[GOAL] ASAPbio / COAR Survey on Preprint Sharing in Repositories

[Kathleen Shearer]

If you manage an institutional or generalist repository, please consider 
responding to this survey. 

It will only take about 5 minutes and is open until September 10, 2021.

Best regards, Kathleen

---
ASAPbio <https://asapbio.org/> and COAR <https://www.coar-repositories.org/> 
are inviting institutional and other generalist repositories to fill in this 
survey about preprint sharing in repositories. The aggregate results of the 
survey will be made publicly available via our websites. The survey will only 
take about 5 minutes, and is open until September 10, 2021.
 
Please fill in the survey here: ASAPbio / COAR Survey on Preprint Sharing in 
Repositories <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DXV3DCW>

If you have any questions, please contact off...@coar-repositories.org 
<mailto:off...@coar-repositories.org>
 


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR launched major strategy to modernize the global repository network

[Kathleen Shearer]

CAUTION: This e-mail originated outside the University of Southampton.


Dear colleagues,

The trend towards open science / open scholarship is strengthening and 
expanding. The COVID-19 pandemic has made open scholarship a top priority for 
governments and the research community around the world and there is a growing 
recognition about the need for greater equity in scholarly communications, as 
underscored in the UNESCO draft recommendations which were developed through 
consensus by over 100 member countries.

Open access repositories and the global repository network represent critical 
infrastructure for open science / open scholarship.

OA repositories advance equity and diversity, because they are localized and 
can respond to different users’ needs, and they are more likely to be 
sustainable and persistent because they are usually managed by long-lived 
research institutions and their libraries.

And with the significant new functionalities being introduced through the COAR 
Next Generation Repositories 
Initiative<https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/what-we-do/next-generation-repositories/>
 and the COAR Notify 
Project<https://www.coar-repositories.org/notify-repository-and-services-interoperability-project/>,
 repositories are poised to take on an even more expansive role in the 
scholarly communications landscape.

To take advantage of this moment, COAR is launching an international strategy 
to modernize repositories.

Despite the widespread adoption of repositories around the world, many struggle 
with low visibility in their research community, are running old versions of 
software platforms, and/or are understaffed.

This strategy, which was launched on July 6, 2021 with a meeting of interested 
national and regional partners, will help position repositories to embrace 
their new and expansive role in the scholarly communications landscape.  
Working with key partners in each region and country, the strategy will develop 
individualized plans for each participating country and region – plans that 
will be highly tailored to the local context and address each country’s most 
salient and acute challenges.

The meeting was attended by participants from Africa, Australia, Canada, China, 
Japan, Korea, Europe, Latin America and the United States.

The strategy and plans will be developed from July–September 2021. Following 
this, COAR will work to assist each participating country and region in 
implementing them.

Stay tuned for more information over the coming months!

Best, Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org<http://www.coar-repositories.org>



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Africa and Latin America agree to closer collaboration around open science

[Kathleen Shearer]

CAUTION: This e-mail originated outside the University of Southampton.
(Please excuse the cross posting)

Today, LA Referencia, RedCLARA and the three African regional research and 
education networks – ASREN, WACREN and UbuntuNet Alliance – signed a Memorandum 
of Understanding (MoU) to formalize their relationship as the two continents 
seek to ramp up their open science activities. The aim of the collaboration is 
to advance open science policies, services and infrastructure that reflect the 
unique needs and conditions of each continent within a framework of 
international cooperation.

This marks an important milestone in the expansion and strengthening of an 
interoperable, international ecosystem for open science and repositories in the 
global south. While open science is a global trend gaining traction around the 
world, there are important local considerations that need to be taken into 
account in the adoption of open science, related to resources, local priorities 
and jurisdictional  aspects. And what works in the global north is not always 
relevant or effective for the global south. This new collaboration between 
Africa and Latin America, which was facilitated by COAR, will support 
south-south knowledge exchange related to open science and potentially 
technology transfer of the LA Referencia software between the two regions. Most 
importantly, it will also strengthen local knowledge and infrastructure related 
to open science and contribute to improving the visibility of the research 
produced in both regions – something that is extremely important for improving 
people’s lives and contributing to sustainable development goals.

Please see the full announcement in 
English<https://africaconnect3.net/africa-and-latin-america-agree-to-closer-collaboration-around-open-science/>
 and 
Spanish<https://www.lareferencia.info/es/component/k2/item/283-africa-y-america-latina-concuerdan-una-colaboracion-mas-estrecha-en-torno-a-la-ciencia-abierta>.

Best, Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org<http://www.coar-repositories.org>


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Science Roadmaps in Africa

[Kathleen Shearer]

CAUTION: This e-mail originated outside the University of Southampton.
Dear GOAL list members,

(Please excuse the cross-posting)

I’d like to share with you an activity that COAR has been contributing to 
through the LIBSENSE Initiative. The aim is to increase the adoption of open 
science in Africa through the development of National Open Science Roadmaps.




