OAI13

TBD

The open academic infrastructure and the scientific journal in Venezuela

Latin America maintains an academic infrastructure, which in its great majority belongs to public academic institutions where universities and publishers drive and promote open content through platforms that offer free software, among them, the Universidad Nacional Experimental de los Llanos Occidentales Ezequiel Zamora (Unellez) and operates in the provinces of Apure, Barinas, Cojedes and Portuguesa, being the largest in the western part of Venezuela, The Unellez, has a Journal System, which contains 26 scientific journals of different disciplines. Among them, the Journal of the Latin American Digital Observatory Ezequiel Zamora (Odlez), which has been operating since 2017 and its areas of knowledge are social and political sciences. However, due to the political crisis affecting Venezuela, it shakes all dimensions of the country, and consequently the Educational System. Many will wonder how the academic infrastructure of scientific journals in Venezuela works? From the experience of Odlez, we can express, in terms of governance, this type of project only receives support from the university in the use of an open source free Software platform (Open Journal Systems), which guarantees open standards, data collection, open content, among others. Sustainability is limited by institutional funding, resources are managed autonomously by the national and international editorial team (ad honorem) and consequently the operation depends on the human capital that composes it. There are no government programs or projects that support these initiatives with financial and non-financial resources. This increases the gaps in the open academic infrastructure in the country, since the technology and resources necessary to maintain the sustainability and security of scientific communication in Venezuela are still in use due to the use of open source free software.

A case study: OpenCitations, an open science infrastructure seeking long-term sustainability

OpenCitations is a community-based open science infrastructure organization with the mission of harvesting and openly publishing accurate and comprehensive metadata describing the world's academic publications and the scholarly citations that link them, under open licenses at zero cost and without restriction for third-party analysis and re-use. To build an infrastructure that is sustainable in the long term and follows pure Open Science principles, OpenCitations has adopted in full the Principles for Open Scholarly Infrastructures, and regularly monitors its compliance to the three categories of “Insurance”, “Governance” and “Sustainability”. While OpenCitations fully satisfies the “Insurance” principles, it still lacks an executive body besides the directors and is far from achieving complete financial sustainability. In order to strengthen the weak points, OpenCitations has recently launched two internal Working Groups dedicated to the themes of “Governance Evolution” and “Community Building”, which in OpenCitations are deeply connected. Indeed, the current OpenCitations’ governance relies on the administrative management of the Research Centre for Open Scholarly Metadata, an independent research centre within the University of Bologna, whose fundamental bodies are OpenCitations’ Council (made up of OpenCitations members) and the elected International Advisory Board, which guides OpenCitations strategies. OpenCitations’ stakeholder community is so integrated into OpenCitations’ existence both in a financial and strategic way, and with its advice it ensures that OpenCitations’ original aim of free provision of open and free bibliographic and citation data, services, and software is maintained. However, despite the valuable support from the community and the successful involvement in the SCOSS second funding cycle, OpenCitations is still seeking a ‘business model’ which could help move it from being a 'sustainable infrastructure' (in POSI terms) to being a financially sustained infrastructure upon which the global scholarly community can rely for open bibliographic and citation metadata for many years to come.

The Open Book Collective: An Infrastructure for Equity and Diversity

This paper introduces the Open Book Collective, a new member-governed charity devoted to supporting the production and dissemination of Open Access Books from small-to-medium publishers. The OBC is committed to supporting equity and bibliodiversity in OA publishing. This means supporting small-to-medium publishers in diverse geographic and linguistic settings, while making content produced by OBC members accessible to a wider range of authors and institutions. Our model supports publishers in moving away from Book Processing Charges, which can re-entrench the inequalities already inherent in academia, leading to a stultification of fields. The OBC positions itself as an alternative to the monopolies of a handful of dominant publishing houses in academia across the globe. Our membership, comprised of librarians, publishers, OA service providers, librarians, and other supporters works collectively bring about a fairer and more sustainable model of open book publishing. From our development research in collaboration with our library colleagues, we know that many libraries and institutions wish to support OA Books and have budget set aside to do so. But a confusing array of options, lack of easily readable metadata, and the varied workflow of OA publishers makes it difficult and time-consuming for libraries and their institutions to know where to invest their support. The OBC platform offers a fast and simple way for libraries to compare publishers’ catalogues, packages, business plans, and values, allowing the creation of pre-made or bespoke subscription packages before generating a quotation. The OBC then manages the subscription, and delivers benefits to libraries including maximally readable metadata, easy integration into existing workflows, and a guarantee of quality via the vetting and application process our publisher members must go through. We assess all membership packages on the platform, to ensure they are priced fairly and that funding will support high quality OA publishing and distribution.

