On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Keith Jeffery (keith.jeffery --
stfc.ac.uk) wrote:
> All -
> Indeed, Charles, it has been a long hard battle. Â Chapter 6 is the relevant
> one especially 6.6 et seq. - and note statements on OA to data as well as
> publications in the earlier sections of that chapter and the setting up of
> the open data institute (semantic web / linked open data)
Here is the pertinent passage, and it says it all (apart from the
implementation details):
§ § § §
6.9 The Research Councils expect the researchers they fund to deposit
published articles or conference proceedings in an open access
repository at or around the time of publication. But this practice is
unevenly enforced. Therefore, as an immediate step, we have asked the
Research Councils to ensure the researchers they fund fulfil the
current requirements.
http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/innovation/docs/i/11-1387-innovation-and-research-strategy-for-growth.pdf
§ § § §
For the implementation details, I would like to repeat the following
plea to integrate university and funder mandates so they can
complement and mutually reinforce one another:
How to Integrate University and Funder Open Access Mandates
http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/369-guid.html
Research funder open-access mandates (such as NIH's and RCUK's) and
university open-access mandates (such as Harvard's and U. Liege's) are
complementary. There is a simple way to integrate funder mandates and
university mandates to make them synergistic and mutually reinforcing:
Universities' own Institutional Repositories (IRs) are the
natural locus for the direct deposit of their own research output:
Universities (and research institutions) are the universal research
providers of all research (funded and unfunded, in all fields) and
have a direct interest in archiving, monitoring, measuring,
evaluating, and showcasing their own research assets -- as well as in
maximizing their uptake, usage and impact.
Universities (and research institutions) also have a direct
interest in ensuring that their researchers fulfill their funders'
conditions for awarding grants.
Both universities and funders should accordingly mandate deposit
of all peer-reviewed final drafts (postprints), in each author's own
university IR, immediately upon acceptance for publication, for both
institutional and funder monitoring and record-keeping purposes.
Access to that immediate postprint deposit in the author's university
IR may be set immediately as Open Access if copyright conditions
allow; otherwise access can be set as Closed Access, pending copyright
negotiations or embargoes. All the rest of the conditions described by
universities and funders should accordingly apply only to the timing
and copyright conditions for setting open access to those deposits,
not to the depositing itself, its locus or its timing.
As a result, (1) there will be a common deposit locus for all
research output worldwide; (2) university mandates will reinforce and
monitor compliance with funder mandates; (3) funder mandates will
reinforce university mandates; (4) legal details concerning
open-access provision, copyright and embargoes will be applied
independently of deposit itself, on a case by case basis, according to
the conditions of each mandate; (5) opt-outs will apply only to
copyright negotiations, not to deposit itself, nor its timing; and (6)
any central OA repositories can then harvest the postprints from the
authors' IRs under the agreed conditions at the agreed time, if they
wish.
Stevan Harnad
EnablingOpenScholarship
http://www.openscholarship.org
