Unlocking the repository: A strategy for increasing the uptake of green open access

Recommendations about publishing and publication procurement practices across the health and social care system

Economic perspectives on the future of academic publishing: Introduction to the special issue

NIHR Open Access Policy Review Stakeholder Survey Report

Ensuring open access for publicly funded research

Background. While there is evidence that open access (OA) has been growing (Hobert et al., 2021; Piwowar et al., 2018), many publications remain behind a paywall. In many cases, journal or publisher self-archiving policies allow researchers to make a version of their publication openly accessible in a repository, sometimes after an embargo period (green OA). The UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science (UNESCO, 2021) adopted in November 2021 recommends several priority areas of action, including fostering a culture of open science by ensuring diversity in scholarly communications and supporting non-commercial publishing models. In this study, we evaluated the potential of journal articles from clinical trials conducted at German university medical centres to become green OA. Methods. We assessed a sample of clinical trials registered with ClinicalTrials.gov or DRKS completed between 2009 and 2017 (Riedel et al., 2021). The analysis was limited to their results published between 2010 and 2020 in 1907 unique journal articles with a DOI resolved in Unpaywall. We queried Unpaywall (OurResearch) via its API to identify paywalled publications in our sample. A publication was considered paywalled if it was not accessible via any OA route (gold, green, hybrid, or bronze). We then queried Shareyourpaper (OA.Works) via its API to obtain self-archiving permissions of publications in our sample. Shareyourpaper combines publication metadata and policy information to derive selfarchiving permissions at the level of individual publications. Publications were considered to have the potential for green OA if a “best permission” was found for archiving the accepted or published version in an institutional repository, and if the embargo (if applicable) had elapsed by the query date. The Unpaywall API was queried on 13 May 2022 and the Shareyourpaper API on 14 May 2022. Results. We identified 870 (46%) articles that were not openly accessible via any route (gold, green, hybrid, or bronze). Of these, 753 (87%) had a “best permission” in Shareyourpaper for archiving the accepted or published version in an institutional repository. At the time of the query, 136 (15%) of otherwise paywalled publications with a permission for self-archiving in an institutional repository had been made openly accessible via this route. Conclusions. For clinical trials to generate useful and generalizable medical knowledge, their results should be openly accessible, in line with established guidelines (World Health Organization, 2017). We found, however, that many results from clinical trials conducted at German university medical centres remained behind a paywall, even though they could be self-archived in an institutional repository. Our findings suggest that the potential of green OA to broaden the dissemination of scientific knowledge and ensure equitable access remains relatively unfulfilled and encourage an ongoing intervention at the Charité to increase clinical trial transparency. This case study clearly illustrates how openly available tools can be used to obtain actionable information related to self-archiving at scale, and thereby empower authors and institutions to increase science discoverability. Funding. This project was funded by the BMBF (01PW18012).

PurposeThis study aims to analyze Open Access (OA) publishing trends and policy perspectives in India. Different aspects, such as the growth of OA journals digital repositories, the proportion of OA availability to research literature and the status of OA mandates and policies are studied.Design/methodology/approachData for analyzing OA trends were gathered from multiple data sources, including Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), OpenDOAR, SCImago and Web of Science (WoS) databases. DOAJ and OpenDOAR were used for extracting OA journals and digital repository data. SCImago Journal and Country ranking portal and WoS database were used to obtain Indian publication data for assessing the proportion of OA to research literature. ROARMAP was used to study OA mandates and policies adopted by universities, research institutions and research funders in India. OA mandates and policies of major regulatory bodies and funding agencies were also reviewed using secondary sources of information and related websites.FindingsIndia ranks number 15 and 17 globally for OA journals and OA repositories, with 317 journals and 98 repositories. Although India’s proportion to OA publications is 23% (7% below the world average of 30%), the annual growth rate of OA publications is around 18%. Although the governing bodies and institutions have made efforts to mandate researchers to adopt OA publishing and self-archiving, its implementation is quite low among Indian researchers, as only three institutions (out of 18 listed in the ROARMAP) are defined the embargo period. Funding agencies in India do not provide financial assistance to authors for the payment of Article Processing Charges despite mandates that research is deposited in OA repositories. India lacks a national OA policy but plans to implement a “one nation one subscription” formula to provide OA to scientific literature to all its citizens.Research limitations/implicationsThe study has certain limitations. Because much of India’s research output is published in local journals that are not indexed in WoS, the study recommends conducting further analyses of publications using Scopus and other databases to understand the country’s OA publishing proportion better. A further study based on feedback from different stakeholders through a survey may be conducted for formulating a national OA policy.Originality/valueThe study is the first that used multiple data sources for investigating different facets of OA publishing in India, including OA journals, digital repositories, OA research output and OA mandates and policies for publicly funded research. The findings will be helpful for researchers and policymakers interested in promoting OA adoption among researchers worldwide.