Towards sustainable open infrastructure: The case of CORE

CORE is one of the largest indexing services for open access research papers from repositories and journals. It is a not-for-profit service dedicated to the open access mission and the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). With over 11,000 data providers, it has supported open research for over ten years, as well as assisting institutions to comply with funders’ requirements for open availability of funded content. From September 2023 CORE will no longer be funded by Jisc, but will move to a membership model, with its data providing members being able to influence CORE's development roadmap. As we all know, research funding is typically for a limited duration and susceptible to termination at any moment. A Membership model brings several sustainability benefits, including increased income diversity as well as an opportunity for a more direct interaction between the CORE service and its members. Our vision is for CORE to remain not-for-profit and to continue to provide free access for the vast majority of its users. We have therefore designed a three-tier membership model with the lowest tier being completely free and the two other tiers delivering extra benefits in the form of guaranteed technical support and tools for open access compliance checking with funders. In this talk, I will present the challenges as well as opportunities in transitioning to a membership model for a large OA infrastructure service that aims to stay committed to the POSI values.

A distinctive scholarly publishing model: working together to accelerate diamond open access - an African focus

Open access guarantees access to scholarly content that has minimal barriers to sharing and expanding upon knowledge. Diamond open access, through an African lens, is more than the removal of financial barriers to access and sharing scholarly output. It is finding equitable solutions, within its socio-economic context, which should be “underpinned by social justice principles as it has the capacity to usher in equity and equal opportunity” (Raju and Badrudeen, 2022: 54). The purpose of the presentation is to discuss the need for communities of practice to collaborate and share skills for an inclusive scholarly ecosystem, with a social justice approach of ultimately channelling opportunities to advance African research. Social justice in scholarly publishing allows for the dismantling of systemic bias within the established scholarly ecosystem and rebuilding this ecosystem by including those who were previously marginalised. Communities of practice for this ecosystem, with the driver of social justice, should be with academic libraries, African researchers and with information technology skills. Academic libraries have the opportunity to support the dissemination of scholarship through library publishing by providing skills development to other libraries, as well as guidance to authors and editors of scholarly journals and books. The communities of practice for the African academy should aspire to disrupt and rebuild the publishing landscape so that it’s reflective of their society, by encouraging the publishing of local content that is multilingual and foster partnerships with co-authors on the continent, including providing opportunities and mentorship for the next generation of researchers. The dearth of IT infrastructure and skills in Africa will be addressed through collaboration. Together the scholarly communication landscape can be more diverse and inclusive, with the equitable solution of increased scholarship emanating from Africa, and not merely a landscape that is representative of global north research. The University of Cape Town (UCT) libraries have developed a continental publishing platform, using diamond open access, to grow and expand African scholarship. The social justice drive to make African scholarship freely accessible and shared has resulted in some fledgling communities of practice. The librarians provide training and support through train-the-trainer model for library publishing and the African researchers are encouraged to publish local scholarship for their own societies, including in multiple languages. The continental platform provides one publishing infrastructure which all African institutions can freely publishing in showcasing their own institution’s scholarship. Collaboration in diamond open access can enable the acceleration of scholarship. However, by underpinning this collaboration on social justice principles, diamond open access enables participation to a global kaleidoscope of knowledge by including all research voices, specifically Africa’s marginalised voices. The African proverb of going further together, especially through social justice communities of practice, is important for a diverse, yet inclusive scholarly ecosystem, as together the research landscape will showcase the variety of scholarship that is needed to impact and build up all societies.

The Value and Challenges of Student-Run Journals: Lessons from a Student Editor

Student-run journals are unique spaces for learning about and engaging with the scholarly publication landscape. Student editors and reviewers build their authorial voice and academic identity by leading the editorial process, which may help increase their sense of belonging to academia. Moreover, student journals serve diverse communities and are particularly committed to open access. Indeed, many existing student journals are run under the diamond model as universities host and support their operations. Despite the outlined benefits, there are several challenges when running a student journal. For instance, student journals may be considered few relevant as they are perceived as less prestigious and reputable than the so-called ‘top tier’ journals. This perception might result in lacking institutional or financial support. In this talk, I will share the lessons learned from my experience as a student editor of Current Issues in Education, a diamond open-access journal sponsored by Arizona State University. I will highlight the opportunities I encountered as a doctoral student to actively engage in discussions about topics, methods, and approaches in educational research. Finally, I will present my arguments to increase the support for student-run journals as they are spaces for innovation and recognition of the epistemic value of OA journals beyond commercial interests.

The Power of Community-Driven Publishing for Inclusive, Transparent, and Impactful Scholarly Communication

Emerging community-led publishing models, called "Diamond Open Access" initiatives, aim to provide unrestricted access to scholarly publications, enabling them to be freely read and published. These models have the potential to address challenges of inclusivity, diversity, and transparency in scholarly communication. Using the Journal of Horticultural Sciences as a case study, this presentation highlights the potential of Diamond Open Access to transform scholarly communication in the Global South. The AmeliCA/Redalyc initiative promotes non-commercial open access through inclusiveness, collaboration, capacity building, and advocacy, providing a viable alternative to traditional publishing models while still on par with commercial ones. Scholarly societies should recognize the importance of community-led initiatives and the need for greater collaboration to create a more equitable and just academic publishing landscape. The presentation also calls for increased government investment in these initiatives to foster greater collaboration among stakeholders and to rethink the current publishing model to better serve the needs of the scholarly community in the region. Through non-commercial Diamond Open Access, countries in the Global South can achieve greater visibility and recognition for their research output, contributing to the global knowledge commons in a more equitable and sustainable manner.

