensibly, in terms of a data article about a specific area. But I do think that publishers and professional learned societies have a very strong role to play. Researchers often even th the efforts to harmonise data and produce standards for a given area.
But I think the last thing I would say, something a bit more specific to the day, if the RCUK funding is for these publishers charge APCs to publish their data papers, as opposed to traditional journal articles.
Thank you.
sentation can be downloaded from the following link: http://www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/forums/slides/Jonathan_Tedds.pdf
David Amess MP: Well Jonathan thank you very much indeed for closing this session, and I thought all our contributors were excellent.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 31 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The way forward for the academic publishing industry Questions and comments from the floor
David Amess MP: Now David I saw you scribbling a note which indicated you wanted to have a public private row with Nigel, so before we hand over to the audience for questions, would you like to get it off your chest?
David Prosser: question about citation half lives and the effect that that has on subscriptions. So you raised a very good point that obviously in arts and humanities subjects, they have a great longevity, so they can be the, say the
then leads to the fact that you have to have longer embargoes, y are the papers of interest after a long time, but they are not of interest now, when they are
librarians will tell you that if they cancelled these journals, after say 12 months, and the head of the history department came into the
movin
make a direct link between citation half lives and embargo periods.
David Amess MP:
Professor Nigel Vincent: there will be an indirect link, something needs to be explored and we need some data, but we are not just talking
the things I cited, and I said, no I mean 1894 and 1894 publications
but there is a connection and we just need to be very careful that we say, oh historians are just being emotional when they say they need 36 months, there are very good reasons why historians think differently and
and accept in the context of these conversations and discussions, and not make it simply a conversation about disciplines that work in terms of 95 or 99% journal publications.
David Amess MP: Well there we are, ladies and gentlemen, we satisfied that very amicably. Yes. Lots of questions.
Dr. Malcolm Skingle: From GlaxoSmithKline. nder if you could
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 32 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Professor Nigel Vincent: I work on Italian and I cite an Italian academic from 25 years ago, then people start text mining into that, (a)
disciplines, which is a different issue, but I can make academic quotations about to then go and start text mining on the basis that I choose to cite.
is more problematic. Often text mining which interestingly my discipline is linguistics, a lot of people who work in text mining
searching, very often, on essentially the words that are in texts, whereas a lot of the detail of an argument is structured in terms of the way the sentences and the paragraphs are put together and the
should be able to take things where the actual structure of the prose matters and being freely allowed to text mine into that. So I just
should be able to text mine everywhere.
Dr. Malcolm Skingle: But presumably it will get more sophisticated as time goes on?
Professor Nigel Vincent: Yes, but more than technical, the intellectual problems of getting that degree of sophistication are a long way off.
David Amess MP: Okay, yes.
Dr. Raymond Perrin: charity, which researches into
Central Lancashire as well as an Honorary Senior Lecturer. The problem we have is up to now, any research we have published, we go through peer review and we that, with open access now we are finding that we are charged at
comment on this?
Mark Hahnel: I would just like to call out Ross Mounce because Ross has done a lot of work into this and there are a lot of areas where you can publish, it might not be field specific, but yes, Ross.
I will just introduce myself again. Ross Mounce: open ac cases like this, a lot of people seem to be concerned about the Gold open access route, but the Gold open access route also includes fee free journals, so there are actually journals where you could submit to, it will be immediately published, open access, but the authors or the funders of the article do not necessarily need to pay an upfront charge to publish there, so it will be the fee free journals. There are hundreds of them and they are actually quite good quality publications. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, they tend to be quite small journals, institutional run with institutional support, volunteer academic time. Obviously publishing costs something, of rather than actual money. And then also journals like PLoS, BMC,
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 33 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
and I do know of researchers who have received fee waivers to publish a paper. I have been an author myself on a paper submitted to BMC, a commercial, for-profit, open access publishing company that we got the fee waived for, because we asked for a fee waiver. of these issues that I think needs to be highlighted.
David Amess MP: Thank you. Oh, yes.
David Prosser: You do have another option which obviously you are not under the RCUK policy, because you are not being funded necessarily by RCUK, so you can go Green, you can deposit the paper into an institutional repository, and then publish as normal in your journal of choice. So you have, essentially, three different options at least.
David Amess MP: Good, yes the gentleman there.
Dr. Dominic Davies: I work for the Defence Science and Technology Labs which is part of the Ministry of Defence, doing the research to support the armed services in the frontline. I find myself in the strange situation of being in a very similar place to the gentleman from the charity who just spoke, because we not only use a huge amount of academic literature and therefore pay some of the massive subscription costs associated with buying
esearch we do to support the armed services, but we then also publish a lot of very high impact articles on, mainly the really high impact ones in the sort of chemical and
well to the spirit of the policy and therefore publish in open access, this leaves us with a significant bill for publishing the couple of
the Ministry of Defence, because we are coming constantly under harder and harder cuts to actually justify the very large hole in the Defence budget. But on top of that, if the money is going to come
the amount of money I spend on journal subscriptions to pay for the cost of open access publishing. So a comment from anyone would be appreciated.
David Amess MP:
Professor Sheila Anderson: in the session previous to this one talked about knowledge transfer, well it seems to me that we need to be talking about knowledge exchange and recognise that knowledge is produced outside of the academy, as well as inside the academy, and what we have to have is publishing models that allow us to combine all forms of knowledge, wherever they are coming from.
but I would certainly want to look at different business models that allow us to do that, and there are, you know increasingly we have the technologies that allow us to do work flows for peer review, for
rest of it
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 34 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
is somehow second rate, then encouraging a collaboration with you, so that we can connect my publications with your publications or
a way in which we can bring those together in open access through repositories, through overlay journals, through different forms of publication, has to be the way to go, otherwise we are excluding
deconstruct and look at layers of infrastructure and kinds of services and kinds of products and business models that are forming around
I would like to see more work in that area.
David Amess MP: Right. Yes the gentleman there.
Ian Douglas: Daily Telegraph. Given that peer review and editing the journals tends to happen within Departments rather than in publishing, and given that digital publishing is a fairly straightforward and very low cost exercise these days hangover from a completely different model of publishing that academia can now do without?
Professor Nigel Vincent: said, in fact I saw him nodding furiously as you were making your remark. I mean to give the example that I alluded to very briefly,
number of years now been run essentially on volunteer individual time by a very prestigious and very well reputed group of researchers at MIT, and that journal has now been taken under the wing of the Linguistic Society of America, which is the big national body that publishes the most prestigious journal in the field, which charges a relatively modest $400 APC which it will waive in
got large bodies that have the academic prestige, because the problem with a lot of these online journals is that they have the academic prestige and so if you are exactly the point that was made earlier on about early career researchers, you need the kind of kite mark of that kind of reputation on your CV in order to be able to get on the short list and get higher and get promoted and getting to REF and so on. So if you can find a way to get the quality value added to the journal without the APC, which I think will happen more and more in the way you are indicating, then I think that does threaten the traditional business model.
David Amess MP: We are running out of time now, the lady there. Yes.
Dr. Susan Hezlet: London Mathematical Society.
quality journals from Green open access. We have a classic example of mathematics, the Annals of Mathematics is probably the best mathematics journal in the world, it went Green open access, a third of its subscriptions collapsed in 5 years, it is now back behind the wall. The second evidence which is beginning to come to light is more generally from mathematics journals, where those journals which have a larger proportion of their pre-prints on the math archive, which is a pre-print server, have fewer downloads. Now
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 35 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
quite frequently these journals are the best quality journals because those are the researchers who tend to put their papers first on the math archive. How much evidence do you require before one
not be huge, but there is some.
David Prosser: Well I would be interested to know more about the journal. So that
Dr. Susan Hezlet: No.
David Prosser: Okay, so maybe you have to have to just look at some sort of vidence of needing 36 months, but I'd like to look into that a little bit further. The download one is an interesting one because there are a number of subject areas where this is important, so maths is one, high energy physics is another one, so the Institute of Physics, for example, have seen download numbers falling for its physics journals where there are large numbers of its papers are in the archive, but again they Well it would be lovely if that was publish evidence. Lots of people have come up to me, at thousands of these meetings and said oh well w e heard rumours that so and so have lost subscriptions but the published data just never comes around, so it would be nice to have that.
