OA: today, tomorrow and beyond a view from the Wellcome

Transcription

1 OA: today, tomorrow and beyond a view from the Wellcome COASP, 21 st September 2017 Robert Kiley, Wellcome Trust Head Open Research (r.kiley@wellcome.ac.uk) ORCID: Slides made available under

2 Context

3 Scale of OA (legal) Estimated that 45% of content published in 2015 is now Open Source:

4 Scale of OA (illegal) Estimated that Sci-Hub's database contains 68.9% of all 81.6 million scholarly articles This rises to 85.2% for those published in closed access journals Source:

5 OA in the news (again)

6 What is Wellcome doing?

7 Two areas to discuss Open Research (in general and in brief) Open Access to research publications (in particular)

8 Wellcome and Open Research Dedicated Open Research team established Committed to ensuring research outputs can be accessed and used in ways that maximise health & societal benefit Making these outputs more widely available holds the potential to: accelerate discovery and its application help ensure findings can be validated and reproduce increase efficiency reduce duplication and waste

9 Wellcome and Open Access (publications) Providing researchers with range of publishing opportunities Supporting new publishing platform Wellcome Open Research (WOR) and continuing to support elife Strong advocate of preprints Developed a set of publisher requirements Continuing to fund fully fund OA publication costs Compliance (%) % of papers in PMC % of papers in PMC Month Around 80% of Wellcome-attributed articles made OA in line with policy

10 Wellcome Open Research publishing platform

11 Wellcome Open Research: making the sharing of results. Faster Transparent Reproducible Inclusive Cost-effective

12 Wellcome Open Research: making the sharing of results. Faster Transparent Reproducible Inclusive Cost-effective

13 Wellcome Open Research: making the sharing of results. Faster Transparent Reproducible Inclusive Cost-effective

14 Wellcome Open Research: making the sharing of results. Faster Transparent Reproducible Inclusive Cost-effective 14

15 Wellcome Open Research: making the sharing of results. Faster Transparent Reproducible Inclusive Cost-effective Average APC for Wellcome Open Research (inc VAT) Average APC across all journals used by Wellcome authors (inc VAT)

16 Adoption Title: Number of Wellcome- a3ributed ar5cles published between 15th Nov 2016 and 22nd August 2017 Scien'fic Reports 234 [search] PLOS ONE 155 [search] Nature Communica'ons 119 [search] Wellcome Open Research 100 [search] published ar'cles of which 62 have, as of 22nd August, passed peer review and are in PubMed elife 69 [search] PNAS 61 [search] PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases 52 [search] Cell Reports 48 [search] Malaria Journal 38 [search] BMJ Open 35 [search] Journal of Neuroscience 32 [search]

17 Some feedback

18 Preprints Preprints seen as another way in which dissemination of research outputs can be made faster and more inclusive (i.e. all types of outputs not just research articles) Wellcome grantee s can now cite preprints in grant applications and end of grant reports

19 Publisher requirements Spell out what we require when APC paid Deposit Licence Invoice All major publishers have asserted they are compliant And, there has been a significant improvement in compliance with our requirements analysis shows 91% of the articles are compliant with the open access criteria; compliance was 74%. But some publishers offer licence choices which continues to cause confusion and adds to administrative overhead for all stakeholders

20 Next steps for Wellcome

21 Review our OA policy Policy in place since 2005; last reviewed in 2012 Landscape changed OA is mainstream Costs are increasing & little evidence that effective market forces are at play New options to consider role of preprints, Scholarly Communications Licence, Wellcome Open Research

22 Cost modelling Early modelling suggest that over next 5 years Wellcome will spend between 37m and 46m on APC costs

23 Meeting OA costs (Wellcome/COAF) Hybrid OA 52% more expensive that full OA Median APC increased by 6% over past 12 months

24 What to do with hybrid OA? Growing call for funders to stop paying hybrids Too expensive Double dipping Deposit/licence issue almost exclusively pertain to hybrids But.massively popular with researchers In , 71% of articles for which an APC was levied were published in hybrid journals and not all hybrids fit the caricature above Royal Society (e.g. transparent pricing model; articles CC-BY, deposited at PMC) Subscription costs fall in line with increase in OA in this case subscription price fell by 7%

25 Early options under consideration Option 1 - Do nothing Number of publications (pa) Median APC (across all jns) Option 2 Stop funding hybrid (assume authors switch to fully OA) Total cost Research spend % on OA m 900m 1.7% Number of publications (pa) Median APC (fully OA journals) Total cost Research spend % on OA m 900m 1.25% Option 3 Introduce funding cap (on hybrids) Follow lead of FWF and set cap on hybrids. Cap at 2.5k would save 0.5m impact 308 journals; cap of 2k save 1m

26 Early options under consideration Option 4 become greener More actively promote green and explore role of preprints in OA compliance Define licence requirements Option 5 Change model for paying APCs Develop a less squeamish approach to offsetting and actively encourage their use and limit this support to offsetting deals which move to a total cost of publication model Consider alternative methods of managing APC payments And any combination of the above and explore whether open peer review form part of the policy?

27 Developing a common funder policy? We are mindful of the administrative & communication challenges with different funder policies But.we need to be careful what we wish for as a common policy may be less progressive Source:

28 A look to the future.. (and what we need to do to get there)

29 Journal subscription end of life? Trying to limit access to scholarly content seems almost impossible (e.g. SciHub) More OA journals being launched though subscription titles are also still being launched Growing call to move to Total Cost of Ownership model Springer Compact Model In 2016 Springer published just over 300k articles, of which 27% were OA Projekt DEAL push from German universities to move away from subscriptions

30 Rise of funder platforms. Growing number of funder platforms including Gates, EC and others Development of Open Research Central Currently an aggregation service In time, potentially a publishing platform but for these platforms to disrupt the current publishing model we need to stop using journal names as a proxy for quality to develop means by which content published on open platforms can be badged for impact 30

31 Moving beyond journal names as a proxy for quality: an evolving blueprint 1. Policy 2. Implementation Remove biases which could lead applicants to report only on journal articles Provide guidance to review panels Consider asking applicants how they practise open research 3. Engagement Be explicit how the scientific productivity of applicants is assessed Work with institutions to encourage good practices WRT promotion and tenure committees Celebrate those who do it well, communicating case studies etc.

32 Explore new ways to assign impact Many journals conflate two functions: Peer review to validate the science Editorial review seeking to identify research which is exemplary, ground-breaking & novel Need to develop a new way to identify the best research that doesn t rely on journal name Interested in developing an experiment in which open articles published under CC-BY, and where the peer review reports are open and signed can be exposed to a second editorial review

33 Plug gaps in the infrastructure Provide good funder metadata Make the collection of funder data a mandatory part of submission process Funders should explore a grant registry (assigning a persistent ID to a grant) Remove friction in APC payment & verification processes Even more important as services (screening, peer review, copy-editing, publishing) are un-bundled Sustainability Coordinated international support of core data resources for the life sciences

34 Closing comments The publishing ecosystem will continue to evolve Pre-printing will become the default behaviour (in the life sciences) Open, signed peer review will become widely adopted and integrated into the services preprint servers offer Articles will become fully actionable no longer static documents (e.g. see elife s Reproducible Document Stack, or the Code Ocean platform) Overlay journals where experts identify the best/novel/ground-breaking research will become widespread All research content become open; non-oa publishers adopt freemium model a read only copy available for free, revenue comes from provision of other Data, not publications, becomes the new currency of the realm for researchers.

35 Questions

36 Other slides

37 (and btw we use reviews for everything else)