OA Without Tears: Platforms and Workflows for Actually Equitable Open Scholarly Communication

The many colors and flavors of open-access currently in circulation have obfuscated two key issues: first, that one of the originating goals of the open access movement was creating greater equity by reducing the stranglehold that extractive corporations have developed over scholarly publishing; and second, that the dominant OA publishing mechanisms that have since emerged have if anything reduced equity, by attaching high fees to the formats that allow publications to circulate most widely. If actually equitable scholarly communication is our goal, we need to begin again, rethinking our platforms and workflows -- and above all, the ownership and governance of those platforms and workflows -- to allow for more meaningful scholar-led practices. This presentation will focus on work being done by Humanities Commons to develop open, collective, equitable communication processes that can give all scholars agency over the ways that work in their fields circulates.

TBD

TBD

India's Roadmap Towards Implementing the UNESCO Recommendations on Open Science

India is one of the leading developing nations involved in the global open science (OS) movements since the last two decades. In November 2021, UNESCO adopted the “UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science” ratified by 193 nations including India. In 2023, India is also hosting the Presidency of G20 nations and working towards achieving the “Common Digital Future: Open, Accessible and Inclusive Digital Public Infrastructure” as reflected in a G20 Task Force. In 2020, the Government of India released the 5th National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (STIP), where Open Science is discussed at length. Presently different public agencies are working towards implementing open science infrastructure across the country, involving the research funding agencies, academic and research institutions, and the scholarly publishers. This presentation evaluates the roadmap towards implementing the UNESCO Recommendations on Open Science in India. In addition, the presentation will also assess the India's position in the global open science scenario, as reflected on the international directories of open science/open access initiatives and open science monitoring web portals, including the DOAJ, OpenDOAR, UNESCO's Global Open Access Portal (GOAP). ROARMAP, besides others. India's initiatives will also be compared with the other emerging developing nations namely China, Brazil, Russia and South Africa (BRICS Nations). A number of scholars have compared OS initiatives of BRICS nations. This presentation will also review their studies, and identify most significant OS initiatives undertaken in Indian institutions.

Carrot & Stick: Policy as a driver for Open Science

In order to establish Open Science as the default at the UZH, the Open Science team developed a university wide, Open Science Policy. This document sets out expectations and recommendations on ways in which the practices and values of an open academic culture can be integrated into the structure of the UZH, and in its research and teaching. All UZH employees and students were able to comment on the draft policy in 2020 by means of a survey. Over 2000 UZH members took part in the survey, 642 filled out the entire questionnaire. At the same time, the Open Science Committee reviewed the policy, and several faculties and institutes provided institutional feedback. An overwhelming majority welcome an Open Science culture and support practices that promote open exchange, transparency, reproducibility and accountability. However, the fear that career opportunities for young researchers were at risk. This means it is important to communicate clearly that in view of the global movement towards Open Science, an open scientific practice can also improve career opportunities in the future. It also became clear that the requirements of the individual departments are very different and must therefore be taken into account during the implementation of the policy. A main point of criticism furthermore was the fact that Open Science requirements were formulated as mandatory in the first version of the policy, because such fundamental changes in the research culture need time and resources, this input is in line with the UNESCO recommendations. Based on this feedback, the draft has been revised and now includes expectations and recommendations instead of requirements. This also addresses the concerns that many changes in the scientific process require time and resources.

How do we measure success for Open Science?

To deliver the benefits of Open Science – economic, societal, research impact and for researcher careers – increasing adoption of Open Science practices is a prerequisite goal. There is a growing need for reliable data on Open Science practices to better understand researchers’ needs, and to understand the effectiveness of policies and solutions at increasing adoption of Open Science. In 2022 PLOS launched ‘Open Science Indicators’, (OSI) an initiative that tracks adoption of Open Science practices – such as sharing data, code, protocols and preprints – over time in the scholarly literature. This initiative aligns with UNESCO’s goal to implement an Open Science Monitoring Framework. PLOS developed requirements for an OSI measurement framework, underpinned by six guiding principles: (1) Align with established community definitions or approaches wherever possible; (2) Measure what practices are being carried out now; (3) Ensure interoperability across diverse communities; (4) Be scale-able across large volumes of research outputs; (5) Share results of Open Science Indicators/ monitoring activities openly; (6) Use Open Science Indicators responsibly. OSIs are being delivered in partnership with DataSeer, using a repeatable approach that can be delivered at scale across thousands of published articles, and which reaches recognised thresholds for accuracy. Importantly, OSIs should not be used to rank journals, institutions or individuals. The initial results of the project analysed nearly 70,000 articles published between the start of 2019 and the end of Q2 2022 and results are being updated through 2023 as new articles are published (https://theplosblog.plos.org/2022/12/open-science-indicators-first-dataset). The results show changes in adoption of data, code and preprint sharing, and reveal differences in adoption – and potential for adoption – between communities and regions, The data are being shared openly to engage the community in a conversation about how we can use better quantitative, longitudinal evidence on Open Science practices to support increased adoption of Open Science globally.

Poster Session