David Amess MP: Okay, last question.
Thanks very much. Professor Sally Haw: this whole process of public and policy engagement is absolutely central to the work and the research dissemination. And I wanted to pick up on the point that Sheila Anderson was making about knowledge transfer and exchange. The discussion so far about dissemination have seen dissemination and public engagement, policy engagement, very much at the end of the process, but
we begin to look at research ideas, that we engage the potential research users, because both the way we formulate the questions, the methodology, and the way we actually then package the research is really influenced by some of the concerns and issues about the end user, and I really just wanted to make that point that the research process policy and public engagement really should start at the very beginning.
David Amess MP: Sheila.
Professor Sheila Anderson: why we need to kind of rethink what we are doing. Certainly a lot of the work that came out of the eScience Programme which, you know, was a huge UK programme that pushed things forward, was looking at how we can publish and it picks up on your points, how can we incorporate, not only the results of our research, but the process of our research and the thinking behind our research, and we have the technology and the tools to be able to do that, so we can start to capture what our research are ideas are, we can capture
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 36 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
the data or the content that we are working on, and we can capture the process and the work flows that we are applying, and it seems to me that we have this opportunity to do enhanced publications, enriched publications, which have the potential to be really transformative and we are kind of missing a trick if all we are doing is saying, how do we cope with the traditional methods of publication in a new business model?
David Amess MP: Well on behalf of the audience I would like to thank all our contributors, I thought you were absolutely excellent, can we show our appreciation.
And now I would like to invite Professor Martin Hall to join me please. Now Professor Martin Hall is the Vice-Chancellor of the
about smoothing the pathway to Gold open access research. Martin.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 37 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Neither Green nor Gold Professor Martin Hall, Vice-Chancellor, University of Salford and Chair, UK Open Access Implementation Group
y different title, and in fact I was asked to speak about smoothing the transition to Gold, but when I engaged with the subject that I had been given, I discovered that I disagreed with it. So I want to talk about smoothing a transition to something else.
which you can see the url at the bottom there, and I say that because what I put on the last slide is a number of references to the literature which I think people might find helpful.
I should also declare that I am a fully paid up member of the Finch Group, working with Dame Janet Finch who has become a noun and will soon become, I think, a verb. And what I want to do today is to go over five topics which I think might be helpful and which have been anticipated very usefully in several cases by the very valuable contributions that have been made in the two panels so far.
So I want to talk a bit about the wider context in the Finch Group Report, what we were getting at behind the specific recommendations. I then want to go back to a rough benchmark of around about the mid-1990s and want to refer to the excellent Royal Society report, Sciences and Open Enterprise, which I think is an important benchmark in our thinking of these issues and I want to then look ahead to some of the issues, again anticipated in comments from the floor in research, which is the integration of publishing and a far wider and more exciting issue of the integration of data.
So to start and to pick up a couple of points here.
The Finch Group Report and the discussions that have followed from it, are obviously part of a much longer has been reported as Green versus Gold, publication charges and the role of commercial publishers, but our report was trying to address a far wider context than this, and what I want to emphasise today is the connection between open access publishing, open data and the future of research, and a particular point tha future, and that will relate to the extraordinary advances that are being made in text and data mining and which will transform research as we know it, over the coming years.
So to go back to some benchmarks in 1995, these are always useful because they help us to track the pace of these extraordinary changes that we are going through, and the technological basis for those changes. And two benchm The Information Age, published
o go back to that baseline of the mid 1990s and to look back at it and see where we are now in the world that we work in.
And also in 1997, the concept of the digital dark age which was introduced at the International Federation of Library Associations Knowledge Exchange Report of 2011, the references to all of this are in the slide set, a very interesting f 1845, 1950 and 2006, and the fact that we in fact have less data available from 2006 than the earlier reports, because of the lack of standardised archiving of data sources, the lack of attention to interoperability, the inability of the institutions involved to update their data sets, which illustrates the point that we are in this very interesting situation where we have infinitely more data as researchers, than we ever had before, but we are infinitely greater risk of it all being lost and destroyed, which is one of the key issues for us, I think, into the future.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 38 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
course, is that we all are under a deluge of digital data. If you were trained, as I obviously was as researcher, back in the 70s or the 80s, and you did your PhD then, you were told that chapter 2 was the literature review. And in the literature review you were expected by your supervisor to review and read every article that was relevant to the field that you were looking at, and I suspect in some universities we still train our PhD students produced now is totally extraordinary. B new digital data each year. For those of you who are challenged by this, as I certainly am, a zetabyte is a million terabytes, a terabyte is what you can buy for about £60 online at Amazon and it will of course contain, unless you are doing something very unusual, everything you could conceivably read or write in your lifetime, again
o new peer reviewed papers are published every minute, so good luck with chapter 2.
years, just to annotate 50% of a database of protein sequences. We are being overwhelmed with information. Epidemiologists and others have been telling us this for some time, but as I want to demonstrate a little while Society online. Technology is capable of acquiring and storing vast and complex datasets, challenging the principle that science is a self-correcting enterprise. How can a theory be challenged or corrected if the data that underlies it, is neither accessible not assessable? This is a key point I think, for the rationality of scientific inquiry.
that systematically destroys its evidence while amassing vast quantities of data. You only dig Richard III up you destroy context, so we always had massive amounts of data and of course our data tends to be chunky, and as a result, archaeologists have long been interested in the opportunities for digital record keeping and on in archaeology on this, and in fact the jornal World Archaeology dedicated an entire edition last year to open archaeology.
How does this manifest itself in this disciplinary context? Well here's just one example. Archaeology has a strong strand geospatial platforms and the sorts of smart devices that any amateur archaeologist can use, which enable them to report information, report their location on a smart device and to lodge that very quickly on to an open data platform, is that we are amassing huge amounts of citizen generated geo tagged media that are redefining the interpretations we have made of the distribution of archaeological data across the world. This change the entire nature of the databases that we work with in archaeology, hop for example we test models for the movement and spread to the human species, the emergence of ourselves as anatomically modern people, So very complex changes are happening within the basic structure of the discipline of archaeology, generated by these new technologies, and by the ways that information and data are constantly produced.
contributions here, that one of the key developments of the move towards digital publishing is the connection between those databases and the final published project. So, for instance, in archaeology in the future and indeed in the present, increasingly archaeologists are looking, not only for the publication, but also for direct active links with the databases that underlie them, very particularly in archaeology, because most of that data in one way or another is publicly owned. It has either been excavated as a result of public funding, or more to the point, it belongs to a public notion of what heritage constitutes, and you saw that in the wonderful arguments this week about where Richard III should end up, with one suggestion of a State funeral in
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 39 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Westminster, the other I thought a very colourful suggestion, of his being buried in Worksop, because he was halfway between one place and another, and the perhaps unfortunate metaphor by the leader of the Leicester City Council that Richard III would leave Leicester over his dead body. Obviously this is a matter of extreme public interest, people have a right to get involved in these issues of archaeological data. So what we are of you in your own disciplines, you could draw a similar set of connections.
This is one of the aspects we
This is also a point that is made in the Royal Society report, also of last year. The internet provides a conduit for networks of professional and amateur scientists to collaborate and communicate in new ways and may pave the way for a second open science revolution, as great as that triggered by the creation of the first scientific journals. So again the integration of open publishing and open access with open data is changing the wa
Now here's an example drawn from the Royal Society report, which I thought rather made the point about the public interest in this, and the importance of the connection between open data availability and open publication. May 2011, there was a rather nasty outbreak of severe gastrointestinal infection in Hamburg, 4,000 cases across Europe pretty quickly, and 50 deaths. Within a week, 2 dozen reports had been filed on open source site dedicated to the analysis of that particular strain. By July scientists had published papers based on that work, a couple of months after the initial outbreak in Hamburg, by July already papers were being published on this particular outbreak, and as the Royal Society points out, by opening up their early sequencing results to international collaboration, researchers in Hamburg produced results that were quickly tested by a wide range of experts, used to produce knowledge and ultimately to control a public health emergency.