Communiqué<https://wacren.net/en/news/libsense-national-open-science-roadmaps-debuts-wacren-2021>
 - March 9, 2021

The LIBSENSE  initiative, which was launched in 2017, has been building a 
community of practice for open science and progressing the adoption of open 
science services and infrastructures in Africa. The initiative is led by WACREN 
- West and Central African Research and Education Network - in partnership with 
a number of other organizations. The aim of LIBSENSE is to advance open science 
in Africa through strengthening and expanding services at the institutional, 
national and regional level.

LIBSENSE recognizes that open science in Africa, with respect for diversity and 
sustainable development, can be best realized through localized, yet 
interoperable, infrastructures - rather than being outsourced to private 
industry or external organizations. Not only will these services be able to 
more directly respond to the needs of African research communities, they also 
contribute to building local capacity and knowledge around open science.

The UNESCO Open Science Partnership has put open science on the agenda of 
national governments. Leveraging this strategic opportunity, LIBSENSE has begun 
to work with several African countries that are committed to advance open 
science policies, infrastructures and services to develop African National Open 
Science Roadmaps that can then be adapted to other African countries. The 
initial countries LIBSENSE is working with are Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, 
Lesotho, Mozambique, Nigeria, Somalia, Tanzania, and Uganda.

These national roadmaps, which may differ in each country, will present a 
concrete plan for rolling-out open science in each country including policies, 
infrastructure, and capacities.  Join us for the “Open Science and Open Access” 
session of the WACREN2021 
conference<https://wacren2021.wacren.net/#1614906059811-01315d3b-759c> to find 
out more.



Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org<http://www.coar-repositories.org>


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open science and covid-19 - let's not go back to business as usual once the pandemic is over!

[Kathleen Shearer]

Dear all,

Our current research and social context – the coronavirus pandemic, economic 
upheaval, climate change, racial injustice – requires timely and reliable 
research results, shared equitably by, and with, all parts of the world.

The COVID-19 pandemic has shown that, with enough political will, we can adopt 
open science practices widely. Let's not go back to business as usual once the 
pandemic is over!

Please see our full post on the London School of Economics Impact Blog 
<https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2020/09/24/covid-19-has-profoundly-changed-the-way-we-conduct-and-share-research-lets-not-return-to-business-as-usual-when-the-pandemic-is-over/>

Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open access and open science in Asia

[Kathleen Shearer]

Dear colleagues (please excuse the cross posting / disculpe el mensaje cruzado),

Open access and open science are global trends, but we tend to hear most about 
what is happening in Europe and North America.

Asia is rapidly increasing in prominence on the world stage, both in terms of 
R as well as scientific production. According to UNESCO, in 2015, the Asia 
region encompassed close to half of global expenditure on research and 
development (R, 42%) and for research outputs, Asia has been extremely 
prolific and growing quickly, with China leading the world in numbers of 
published research articles. But Asia is also a very diverse continent, 
representing many different languages and cultures and this diversity must be 
reflected in the way open science is implemented. International alignment, 
common standards and interoperability must be balanced with local priorities, 
needs and requirements. 

At COAR, we believe it is important to have venues and opportunities that allow 
participants to focus on issues of local importance in their own region. Asia 
OA is a community hosted by COAR with the aim of supporting information sharing 
about open science policies and practices across the Asian continent. On a 
biannual basis, COAR along with a different local host, organizes an Asia OA 
meeting. Previous meetings were held in Tokyo, Kuala Lumpur, Kathmandu, and 
Dhaka, Bangladesh. 

The Asia OA meeting is hosted this year by the Korea Institute of Science And 
Technology Information, KISTI and offers participants the opportunity to learn 
more about what is happening in Asia related to open access and open science. 
This meeting, which is normally attended by delegates from different Asian 
communities, is taking place online this year and is therefore open to everyone.

The meeting began today (September 9 - 16, 2020), and offers a mix of 
prerecorded presentations, live panels, and a session with country reports from 
14 different jurisdictions. 

For more information, please visit the meeting website: 
https://2020korea.asiaoa.org <https://2020korea.asiaoa.org/>

Best, Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR forum on COVID-19, Open Science and Repositories

[Kathleen Shearer]

Dear colleagues,

We still have a few spaces left in this "COAR forum on COVID-19, Open Science 
and Repositories" so we are opening up registration beyond the COAR community. 
If you’re interested, you can register through the link below.

Spaces are limited, so you will need to register soon if you want to 
participate. Please don’t register unless you are sure you can attend.