Open access (OA) is free, unrestricted access to electronic versions of scholarly publications. For peer‐reviewed journal articles, there are two main routes to OA: publishing in OA journals (gold OA) or archiving of article copies or manuscripts at other web locations (green OA). This study focuses on summarizing and extending current knowledge about green OA. A synthesis of previous studies indicates that green OA coverage of all published journal articles is approximately 12%, with substantial disciplinary variation. Typically, green OA copies become available after considerable time delays, partly caused by publisher‐imposed embargo periods, and partly by author tendencies to archive manuscripts only periodically. Although green OA copies should ideally be archived in proper repositories, a large share is stored on home pages and similar locations, with no assurance of long‐term preservation. Often such locations contain exact copies of published articles, which may infringe on the publisher's exclusive rights. The technical foundation for green OA uploading is becoming increasingly solid largely due to the rapid increase in the number of institutional repositories. The number of articles within the scope of OA mandates, which strongly influence the self‐archival rate of articles, is nevertheless still low.

<i>ChemElectroChem</i> is Becoming Fully Open Access

Journal article access: Free, open, and subscription

The open access availability of publications by Catalonia’s CERCA research centres was analysed to determine the extent to which authors use open access journals, repositories, social networks and other websites to disseminate their research results. A sample of 3,730 journal articles published by authors from CERCA research centres between 2011 and 2015 and available on Web of Science (out of a total output of 44,423) was analysed to identify how many were available in open access, full-text format. The results revealed that 75,8% of the total (2,828 articles) had at least one version available in open access, but just 52% (1,940 articles) had at least one version available in either journals (whether pure or hybrid open access journals or those with embargo periods) or repositories, a finding that highlights the powerful role played by academic social networks in the sharp increase in open access availability. Of the 2,828 articles for which at least one open access version was found, a total of 9,868 copies were located. With respect to versions, the publisher’s final version, i.e. the type formatted for publication by journal publishers, was found in 75,3% of cases. The number of articles published in open access journals (567) was very close to the number of articles published in hybrid journals or journals with embargo periods (624). Only 40,4% of the articles in the sample were located in repositories, being the subject repositories the heaviest used. Fifty percent of the articles (1,881 publications) were posted on academic social networks, the most popular of which were ResearchGate and Academia. According to thematic areas, all six areas (science, life sciences, medical and health sciences, engineering and architecture and humanities) exceeded 70% of articles in open access.

Open access publications are those where following the publication itself, the publishers allow anyone to access the article or publication to read, or download without any restriction. It is believed that publishing in open access journals can increase the visibility of the publication, although uncertainties prevail. In a bid to improve the PBRF ratings, the College research committee in its monthly meeting agreed to organise an Open Access Seminar in the college. The seminar was organised on 4th of June, 2015, Thursday. Four speakers were identified. They were: Peter Lund and Anton Angelo from the University of Canterbury Central Library and Researcn Unit, Peter Binfield from PeerJ, and Viriginia Barbour from Australian Open Access Support Group. The topics of the seminar included a brief introduction to open access publishing and the state of the scenario in NZ and Australia and exploration of the issues around green and gold open access, and future directions as to what can be done to increase participation in open access. The seminar was also designed to be an open to all, and free flowing discussion. This seminar followed a format of webinar and on the spot presentations, questions and answers. A web based page was set up using the openly accessible Adobe Connect "room" where participants could connect even if they were not able to attend in person. Dr Binfield and Barbour were overseas speakers and they connected using the webinar (Adobe Connect). Mr Lund and Angelo were local speakers and they came to the meeting hall directly and spoke. A resource website was set up and the event was recorded for later viewing. The event was publicised across the university and through online channels. About 30 individuals attended the meeting in person, and ten participants joined online. Mr Lund introduced the concept of open access at the University of Canterbury, and introduced the concepts of gold and green open access; Mr Angelo introduced the concepts of creative commons, and Drs Binfield and Barbour discussed models of open access and the situation in Australia. The floor was open for questions, and clarifications and discussions from the audience participation. Key takeaway lessons from the seminar included: at the University of Canterbury, scholars are active in publishing in Open Access channels; green open access is popular in Australia and in New Zealand; newer channels and novel publishing models uitlising the Open Access formats are emerging and becoming popular; while some reservations about quality in open access exist, quality of peer review in OA journals were at par.