So through the combination of open access to data, and open publishing and communication, we got a very rapid response to a particularly significant and potentially global health problem.
were moving towards in Finch and the route that the Royal Society sketched out eloquently on a far wider canvas, the alternative is that we get knowledge that is similar to a gated highway, the commercialisation of the knowledge economy without the counterbalance of the public benefit and the public good. And to talk a little bit more deeply about the economics of this, I would suggest going to an excellent paper by Stuart Shieber who is the Director of Scholarly Communication, Harvard University which talks about knowledge as a complementary good that contributes in a significant way to the
A quick example here and again why the open data has an immediate public benefit. One of the important advances that has happened recently has been Government policy to open up publicly owned data sets, and a nice early example here is what access to open database prescriptions, written by all doctors in the UK, reveals. In the case of statins which are one of the most prevalently used medications, rationalisation of prescriptions alone would result in a £200 million saving for the National Health Budget. This is only evident because the open data set is available for data mining and data searching, and one of many potential examples of the public benefit of openness
In closing, I want to go back then to the key point of publishing to my argument for neither Green nor Gold. . What we were trying to do in the Finch Report was to map out what we called a mixed economy. We fully talk, quite appropriately, of the advantages and disadvantages of Green versus Gold. But the bigger point that I want to make here is that we rather need to shift to full upfront article processing charges rather than in fact continuing with this dichotomy of Green versus Gold. , A point that Stuart Shieber makes in his paper is that in fact across all open access publishing, the median cost of APCs is precisely zero and that because there are so many open access publishing journals out there that have in fact a zero APC charge. So the point to remember here is that an APC can be precisely nothing, and there are many alternatives to publishing that do not involve the very high charges we are seeing in some particular cases.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 40 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The point that I want to emphasise and the point that I want to end with, is that unless we move to perform where the costs of publishing are met fully upfront, either by publication charges or by volunteer participation by people to produce those journals, we will not enable the sorts of connections between open data and publishing that are going to be essential to the future, and for me, right at the heart of that, and the lynchpin, if you like, of this whole process, is availability of the copy record, because without the copy of record, we do not have the guarantee that we are moving forward with a rationally based scientific inquiry, rather than being immersed and swamped by that mass of digital data that is around us now.
So the key thing is for us to make available, openly to everybody who needs it, available through the massive ove forward with the possibilities that we have for open inquiry in the future.
Thank you.
http://www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/forums/slides/Martin_Hall.pdf
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 41 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Neither Green nor Gold Questions and comments from the floor
David Amess MP: Well thank you very much indeed Martin for your contribution, I know there was so much more that you wanted to share with us.
Martin? Yes, the lady at the back there.
Amelia Aspden: for the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee. Martin, thank you. I just saw on your slide that you have put up CC BY-NC for the alternative model. Could you talk a little bit about some of the common misunderstandings about what a CC BY licence and CC BY-NC mean for this debate?
Professor Martin Hall: Yes thank you. People are tending to use the term CC BY and CC BY-
point about CC BY, one of the common misunderstandings is that if you publish with a CC BY lice
been clarified by Creative Commons. If you use a CC BY licence, anything that is in the article that is being cited is protected in terms of t one first important point, because there has been some talk about CC BY enabling the theft of intellectual property, and that is not the case. The reason why I tend to prefer the argument for CC BY-NC is not because it restricts distribution, but because the non- commercial aspect of it would require somebody wishing to use open access material for commercial uses to negotiate that with the rights holder, and I think that is important because whether individuals or institutions, they have a right to control commercialisation of their product, which is why I tend to stress CC BY-NC. However, more work is needed on CC licencing options, and there are also drawbacks with the use of CC-BY-NC.
David Amess MP: Yes, Frederick.
Frederick Friend: Thank you Martin. I agree with a lot of what you say, particularly about the fourth paradigm and so on. What I wondered whether you would also allow for is the value of open data linked to repository content. One of my roles for the OpenAIREplus project is to act as a reviewer for the Open Air Plus project, which is following very much the kind of path that you were suggesting. Now, as always in the EC policy, the EC is not ruling out conventional publishers linking their text to open data, but equally the EC does believe that there is a value in data sets, open data sets being linked to the repository copy, which in the open air repository that they set up for FP7. So I just wonder whether you know about this approach
Professor Martin Hall: Thank you Fred. My personal point of view is that I think repositories are critical. Now my vision of what would happen with full APC, even if the APC is zero, would be that that would allow the copy of record to be put in an institution repository, or a subject
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 42 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
copies of record residing on commercially owned repositories by publishers, because those cannot be guaranteed into the future, and institutions have a critical role here, whether they are the British Library or individual institutions. I think linked to that, institutions, in particular universities, have a particular role as public interest data repositories. Now in retrospect one of the things that we could have done better in Finch was have paid more credit to the value of
by absence rather than intent, if you see what I mean, it j retrospect we should have had a stronger statement about the importance of Green, because I think that repositories are critical.
repositories, we n move
touched here and there on academic monographs, particularly
opportunity to look at that adequately, but anybody here from the
right now that has to be addressed. I tend to think that for monographs, universities are going to have to become publishers, and they are going to have to become, with proper peer review, and their repositories are going to be critical for academic monographs into the future. So I would endorse your view on the significance of repositories.
David Amess MP:
David Hoole: From Nature Publishing Group. Martin, you said it had been a good week for archaeology, how do you feel about the way the Richard III findings have been published? Does that tell us anything about the future of peer review?
Professor Martin Hall: Well thank you. First of all I think my colleagues at the University of Leicester have acted impeccably in a very, very difficult situation to deal with and I would have done it in exactly the same way, so good er
good example in chemistry that we enjoyed earlier where you get quite an obscure scientific publication that happens to be about caffeine and coffee shops and everybody gets excited about, Richard III puts the caffeine in coffee shop bit the other way around, everybody gets excited first and the publication comes later. But if you look carefully at what people said at Leicester, they were very,
David Amess MP: Okay, another couple of questions. Someone put their hand up over here. Yes.
Professor Tom McLeish: PVC for Research at Durham. Martin, very interesting, I wonder if you would say just a little bit more about your vision for the future, which seemed to be somewhat more radical than had been sketched this morning, in
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 43 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
When I first had this iPad here, I started to create a silly filing system for it and then realised it was completely ridiculous because all I had
having to sort it, and similarly not only can we now pull out articles without kn could even pull out the form and connectivity of them. So can you say a little bit more about the tools for transmitting content into form, rather than traditional form.
Professor Martin Hall: Thank
earlier to the importance of linguistics as a discipline is, I think, very from linguistics. I
we link those things, and increasingly we are going to have to automate those links, simply because of
course, what we really want to see is a verification that the links that we are getting are, in fact, connected in some way that replicates the quality of the data in the argument, which is why I keep coming
back to my Hamburg example, the key thing in tackling very, very quickly a very complex rapidly spreading public health problem, was the authenticity of the science publications behind that and their copy of record. Without that the whole thing simply collapses into a generalised Google search, in which case we might as well give up not add the value that verifies the semantics and the connections, and I think that is so rapidly changing that we have to be on top of the technology of this.
David Amess MP: There was just one last question. Yes, the lady there.
Katie Foxall: From ecancer. Just to bring up the issue of open access publishing, which has come
should be funding it?
Professor Martin Hall: Yes, thank you. As somebody said earlier, and quite correctly,
have a slightly nervous reaction to the point about academics volunteering for things because I am paying them, so in fact what they are doing, in strict terms, is they are alienating some of their time at the university towards another sort of activity, which is
community. So I think what we are seeing is the emergence of complex models, I think the reference to the French example was a very good instance, we can learn from other places. I have a strong connection to South Africa, South Africa did some very interesting things recently where they moved to complete online publishing and simultaneous print publishing, and guess what, the volume of print publishing went up the more the monographs were fully available online. So there are complex models emerging of how we can do
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 44 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
this, and they are by no means limited to the sort of Elsevier type commercial model that has tended to dominate our thinking about this, and others have mentioned that. So I think that the key thing
open up the possibilities for new ways of publishing and new ways of funding that, and that I think opens up a very exciting set of opportunities.
David Amess MP: Well thank you Martin very much indeed for your contribution. Can we show our appreciation.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 45 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
closing remarks David Amess MP, Member, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing
And I just want to make a few general remarks as I close this session.
funeral, but I hope we give him a decent send off, absolutely incredible.