> COAR will have 2-hour forum on Thursday, 10 September on the role of the open 
> science and open repositories in the context of COVID-10. Those who would 
> like to join can still register at this link 
> <https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZAtcOquqzMsGdZzYjeohM4WibDXcJRelnm5>.
>  Please see the details below.
> 
> 
> Join us on Thursday, September 10 for a 2-hour forum highlighting the role of 
> open science and open repositories in the context of COVID-19.
> The forum will showcase several collaborative initiatives from around the 
> world aiming to improve the discovery of and access to COVID-19 research 
> outputs.  Participants will learn about the critical need for open science in 
> the time of the pandemic, new workflows and practices that can be adopted in 
> you own local context, and identify possible areas of international 
> collaboration.
> 
> OpenVirus is a joint UK-India, open repository-based project to extract 
> multidisciplinary semantic knowledge about viral epidemics (including 
> COVID-19) through analysing tens of thousands or articles we can find clues 
> to predict/prevent/mitigate viral epidemics.
> 
> OpenAIRE COVID-19 Gateway is a portal that provides access to publications, 
> research data, projects and software that may be relevant to the Corona Virus 
> Disease (COVID-19). The OpenAIRE COVID-19 Gateway aggregates COVID-19 related 
> records, links them and provides a single access point for discovery and 
> navigation.
> 
> Canadian COVID-19 Open Repository Initiative is a collaborative project led 
> by the Canadian Association of Research Libraries to identify and make as 
> many Canadian research outputs related to COVID-19 available through major 
> discovery systems including the OpenAIRE COVID-10 Gateway.
> 
> The forum will take place from 14h-16h UTC time (see https://time.is/UTC 
> <https://time.is/UTC>) on Thursday, September 10, 2020
> 
> Register at 
> https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZAtcOquqzMsGdZzYjeohM4WibDXcJRelnm5 
> <https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZAtcOquqzMsGdZzYjeohM4WibDXcJRelnm5>
>  
> See the news item here: 
> https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/coar-forum-on-covid-19-and-open-science/
>  
> <https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/coar-forum-on-covid-19-and-open-science/>
>  



Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Overlay Model for Peer Review on repositories - open for public comments!

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Sorry for the cross-posting)

I am pleased to share with you a draft model for peer review services on 
distributed resources contained in repositories, archives, preprint servers and 
other data providers.

Modelling Overlay Peer Review Processes with Linked Data Notifications 
<https://comments.coar-repositories.org/> was prepared by Paul Walk 
(COAR/Antleaf), Martin Klein (Los Alamos National Laboratory), Herbert Van de 
Sompel (DANS) and myself, with input from a group of Use Case contributors. 

It presents a simple model using widely adopted technologies and protocols for 
exchange between services, and builds on previous work undertaken through the 
COAR Next Generation Repository Initiative 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/what-we-do/next-generation-repositories/>
 and the Pubfair Framework 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/pubfair-version-2-now-available/>
 to define new roles, technologies, and behaviours for repositories.

Scholarly knowledge comes in a variety of formats beyond the article or 
monograph (e.g. datasets, software, protocols, “grey literature”) and all these 
formats hold the potential to spark new discoveries. As knowledge is 
continuously evolving (and at an unprecedented rate) and in an age where 
immediate dissemination via the Web is possible, the concept of a “publication” 
as a discrete output that follows the completion of research work can be 
challenged. At the same time, much potential remains to innovate around the 
traditional article itself; to think beyond the PDF-paradigm and leverage, for 
example, incremental publishing, live data and interactive figures. 

The model we are proposing could greatly accelerate innovation in scholarly 
communications, and it is especially timely as we are more aware of the need 
for rapid sharing of research outputs during the pandemic. It is highly 
scalable, it can support diversity in users, research products, and 
communities, and it is also a sustainable solution, because the costs of 
managing the system are distributed across many institutions.

We are currently inviting public comments on this model via the COAR Comments 
Press website <https://comments.coar-repositories.org/> until September 11, 
2020.

Once we have community consensus about the technologies, protocols and 
vocabularies, we will start working on prototypes with interested organizations 
and initiatives.

All the best, 

Kathleen


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] Knowledge and Equity: analysis of three models

[Kathleen Shearer]

Hi all,

I don’t want to waste too much time going in circles, so just a short response:

The resources below are different ways of conceptualizing open, not really 
definitions. They contribute to a deeper understanding of the concept of open, 
which is a good thing.

The knowledge commons is a different issue, and it is what we should be 
addressing at this stage of maturity in the transition to open. This includes 
the principles, governance structures, infrastructures, communities, and more 
that will be needed to create the optimal conditions for scholarship to be 
communicated and used around the world.