Favorable conditions for the development of open access have been created in Lithuania: in the absence of scholarly commercial publishing, some scholarly journals in 1999 were already freely available on the Internet. eLABa, in 2011 launched as a national repository, laid the foundation for the development of “green” open access in Lithuania. Currently 13 repositories in Lithuania are maintained and various legal acts related to the implementation of open access in the country have been adopted. The aim of this article is to analyze how “green” open access is being developed in Lithuania in terms of infrastructure, regulation, and implementation. International, national, and institutional documents regulating the implementation of open access were analyzed using the document analysis method. The analysis showed that a legal environ­ment which complies with the provisions of international documents regulating open access has been formed. In the analyzed documents, the authors of Lithuanian scholarly publications are required to submit their peer-reviewed publications to eLABa or another specified reposi­tory within a specific period. This requirement, as shown by the analysis of statistical indicators of the national repository eLABa, is fulfilled to a very small extent. Only 3.4% of all scholarly publications for which metadata had been submitted to eLABa were uploaded as full text documents at the end of 2019. It means that scholars provide biblio­graphic data on publications to eLABa, but upload only a small part of the full-text documents to it. One of the reasons for the low level of activity in promoting scholarly publications to eLABa could be that most Lithuanian scholarly journals are open access in nature and are already publicly available. Also, uploading a full-text scholarly publication to a repository, not just registering it, does not have a direct impact on the at­testation of the researchers at most universities in Lithuania. However, the low use of institutional repositories as a channel for publishing scholarly publications is a common problem not only in Lithuania, but also in other countries. There is a global trend of subject repositories being used for the dissemination of full-text scholarly publications, while institu­tional repositories – for providing bibliographic information on research output and uploading student works. This situation, where only a very small proportion of all registered scholarly publications are uploaded to institutional repositories, does not allow scientific institutions to ensure the long-term preservation of scholarly works. In general, it can be seen that the debate on open access and, at the same time, the way to imple­ment “green” open access, is becoming more and more concrete, focusing on specific, practical issues. Instead of considering whether open access is needed, discussion is moved on to the question of what measures should be taken to address the lower-than-expected scholars’ involvement in the implementation of open access publishing. Therefore, the research of scholars’ open access publishing behaviour is important in order to better understand the needs of authors for the dissemination of open ac­cess scholarly publications. In the case of the implementation of “green” open access in Lithuania, it is important to find out what determines the choice of the scholars to provide or not publications to eLABa and / or international repositories as well as to investigate if there is a need to create Lithuanian subject-based repositories.

Introduction . The COVID-19 pandemic is a global challenge but at the same time it creates a unique situation for the advancement of science, scholarly communication and open access (OA). We studied impact of the pandemic and self-isolation on bibliometric indicators: the number and structure of publications in terms of fields of research and OA models. Materials and methods. The study employs original keyword searches and services of WoS CC database and InCites platfom of Clarivate Analytics. It studies the dataset of WoS CC and the COVID-publications retrieved with the keyword searches. Results and discussion . In 2020, we see a dramatic increase in the overall number of COVID-publications and a two-time increase in the number of publications in Social Sciences. The structure of the 2020 publications in terms of OA models indicate the 36 % of WoS CC articles and 87 % of COVID articles in OA. The OA journal articles in a single copy make 20 % of WoS CC publications, the OA articles in multiple copies on the journal platform and in repositories make 60 % of COVID-publications. In 2006, the OA repositories were mainly populated through self-archiving of paywall journal articles, whereas in 2020, the OA journals make the main self-archiving channel. They comprise, respectively, 92 % and 97 % of the input from the WoS CC and COVID datasets. The structure of COVID publications in hybrid and paywall journals has been modified: in 2020, 38 % of articles in those journals were published in hybrid OA. In 2018, that number was 12 %. The proportion of “paywall” articles moved to repositories after the embargo period is low compared to the possibilities for self-archiving provided by publishers. Conclusion . The pandemic of the novel coronavirus changed the bibliometric indicators of COVID publications: the number and structure of the datasets broken by fields of research and OA models. In the next study, we analyse citation impact and usage of COVID-publications.