The next thing I wanted to say, that as a Member of Parliament I get very frustrated that when we make our speeches, time after time we have to rely on American research. Now the difference between the UK and the United States when we are lobbied on a particular subject, it always seem to be an American study on something or other.
And the final thing I wanted to say, and this is slightly off piste, the House of Commons library is absolutely fantastic, awe inspiring, they can get us information on anything and everything all over the world, and I think f Somerset House and Kew Gardens, there we have the Victorian Tower, with the actual documents which go back 500, 600, 700
But ladies and gentl
a wonderful audience.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 46 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
opening remarks Tristram Hunt MP, Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing
Good morning ladies and gentlemen.
M Stoke-on-Trent Central, and if you found the you are drinking out of cheap and nasty foreign imports when you should have been drinking Stoke-on-Trent made pottery from the greatest pottery in the world, and Sir Paul Nurse will be getting a harsh memo from myself, because if the Royal Society, of al e in Stoke-on-Trent, what has the world come to?
So we are looking forward to continuing the discussion today on the open access research model. It is said that the open access research model came from David Willetts trying to research his interesting little book, The Pinch he wanted to online. My view is that he should have been better acquainted with the Havant Public Library and its access to JSTOR and all sorts of other advantages, but he clearly felt this was a great injustice, and so he got together with some other members of the STEM community and introduced this intriguing model we have before us.
Speaking as a historian I see massive problems with what we are looking at today, and this session looks at its effect on the academic community and for historians and social scientists and those in humanities who do not operate on the same business model as STEM subjects, we see an attack upon academic integrity, upon research and upon the freedom of particularly junior researchers who will become dependent upon the patronage and economic modelling of their departments for the publication of their research. I think there are also real problems about the publication of research in international journals who are not subscribing to this, there are also real problems about embargo periods for humanities, who operate on different business models to the STEM subjects. But maybe people on the panel will be addressing those subjects during the course of their presentations.
So we will kick off with Professor Tom McLeish who is the Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research at Durham University.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 47 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Implementing the open access research model Professor Tom McLeish, Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, Durham University
Tristram, thanks very much indeed.
So while we are being a little regional about where we come from, Durham is where I work, but York is where I
While we are on names and metaphors are flying around, have you ever just stopped to ponder this Green and Gold thing? Who wants a Green medal from the Olympics? Who would rather have a Green standard than a Gold standard? n open access and fossil fuel burning open access, and just see where that takes us. Jus after all.
universi ing closed door discussions with RCUK, HEFCE, publishers, which give a much more flexible interesting picture, than the sort of rather hard and, announcement of being a little more flexible on working with the community.
There is much current confusion, but the academic community, as a whole, of course is behind the idea of open access, after all we work, speak and write in dialogue, we thrive on word and message received and written and understood, and the larger the au
where this is going.
However, I ought to just complexify the stakeholder position a little. If you read the Finch Report it draws rather stark lines between the stakeholder communities, of the academics, the publishers, the funders. Those positions are more overlapping and complex than perhaps outlined, after all academics, we work very closely with research councils, we work with them in terms of strategizing, advice, peer review, horizon scanning, bringing up early career researchers; we also work intensively with the publishing community, we write for for them, we proof read for them, and then we pay to buy it all back again. We also, however, of course benefit from the financial benefits from academic society publishing, but not from commercial publishing.
access. One is, Tristram referre
10% of the UK research budget on publishing and disseminating that research. I find myself post-Finch in an extraordinary position of witnessing, after several years of hyper inflationary publishing costs, which are huge burden for the academic community to bear, increased costs over and above that being delivered through the APC route to Gold, with no current reduction in the cost of subscription. There are ways of doing this, and I applaud the Royal Society of Chemistry, from whom we had a speaker earlier today, in exploring ways of cost transfer, tunnelling through the financial barrier to overall open access, rather than having to climb up another 10% of cost on our budget.
So my final encouragement is everyone to act a little bit more in accordance with what they say. Academics behind, we are sometimes our own worst paying for prestige, period. We need to stop being backward looking and traditional as we are, we are very blinkered, and to start embracing the sort of flexible and interesting future, connected future, of Web 2.0 and on be requiring the double dipping
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 48 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Government really believed that Gold open access was the way to enhanced economic growth, then like all investors in clear economic growth, they would pay for it and not require this huge open access financial mountain to be dug out of an already reducing, in real terms, research budget.
The flexible future.
Tristram Hunt MP: Thorley, Head of Science Information and Data Management Coordinator at the NERC.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 49 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Implementing the open access research model Mark Thorley, Head of Science Information and Data Management Coordinator, NERC (Natural Environment Research Council)
-label my slides as going for fossil fuel unfortunately, but I will try and use that analogy if I can.
and one of those involved in its implementation, but in my spare time I also run libraries, so I come at this from several perspectives.
those who ride shotgun from the publishers and from the high church wing, and somewhere in the middle of it is RCUK, trying hard to make a decent fist of
about funding, quite a lot about the transition process over the next 5 years or so, and then something about the work we are doing in the background to try and actually support the community as it moves towards a new normal of open access.
I think Tony research councils over the current spending review period, so when we do talk about the amounts of money, as a percentage of our overall budget, they are really quite small and in line with what the Wellcome Trust also predicts it will spend in supporting open access.
A very quick review of the policy, for those who have forgotten. Basically we would require our authors to publish in journals which are compliant with our policy, journals achieve compliance, either through offering a CC BY licence, else a Green route, with a maximum of a 6 or 12 month embargo period in the non-STEM area, with an equivalent of a CC BY- be CC BY- -commercial reuse, especially text and data mining. Our preference is for Gold, however the choice is with authors and institutions, and we see this transition taking pl the world to change radically on the 1st April, we want to start that journey and work with the community.
So in terms of funding, we are finding funding for APCs through our block grant mechanism, we expect institutions through savage publication funds, and the processes and procedures for managing the distribution of APCs and the payment of invoices to publishers. oing to be very light touch, our guidance will be very flexible on how you spend the money, basically just spend it to best deliver the RCUK policy. And I think going back to the point that Sheila made in her talk earlier about the opportunity to drive innovation in the publishing space, we want to give that flexibility in how you spend the money to help facilitate innovative new approaches to publishing, provided it helps deliver access to our research outputs.
Size of the fund. I say I made a critical mistake in calculating the size of the fund based on average APCs, I understand I should have used the mode rather than the median, which is zero, and our budget would have ed the average figure from year, 20 million available in the second. We can give no commitment beyond that into the next spending review period.
a proxy for research effort and thus the number of research papers arising. So basically an institution gets a critical to note that the research intensive universities between them
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 50 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
37 institutions the funding we allocate really goes to a narrow group of very research intensive organisations.
Now t publishers, institutions and the community to support the spirit of the policy which is around delivering open access to the outputs of a research we fund. We are working with the Research Communications Group at Nottingham, the SHERPA/RoMEO team, with JISC and with the Wellcome Trust, to develop a new website on journal compliance information, so basically we want people to be able to go to websites and say this is the journal I want to publish in, is it compliant with our policy. If it is, how does it deliver that to the clients? And a lot of majority of journals our authors are going to publish in will be compliant.
We are working to develop protocols to enable the HEIs to work together to develop those rules about who is going to pay the APC, is it going to be the first author, is it going to be the corresponding author, and we plan to facilitate a workshop for learned societies to share best practice and OA publishing, some time later this ye working, let us know and we will take that on board in the review process.
And one final slide, and they are waving their red card at me, I wa around about embargo periods, and I put up there what we have there is the words from our submission to the House of Lords inquiry. Now you can go away and read it on the website, basically we are saying our policy is 6-12 months where there is funding available. If a funding is being limited or being reduced, we would like to see our authors making choices to move to journals which have cheaper APCs or short embargo periods, which still meet our 6-12 month embargo period. However, we recognise that funding may well not be available in the future, once our funds have run out, in which case we are perfectly happy for authors to -24 month embargo period. Full stop.
Tristram Hunt MP: Great, Mark thank you very, very much indeed. Now we are going to hear from Dr. Michael Jubb who is the Founding Director of the Research Information Network and also the Secretary of the Finch Committee.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 51 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Implementing the open access research model Dr Michael Jubb, Founding Director, Research Information Network and Secretary, Finch Committee
Thank you.
clearly I was heavily involved in the Committee and its work. I should emphasise also that the Finch Group has no role at all in the implementation of its recommendations, although it will be meeting again in the summer of this year, one year after the publication of the report, to assess the progress that has been made towards the implementation of its recommendations.
Now the question that the Finch Group was set out to try to answer is a rather difficult one. How to increase and enhance access to the published outputs of UK research and indeed global research in the UK. To do that, a working group was set up which had representatives of all the key stakeholder groups, and the group as a whole had to recognise that while there are interdependencies and interrelationships between those groups, they do work together, but they do come to the question with different sets of perspectives, and different sets of interest.
So altogether, trying to answer the question is not an easy process. There is no straightforward answer to the question, what we came up with was a best fit answer, taking into account all the different perspectives and all the different interests, and the proposals and the recommendations in the report are really summed up in its title, accessibility, sustainability and excellence, and there are tensions between those three abstract nouns. We had to look at ways of enhancing, increasing access, not just to the outputs of UK research globally, but to rld for the benefit of UK researchers and there are tensions there.
There are clearly tensions between enhancing accessibility on the one hand, and sustainability. There are, as has been mentioned several times this morning, costs involved in the publication and dissemination process, and those have to be met somehow. And finally we were very concerned to ensure that we sustain, not just the finances of the system, but the key characteristics of the system in sustaining the excellence, both of the UK research base, but also of the services that publishing, and I emphasise publishing not publishers necessarily, the services that publishing and other intermediaries involved in publishing and dissemination make to the research community, both as authors and as readers.
Hence we came up with what we saw was a balanced approach, a mixed economy, as it has been referred to, in which Gold open access, Green open access, and something which seems to have been rather lost sight of in the interim, some extensions to the coverage of licensed access until we have moved to a fully open access world; all three mechanisms, it seemed to us, remained important for the foreseeable future, and all three of them required investment from the publishing community, from the public purse, and also from universities.
But we did conclude that the transition towards open access should be accelerated in an ordered managed way. And I stress that because during the transition period it was clear to us that there are risks, indeed there are risks sitting where we are now if we do nothing, but there are risks to all the key stakeholder groups as we move forward. So we need to recognise that monitoring of how the progress towards open access works is going to be of central importance and that in the transition process we work together in a co-operative way that fully recognises the interrelationships and the interdependencies between the different stakeholder groups.
which promotes innovation, not just through the research system itself, but through the scholarly communications system as well. None of us the future is going to depend on continued innovation which involves cooperation between all the key yet foresee.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 52 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Thank you.
Tristram Hunt MP: Michael, thank you very much indeed. Our fourth speaker is Mr. Ziyad Marar who is the Global Publishing Director of SAGE Publications.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 53 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Implementing the open access research model Ziyad Marar, Global Publishing Director, SAGE Publications
Thank you.
Well I can confirm the rumour you mentioned that a lot of the idea here started when David Willetts was researching his book on intergenerational inequality, The Pinch, and when he told that to a Publishers Association meeting that I was at, I was able to put the following point - I was doing some research of my own
Tristram Hunt MP: Shameful, extraordinary.
an interesting one as well. I think a lot of the debates here are around whether intellectual property is intrinsically theft, but we will come to that in a second.
not just representing a publisher of scholarly journals, monographs and text books, but in particular I represent publisher worth their salt we have been involved in OA for years, for example we partnered with Hindawi for a but I think it needs to be restated, that be an automatic read across from STM. We launched SAGE Open 2 years ago as a way of trying to test that. As at $99. Let me just say that $99 is
So, the Academy of Social Sciences, I think in November now, did a workshop on implementing Finch, especially with the social science angle in mind. Dame Janet Finch was there herself, and it was very interesting anyone with an interest in these matters recognises the importance of all three pillars there. However OA debates generally seems to be dominated by discussions around big science much more than HSS, and the fact lot of hostility to the historians suddenly responding so strongly, but they have not been involved in a debate understand that different fields have different conditions under which knowledge claims are made. Unfortunately accessibility, sustainability and evidence is tending to favour the question of accessibility and potentially obscuring from view the conditions under which sustainability and excellence is achieved, and
For example we saw a statistic earlier that showed the dependence on journals that varies between disciplines - biological anthropology at 90 something %, and social anthropology down at so the scholarly enterprise as one homogenous block.
with our HSS community (we publish on behalf of about 250 societies and the themes are by now relatively familiar.
The first one is around funding, so we saw Mark Thorley putting up the range of funding, the amount of funding that goes to HSS within the RCUK pot is about 10%, just a shade above 10%. The NIH last year dispersed about $29 billion. The HSS story is a very small tail on a very, very big dog when it comes to funding.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 54 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
The sustainability has been mentioned as well, the half lives are absolutely longer in HSS generally. Now the
I think we heard earlier, however it would be great if RCUK actually engage with that question to ask, actually, can we do a bit of research and try and establish what potentially would destabilise journals - seem to be much interest in that in particular.
A disbursement of Gold funds by institutions is now bringing the academic into a relationship with their institution which has not existed hitherto. Now those institutions will be deciding - the quantitative researcher might be deciding whether qualitative research gets to have some money to put their article in a journal or n a different way.
social science material, is different in its impact on HSS. The nature of authorship in social science is different. The human genome sequencing article had 2,900 authors on it. What does that mean for authorship? In STM the idea of data needing to be released makes a great deal of sense, it needs to be uncaged. While social science authorship is much more about the argument made by an individual with moral rights who therefore -derivative as
So concluding thoughts second point. Not just RCUK, but HEFCE in their consultation need to ensure that the HSS scholars are feeling included, not alienated. We should recognise that the transition to OA in HSS will be longer term and a much more mixed economy.
great to see the initiative at the Open Library of Humanities coming up, we should have a lot of read across from the well-established debate that is dominated by big science.
Thank you.
http://www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/forums/slides/Ziyad_Marar.pdf
Tristram Hunt MP: Ziyad, thank you very much for an excellent contribution. Finally we are going to hear from Dr. Malcolm Skingle who is the Director, Academic Liaison for GSK.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 55 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Implementing the open access research model Dr Malcolm Skingle, Director, Academic Liaison, GSK
Thanks very much.
So when I was putting this together on Sunday and saw I was the 18th speaker, I thought I might have to find something new to say because it will have all be said before. So this is a personal perspective, in fact GSK currently have no formal position statement on pre-clinical scientific publications, but obviously we support open access to data because by sharing our data you are more likely to get more data back.
GSK already share many of their reagents and resources with external parties in a bid to expand areas of the science base, which are of value, not only to us but to the whole scientific community. I knew that there were a lot of academics here today, and I just wanted to make the point that the impact factors of GSK published papers are comparable to academia in several disciplines, but in biological sciences, actually the citation indices are higher than in academia.
So this is all the GSK authors who have got more than 100 citations on their papers over the last 12 years, and this is from mining the Scopus database, and you can see that there are many publications with more than a hundred citations and there are few with several thousand citations; and many of these are obviously from the large collaborative projects like the mouse genome project and the HapMap project and perhaps 20 years ago when we were less collaborative on such a large scale, we would be involved with fewer multi-disciplinary, multi-centre papers. But there are also the papers from GSK only authors which have opened up new fields like the VR receptor work when we have published data on novel and proprietary ligands. This paper was published at the turn of the century and now has more than a 1,000 citations. Through GSK putting out more, others have tapped into.
So I would draw your attention to this publication down here, Anti-Malarial Lead Identification by our scientists from Tres Cantos Group in 2010 which last week had had 171 citations. It was in 2009 that the GSK scientists in Tres Cantos set about screening 2 million compounds to combat the most deadly of the malaria parasites, falciparum. It took 5 scientists a year to complete the task and we decided to publish all of the chemical structures and associated assay data not only in a 2010 Nature paper but also in a user friendly database so that other scientists around the world could use these molecules as starting points for their chemistry efforts.