O pen access (OA) refers to the practice of making digital content freely available online. While digital content can mean a variety of things, it most commonly refers to peer-reviewed scholarly research articles but has increasingly included a wider dissemination of scholarly pursuits such as monographs, papers, dissertations, technical/project reports, presentations, and data. Peter Suber, current director of the Office for Scholarly Communication Office at Harvard University and one of the leading pioneers of the OA movement, defines OA literature as “digital, online, free of charge for everyone with an internet connection, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” With a recent interest in OA over the past several years by faculty and researchers alike, it is interesting to note that OA publishing dates back to the 1990s when journal subscription prices began skyrocketing and the need for different business models became apparent. At that time, professional publishing organizations and independent publishers (scientists/scholars) began working together to develop a business model to support OA. As OA emerged as a new publishing model as an attempt to support publishing organizations and scientists/scholars, it is today an established process of delivering scientific communication with support from the government and researcher funders as opposed to subscription fees. Several options are available for authors to consider when making their scholarly pursuits OA to others: OA journals (“Gold” OA), OA repositories (“Green” OA), or OA options with traditional, subscription journals (Hybrid OA). Authors publishing in an OA journal (Gold QA) have their scholarly work accepted to a specific OA journal with the article uploaded to the publisher’s website. An OA journal may or may not charge a publisher’s fee. A common misunderstanding is that all OA journals use an “author-pays” type business model. This is not true. While some OA journals require a publication fee, it is the author’s employer or funder (sponsor of the research) who sometimes pays the fee. In some situations, publication fees are waived or universities maintain funds to pay fees on behalf of faculty/researchers that choose to publish in fee-based OA journals. Another common misunderstanding is that articles in OA journals are not peer-reviewed or peer-reviewed to a lesser extent. OA and limited peer review are totally separate issues. With the publishing community having a vested interest in OA, issues of quality (rigorous peer-review process) are of paramount importance to ensure the overall publishing system remain stable. Authors publishing in OA repositories (Green QA), sometimes referred to as “self-archiving,” have their scholarly work placed in a repository organized by discipline (eg, OpenMed@NIC, including biomedical, medical informatics, dental, nursing, and pharmaceutical sciences) or institution (eg, eScholarship at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester). Institutional repositories are developed and maintained by librarians who are active players in helping create a culture of OA in their respective institutions, thus supporting the core value of access to information. OA repositories do not perform peer review themselves. However, they generally host scholarly works peer-reviewed elsewhere.

Open Access has emerged as an important movement worldwide during the last decade. There are several initiatives now that persuade researchers to publish in open access journals and to archive their pre- or post-print versions of papers in repositories. Institutions and funding agencies are also promoting ways to make research outputs available as open access. This paper looks at open access levels and patterns in research output from India by computationally analyzing research publication data obtained from Web of Science for India for the last five years (2014-2018). The corresponding data from other connected platforms -- Unpaywall and Sci-Hub -- are also obtained and analyzed. The results obtained show that about 24% of research output from India, during last five years, is available in legal forms of open access as compared to world average of about 30%. More articles are available in gold open access as compared to green and bronze. On the contrary, more than 90% of the research output from India is available for free download in Sci-Hub. We also found disciplinary differentiation in open access, but surprisingly these patterns are different for gold-green and black open access forms. Sci-Hub appears to be complementing the legal gold-green open access for less covered disciplines in them. The central institutional repositories in India are found to have low volume of research papers deposited.