John Overington from the European Bioinformatics Institute put a user friendly database together with all of the screening results and compound structures for the 13,500 hits. And we have even made the compounds themselves available to selected scientists around the world.
82% of the potential leads identified in the malaria screen were proprietary GSK compounds that we are happy to make available for other scientists undertaking research and wishing to help those with malaria in the developing world
We have also made samples of the compounds themselves available to selected scientists around the world. The Tres Cantos anti malarial set (TCAMS) has already been provided to 14 groups around the globe and we have also provided the charity MMV with some of these compounds which makes up 50% of their compound set and this has been shared with 100 groups working on malaria.
This malaria initiative has been so successful in stimulating other researchers around the globe that we have recently extended this type of activity and developed a library of compounds, albeit smaller, that are starting points for chemistry against Mycobacterium and a potential treatment for TB.
Furthermore Andrew Witty our Chief Exec also put another £5 million funding into the Tres Cantos lab so that people who had a bright idea for a potential cure for a disease of the developing world, could actually come
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 56 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013 and work in our laboratory, have access to our category 3 containment and to all of our chemistry and we would help drive that idea through into a potential medicine for the developing world.
-pro football, and the timekeeper is showing me the red card so this is my last slide.
GSK are changing their internal structures and frankly their working practices to be more open and transparent with the external science base, and I think some academics are quite surprised at how open and transparent we are, and we are often keen to share our data with external scientists in a controlled way in order to expand the science base and I see open access publishing as very much a part of this continuum.
And finally, I say it one more time, the more science you share with other scientists, the more you are going to get back from external sources.
http://www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/forums/slides/Malcolm_Skingle.pdf
Tristram Hunt MP: Malcolm, thank you very, very much indeed.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 57 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Implementing the open access research model Questions and comments from the floor
Tristram Hunt MP: Right, we are slightly behind time because we were all wrestling
open it up to the floor for a sort of extensive round of questions, comments, queries, before coming back to the panel and then
present some questions, and if you can introduce yourselves, that would be great, we will begin with the gentleman in the middle over
Frederick Friend: Could I ask the members of the panel if they could define what they mean by sustainability. The reason is that in the Finch Report, the sustainability comes across as solely for the publishing industry, not for the process of dissemination of implication in the Finch Report that the repository route to open access is not sustainable, and yet I would say that repositories have been going for a long time, many are based in universities, is the implications that universities are not sustainable? And if another argument against repository sustainability is that it is parasitical, but again I would say that the entire publishing industry is parasitical upon the public research budget. So could we have some explanation please?
Tristram Hunt MP: Okay. And then I saw a hand at the back. Yes, the lady right at the back.
Faye Twine: University Alliance. I would just like to ask the RCUK to advise what criteria or formula they used when they allocated the 10 million funding for the APC charges to only 30 institutions and whether there is any idea of further tranches to be released, and what metrics will be used to allocate that funding to certain institutions?
Tristram Hunt MP: Okay, very good. Anyone else. The lady at the front here.
Dr. Aoife Regan: From Cancer Research UK. I was interested in the first speaker comparing the Gold open access model to fossil fuel. I would argue actually where we are today is fossil fuel with profits of some publishers running at 30-40%,
where we are at right now is a painful place to try and define what that model is. But I was also very interested in your comment on in that transition period who pays for the increase in costs, because over time costs may fall in the publishing system, but who pays for that transition period. Obviously coming from a charity that publishes 2,000 papers every year, this is quite an important issue for us.
Tristram Hunt MP: Okay, thank you. Anyone else? The gentleman over there.
Professor David Bender: Nutrition Society.
with a hybrid journal eventually librarians are going to say if so and
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 58 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
so percentage of the journal is available free of charge, why should we subscribe? So we will have to reduce the subscription cost and
subscription falls, that cut off point is going to be vital for scientific societies. We large publisher could.
Tristram Hunt MP: Okay, fine, okay. Thank you very much. And I might finally ask, if you are a junior academic in a history department and you are having the rationing of your funds for publication in academic
who are under pressure from the university bosses for REF and all the rest of it, and you want to publish your text on woodcraft in an early model and they a
commercial confidence and these kind of things, why is that healthy for the academic sustainability of the UK university base? But Mark shall we begin with this rather specific question about the RCUK
Mark Thorley: Yes absolutely. So BIS very generously made an additional 10 million available earlier this year to pump prime open access activities within the HI sector. And the basic algorithm we used is we distributed that funding pro rata to the top 30 institutions based on the amount of research and funding council funding they had
afraid. It was really their going to the really research intensive universities to help kick start them in this process. So you saw from
for over 80% of the funding we allocate as a research councils. So really, unfortunately we were targeting research intensive s why we settled on the top 30.
Tristram Hunt MP: Mark, thank you. Michael do you want to talk to this issue of sustainability and then also as the sort of voice of humanities on the Finch Report, say something about the humanities.
Dr. Michael Jubb: Yes, on sustainability, I think the key point for the Finch Group was the sustainability of a whole group of services, very important to the success of the UK research community, both as authors, as I said, and as readers, and clearly there is a need for financial flows of resources in order to sustain services of that kind. That does not
platform for innovation in the ways in which those services are provided, and indeed for the provision of new kinds of services, one of which we heard about earlier today. But I think it just underscores the point that we need to be very careful about engaging in an ordered process that does not undermine what is valuable that we have at the moment.
On the issue of arts, humanities, social sciences, I think that we were very clear on Finch that there would be different speeds of travel towards an open access future in different subject areas and I think it is almost certain that the speed of travel in humanities and social
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 59 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
sciences will be slower than it is, for example, in the life sciences, and in that context, I think that the mixed model that Finch advocated is terribly important. We did not say, despite what several people have tried to claim that we said, we did not say that there should be an immediate or even a very rapid transition to a wholly Gold world. Green is going to remain an important part of
whether Green in its current form is going to be a feature of the
but it clearly is going to be very important for whole swathes of the humanities over the next peri period of 5 years, the only one where we can be at all clear about what might happen.
Tristram Hunt MP: Thank you very much. Ziyad, do you want to come back on any of that?
Ziyad Marar: Just yes, I suppose, Fred Friend asked the question of sustainability, which I think has many different pieces to it, but I actually found it quite useful to hear Martin Hall sort of zero in on the copy of record
a pre-publication peer reviewed copy of record, but we can debate that, I have done before. In order to actually provide discoverable accessible, sort of engageable with, content requires an enterprise that is commercially viable on some level and if repositories are the answer, I think anyone would accept there would be a large investment needed to get all the repositories to be linked up adequately with each other to enable that copy of record to be surfaced at the right time for the right people. In a world of information overload with 100,000 tweets a minute being published, how do authority claims get built? Well I think sustainability requires adequately economically viable mechanisms to help those articles surface, and currently the journal brand is one of the key larly interested in how early career authors, as we were hearing earlier, need to find their authoritative voices, I think that people in later career can experiment with all sorts of alternatives, having already built their claims to fame, but I think if
another level of sustainability. I think both of those require sufficient economic viability. The last thing I would just say is that when people talk about publishing, in the same way that the
publishers handling about 3 million submissions a year across nearly 30,000 peer reviewed jou needs to be understood, somewhat more case by case than is typically the case.
Professor Tom McLeish: I thought you put your finger on a beautiful case in point of the early career academic wanting to publish in the Early Modern Journal of Wood Carving and Turning to which I also personally subscribe, but
know I can speak for a number of other universities which I know well, we see an enormous danger here in cutting across academic freedom of where to publish. We do not want to turn our
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 60 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
universities into directive business models where academics are told where they may or may not publish, I think that would be inimicable to the international academic community. So we are doing our best to maintain those freedoms in a difficult world of increased prices. Now I wanted to say something about costs, I do not think the case has been made, the evidence based case that there is now, in the UK Gold open access context a very great cost base. I know we are being charged large prices for it, but until subscriptions, the
current subscriptions, large APCs which is what we are currently being faced for. So again hats off to the Royal Society of Chemistry for offering a tunnel through the transition hill between here and there. Again, though, I would say to colleagues involved universities where encouraging, not, of course, a direction for research, we are of course encouraging a debate about where, the output of an academic, achieves the results that that academic wishes to, where does it get its best airing, its best reading, its best debate, that is not necessarily in traditional publishing media, and
tension that against the cost. We are in danger of spending a lot on funding which has to come out of other operations like funding PhD students, or getting research going in the first place. It is a painful
debate into the wider community.
Tristram Hunt MP: Well thank you very much indeed. Malcolm do you have any final thoughts?
Dr. Malcolm Skingle: me that as APC charges go up, subscriptions will inevitably come down, I think market forces seems quite vibrant, I how many people there are in the room, I would have thought the market forces would have kept the APCs down and the quality threshold up. Probably the real money is going to be made from services, intelligently mined data sets create new knowledge.
Tristram Hunt MP: Thank you. Two last quick words from Mark and from Michael. Mark.
Mark Thorley: Okay, I just want to pick up this issue of sustainability and the
funds, so if Tom wa
Durham to spend 90% of the funding we give them on papers to do with wood turning, if the money to effectively help deliver our policy, but Fred raised a good point about sustainability, and we are very clearly putting money we could be spending on something else, i.e. paying for research, into funding our APC programme, as part of the transition arrangements, and for us sustainability cuts two ways, it not only has to be sustainable for the publisher, it has to be sustainable for the research funder, and we will be making available the data we collect on article processing charges paid for the research we fund, and when we are looking at the university sector to work together
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 61 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
to really start to drive down subscription costs, and there is a real hope that we will start to see publishers introduce differential pricing in the UK market, science in Europe is asking for the same thing, where we are putting substantial additional money into paying publishers, we would expect to see publishers give us something back for that, by in the UK, lowering subscription prices.
Tristram Hunt MP: Thank you very much indeed. Michael did you want to comment.
Dr. Michael Jubb: Just one point on costs and the costs of transition. We are already in a transition period towards open access and we are paying the costs of a transition period. Transitions always involve extra costs, but it does seem to me that one of the key issues on which we have to focus over the next few years is precisely on the trade-off between the increased expenditure from a university funder perspective on APCs and trade-off in terms of reductions in subscriptions on the other, and I think that one of the key issues in that debate is going to be the extent to which the UK can expect to receive a degree of preferential treatment in recognition of its role
debate to have.
Tristram Hunt MP: Michael, thank you very, very much indeed, and I would like to thank the entire panel for their excellent contributions and very succinct replies. I would now like to ask Mr. Ron Egginton who is rolling out this strategy for the Minister to come and make a few remarks.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 62 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Open access policy Ron Egginton, Head, BBSRC and ESRC Team, Research Funding Unit, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Well thank you Chairman.
and
I would like to talk about, first of all our rationale for this. What we going next.
R&D, as many of you will know, is one of the most highly cited measures of innovation in any economy. In the UK about 27% of our R&D goes into Higher Education, 9% into Government, so about 36% from the public of the total that we spend on what is termed Gross Expenditure on Research and Development. Relative to main competitor countries, with all due respect to GSK here today.
The net result is that by comparison, our expenditure is under 2% of GDP, compared to our major competitors who are close to 4%. So we are spending less on R&D in our economy by comparison to some of our main competitor countries. But we know that expenditure on research and development is actually quite good for rate of return was for about seven different technologies. What he did essentially was what GSK will be doing on most of their investment projects, I would expect. Look at what you are going to spend on a project, look at the future cash flows that are coming from it, determine the internal rate of return from net present value assessment and so on, then decide do you want to invest, yes or no, depending upon your cost of capital. In
t hat on, in developing a strategy on agri-science in the UK which Government is very keen to develop. What became apparent when looking at some of the research there, and I apologise to the Chairman, or the previous Chairman, it was an American piece of which actually showed that the internal rate of return was 45% for agricultural research. And we have the further example which is often cited, the human genome programme, from which $140 according to Battelle [transcript gap] resulted in the economy for every dollar spent, and a fair bit of that return was attributed to open access.
We are very fortunate in the UK that our science base is one of the best in the world. We are leading researchers in the world, here in the UK, and our universities are not being slow to engage with business, they already are, £3 billion a year comes in from their engagement with other sources of funding. The World Economic Forum recently rated the UK as second in the world in terms of its effectiveness of translating that
the best in the world.
Now translating that knowledge is important for innovation, as we have heard, in terms of the open innovation that companies want to pursue and so on, but what it also shows is how we reach a conclusion that because of what we were spending on R&D and the importance of R&D to social rates of return, the importance of open access. So what we need is to establish an open access policy which recognises how strategically important it is for the UK and implement it in the most effective way.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 63 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
agenda that we have, which has been a driving force from the Cabinet Office and Central Government, we have developments in Europe and the rest of the world in this area, which have to be taken into consideration. have different perceptions on this. So one of the things we did was we set out in the Innovation Research Strategy in December 2011, that this was something that we ought to address, expanding access to research, and there were three strands to the approach at that stage. One was the work that we implemented for Finch; the other was some work which has been the subject of a separate study by Sir Alan Langlands on administrative data, and the third thing, which I hope you all try out, is something called the Gateway to Research, which is essentially doing what several people have called for here today, the ability to find out what
ped over the last year, and a beta test version is now available publicly1.
In the Innovation Research Strategy we made it quite clear that the fundamental principle behind all of this is that the public, the taxpayer, should have access to the research that they are funding and that should be the case in a reasonable timescale, and yes we do recognise all the concerns that academics have about the particular ways in which they want that research to be communicated, to be distributed and so on; but perhaps we have to remind ourselves that the taxpayer is actually paying for that research in the first place. taxpayers include not just the public, but small businesses as well as larger companies.
So how do we take those sorts of aspirations forward? Well as the Chairman said, David Willetts was concerned about this issue, he decided to hold a Roundtable, which we had in March 2011. After that round table we thought a bit further about how can we take it forward, we decided on the merits of forming a group, which I found myself involved in setting up, the Finch Group, which a number of the speakers here today were party to. We were very fortunate in having the range of expertise and knowledge around the table. I have to present at the meeting. That was the level of depth of feeling that existed in terms of the different perceptions and what the benefits might be. But we brought the group together and Janet Finch did an excellent job of taking it forward and producing a report which everybody has complemented.
And during last year there were quite a few other things going on besides. We heard about the Royal Society report on open data. The Finch Report was published in June, we issued our Government response by July. Some people have criticised that as being rather short, but then, as you know, other times Government is accused of taking too long to reach a decision on certain things.
The terms of reference were as shown. I w range of policy considerations were quite wide. You know we needed to balance the interests of the publishing industry, the learned societies, the researchers themselves, and the public and the overall Government objectives to improve transparency.
today about the advantages of CC BY in terms of being able to do that in an unrestricted way.
rapid rate of change and I can understand why some universities and some publishers feel as though this is one series of threats that they are facing in some respects, but at the same time there are opportunities in those threats. What we have tried to do in the policy is determine a way in which the rate of change is such, as Martin and Tony have said, which accommodates the transition per referred to. This is not going to happen overnight, and nobody expects it to happen overnight. And of course, as we have all been saying, we are concerned with sustainability.
1 See http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/gtr.aspx
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 64 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
So, we accepted all the recommendations, apart from the VAT one. As somebody2 position that was being taken by RCUK as well, that there should be a preference for Gold. We made it quite clear in the response to Finch, and if you look at the wording in recommendation 10, in the response, which is an open letter from David Willetts to Janet Finch, it clearly states there that yes, we do have this preference for Gold, and yes we do, in the case of embargo periods for Green, have an aspiration, a desire for it be 6-12
Charge for Gold, that a longer embargo period may be more appropriate. Twelve and 12 and 24 months was
Economic Forum, in terms of the embargo periods it has stipulated for many publications which it supports, the great majority are covered by that 12-24 month sort of range.
There was a reference made as well, that where there may be exceptional circumstances, that where perhaps
interest is served by this information being out in the public domain as soon as possible. To have it locked away for maybe 3 years, one would have to ask oneself the question, is one also acting in the public interest?
economy approach and the important point being the decision is being taken by the researchers and the universities, the HEIs and their institutions.
for the UK, what about the rest of the world? Are we going to be running the risk by being a first mover of losing out compared to everybody else? I think we would turn it round the other way, and say no, we actually have the advantage by being a first mover of preparing everybody for what is happening in any
e compare that internationally, more widely, countries like Austria, Germany, they do have funds available for Gold open happening in the UK.
At the time that we wrote the response to the Finch Report, we were not aware of a particular piece of research by Laakso and Bjork who were quoted earlier on from a 2009 study. A paper which they produced only late last year interestingly means that their latest findings indicated that of the 1.6 million global articles, according to the Scopus database, 17%, or 340,000 of those were open access in 2011. Of that 17%, interestingly, 11% were Gold open access and 6% were Green open access. So we have a situation where the facts, the evidence is actually telling us that not only is there a trend towards open access, which we are all
Gold open acc
Laakso and Bjork refer to their being 56,000 publications. Also in terms of geographical distribution, yes Europe is a main player, 37%, but North America was 19% and Asia was 25%. So this is a global trend, this is not just something that is happening here.
t the relationship between open access is and the sort of correlation that, you know, you move to open access and suddenly become a lot wealthier. I t likely to be the case that the wealthier countries see that there is a case for distributing information to a greater extent, but it probably requires you to get to a certain point before you feel as though that is something that you want to do.
2 Allegedly Michael Faraday who contributed significantly to the study of electromagnetism and electrochemistry.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 65 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
3 is up on
ognised by RCUK, and it does explain what Mark and Tony have been explaining before in terms of precisely when the longer embargo periods might apply. So this is something which, if you are still slightly confused about precisely what the decision logic is, this hopefully will help.
In terms of what we are doing in terms of future steps, there is a Research Sector Transparency Board which David Willetts now Chairs. This will be looking at just precisely how a number of these open access developments are playing out, as well as the review or the progress report for the Finch Report which Michael
At the moment, as some of you will know, we are busy also responding to Parliament on precisely what is
Willetts appeared before the House of Lords on the 29th January. We are just in the process of finalising our written response to the House of Commons, which is due by the end of this week.
And I think I will stop at that point. The other slides I have are in relation to data which may not be of general f a run through of how we came to develop the policy, the way in the UK, and the manner in which we are trying to be as flexible and as accommodating as possible, while making the sense of direction quite clear.
Thank you Chairman.
Ron Egginton PowerPoint presentation can be downloaded from the following link: http://www.westminsterforumprojects.co.uk/forums/slides/RonEgginton.pdf
3 In the slide presentation and at http://www.publishers.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2299:finch-willetts- rcuk-green-oa-and-embargoes&catid=503:pa-press-releases-and-comments&Itemid=1618
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 66 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Open access policy Questions and comments from the floor
Tristram Hunt MP: of quick questions to Ron if anyone has a burning question now or perhaps you can catch Ron afterwards. He has been nothing, if not open, in developing this policy.
Helena Djurkovic: Political Studies Association again. Ron, I have a question because actually with those figures there, so I
about 3.5% of all the articles published are open access from that
arguments why HSS should be treated differently. What I d quite understand is why the policy had to be introduced wholesale
why not allow STEM where the real impetus has come, to go ahead with this, even to provide the incentive with your APCs and whatever and actually let the rest of us catch up really, because we
come out, and for this policy to be adapted to allow for the very different circumstances in which we operate.
Ron Egginton: correctly interpreted the figures there, but I think the figure I showed was 56,000 in the arts and humanities out of 340,000 which is a lot more than 2.5%, I mean we are talking about 17% of open access papers in the arts and humanities area, would appear to be the case. So I think what that shows is that there are people who are in those disciplines who do want to have their work published in an open access way, because it is, after all, their choice in a sense. I
arrogant as to assume that the research which emerges from our arts and humanities disciplines, is not of as much interest, or potentially of as much value to the wider economy as that which is emerging from our science and technology disciplines. So we
that sense. I think that was the view taken by RCUK, which is an association of all of the seven Research Councils in the UK, that would have been considered by the Chief Executives and the members of the Councils to determine just precisely how they wanted to proceed in a collective way. They reached the collective view, on behalf of all the Councils, in that regard. Now in terms of
owledged that there may be more of a propensity in the case of the arts and humanities to opt for the Green sort of embargo period option than to go for Gold. But David Willetts was particularly keen to ensure that the Gold option was available to all of the disciplines, because in a sense, that provides the arts and humanities or any publication, any learned society, to charge up front for what the full cost is of that particular publication in that journal. Therefore rather than being denied access to funds which provide for the sustainability and the ability to move to this model, everybody has got access to it.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 67 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Tristram Hunt MP: Ron, thank you very much indeed and thank you for your work and your presentation.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 68 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
closing remarks Tristram Hunt MP, Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing
Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to leave it there and we are going to move to lunch.
I would finally like to say something about Departments and Whitehall, because it seems to me that when BIS develops these policies, as a result of having universities not in a Department for Education, but in a Department for Business, you begin to get certain relationships and certain sympathies which would not necessarily be there in other Departments, and my criticism of this process would be that yes, it seems the quite a few years and I think there had to be greater involvement and outreach with the humanities sector, than we previously had, so these kind of issues in terms of embargoes and all the rest of it were behind that. And I know you will tell me that there were any number of consultations and any number of conversations, but I can within BIS and those kind of relationships, I think, has those kind of effects, but we are dealing with it now.
And shall leave it on that controversial, tricksy note, and thank you all very much for coming.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 69 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Westminster Higher Education Forum Jonny Roberts, Senior Producer
Thank you ladies and gentlemen, thank you Tristram. Just a final few words from the Forum.
I just wanted to say thank you to all of you for coming, and we will get on to thanking our speakers finally, but I just want to mention in your delegate packs there are feedback forms and any feedback you can give us is more than welcome and it helps us plan these events more effectively in the future, so please do take a moment just to fill those in and drop them at the front desk.
your time, other than to say I hope you will join me in thanking our Chairs, our speakers, in the time honoured and traditional way. And I hope you have a good day. Thank you.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 70 Westminster Higher Education Forum Keynote Seminar: Open access research and the future for academic publishing 5th February 2013
Comments Dr Krishna Chinthapalli Reporter BMJ
Academics at a seminar at the Royal Society have raised concerns over the forthcoming open access policy developed by the government and Research Councils UK.
Frederick Friend, honorary director of scholarly communication at University College London, who spoke at the event on 5 prioritise open access through the payment [by authors] of article processing charges rather than through long established repositories leaves the UK in an isolated position vis-a-vis open access developments in other countries and with an extra bill for the taxpayer in a time of austerity.
ional payments to the high profit publishers for open access, while libraries are still paying substantial sums for big deal subscriptions. A fraction of the money to be spent on these charges would enable more citeable peer reviewed articles to be made available through
$6.3bn) a year on research, stipulated that from 1 April 2013 there must be unrestricted online access to publications resulting from work funded by its councils.1 2 Specifically, it stated that the preferred option, known as gold open access, is for journals to make a research article available immediately on their website. In return they could ask for an article processing charge from authors. If this option was not offered, then the journal to be deposited in a repository within a period such as six or 12 months, known as green open access.
Tom McLeish, professor and pro vice chancellor at Durham University and another speaker at the seminar, said that there would be increased costs above and beyond the existing research budget for publication costs. Maja Maricevic, head of higher education at the British Library, agreed. She said that both green and gold open access should be equally acceptable to Research Councils UK and that other new models were being developed in any case.
outputs network, said that RCUK funded about 26 000 papers a year and that extra funding to research institutions would enable gold open access. A £10m one- off fund was announced last year, with a further £100m over the next five years, to implement open access.3 He acknowledged that the funds may not be enough, in which case green open access was acceptable.
Tony Peatfield, director of corporate affairs at the Medical Research Council, part of Research Councils UK, noted that immediacy of access may be more important in biomedical research than in other fields of study. in favour of gold is immediate open access. In areas like health, that is very important. If you have immediate open access, people can act upon it, work from it, and build upon it straightaway. If is delayed.
second argument is that if you are paying for gold open access then one of the requirements is for a licence which allows
The BMJ has a gold open access policy, which offers immediate open access with a Creative Commons (creativecommons.org) licence for attributed, non-commercial reuse. It offers a waiver policy for authors unable to pay the article processing charge.
© Westminster Higher Education Forum Important: note conditions of use on front page Page 71