If we get bogged down in a discussion of definitions, we will never get 
anywhere (but I suspect that "going nowhere" is in the interest of certain 
parties)

Anyway, bon weekend! (as they say here in Quebec)

Kathleen




> On Jun 26, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Glenn Hampson  
> wrote:
> 
> In part David, yes---thank you. But I’m also referring to:
>  
> Knoth and Pontika’s Open Science Taxonomy 
> (https://figshare.com/articles/Open_Science_Taxonomy/1508606/3 
> <https://figshare.com/articles/Open_Science_Taxonomy/1508606/3>
> Fecher and Friesike’s categories of concern regarding open 
> (http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2272036 <http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2272036>)
> Moore’s boundary object observations (http://doi.org/10.4000/rfsic.3220 
> <http://doi.org/10.4000/rfsic.3220>)
> Willen’s intersecting movements critique 
> (https://rmwblogg.wordpress.com/2020/02/29/justice-oriented-science-open-science-and-replicable-science-are-overlapping-but-they-are-not-the-same/
>  
> <https://rmwblogg.wordpress.com/2020/02/29/justice-oriented-science-open-science-and-replicable-science-are-overlapping-but-they-are-not-the-same/>)
> Bosman & Kramer’s  diversity of definitions assessment 
> (https://im2punt0.wordpress.com/2017/03/27/defining-open-science-definitions/ 
> <https://im2punt0.wordpress.com/2017/03/27/defining-open-science-definitions/>)
> OSI’s DARTS open spectrum 
> (https://journals.gmu.edu/index.php/osi/article/view/1375/1178 
> <https://journals.gmu.edu/index.php/osi/article/view/1375/1178>)
> Tkacz’s 2012 essay on the connections between the modern open science 
> movement and Karl Popper’s open society theories 
> (http://www.ephemerajournal.org/sites/default/files/12-4tkacz_0.pdf 
> <http://www.ephemerajournal.org/sites/default/files/12-4tkacz_0.pdf>)
> And more. 
>  
> Best,
>  
> Glenn
>  
>  
> Glenn Hampson
> Executive Director
> Science Communication Institute (SCI) 
> Program Director
> Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) 
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: scholcomm-requ...@lists.ala.org 
> <mailto:scholcomm-requ...@lists.ala.org>  <mailto:scholcomm-requ...@lists.ala.org>> On Behalf Of David Wojick
> Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 10:30 AM
> To: Kathleen Shearer  <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com>>
> Cc: Glenn Hampson  <mailto:ghamp...@nationalscience.org>>; Rob Johnson 
>  <mailto:rob.john...@research-consulting.com>>; Heather Morrison 
> mailto:heather.morri...@uottawa.ca>>; 
> scholc...@lists.ala.org <mailto:scholc...@lists.ala.org>; Global Open Access 
> List (Successor of AmSci) mailto:goal@eprints.org>>; 
> mailto:radicalopenacc...@jiscmail.ac.uk>> 
> mailto:radicalopenacc...@jiscmail.ac.uk>>; 
> The Open Scholarship Initiative  <mailto:osi2016...@googlegroups.com>>; Anis Rahman  <mailto:abu_rah...@sfu.ca>>
> Subject: Re: [SCHOLCOMM] Knowledge and Equity: analysis of three models
>  
> Glenn is drawing upon lengthy discussions of the problem of multiple 
> definitions that we have had at OSI. Looking back I find that I first wrote 
> about this issue seven years ago:
> https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/11/11/open-access-on-the-sea-of-confusion/
>  
> <https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/11/11/open-access-on-the-sea-of-confusion/>
>  
> It might be better to call them concepts or models than definitions, but it 
> remains that different people are calling for or allowing very different 
> things as being open access. At one extreme we have, for example, the US 
> Public Access Program, which is basically read only with a 12 month embargo 
> for subscription articles. At another extreme we find born open with no 
> restrictions on use. In between there are at least a dozen variations, many 
> more if one counts small differences, like the CC BY variants.
>  
> This wide ranging multiplicity of incompatible definitions is a very real 
> obstacle to public policy.
>  
> On a more distant topic, profit is a public good if it provides a public 
> service. Food, for example.
>  
> David Wojick
> Insid

Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] Knowledge and Equity: analysis of three models

[Kathleen Shearer]

Glenn, all,

I don’t think there really is a large variation in current definitions of open; 
but there are some stakeholders who want to slow progress, and use this as an 
excuse :-(

The issue of diversity is an important one, although not in the way that it is 
expressed by Glenn, (which is diversity in stakeholders goals - profit vs 
public good), but diversity of needs, capacities, priorities, languages, 
formats in different fields and countries. And these diverse requirements 
cannot be supported effectively by any one large centralized infrastructure, 
which will tend to cater to the most well resourced users (or the majority).

While there are some international infrastructures that are appropriate, the 
“global commons” should also be composed of many localized infrastructures and 
services that are governed by, and can respond to, the needs of those local 
communities; and then we must figure out how these infrastructures can be 
interoperable through adoption of common standards that will allow us to share 
and communicate at the global level.

This requires finding a delicate balance, a balance that possibly the UNESCO 
discussions can help to progress.

As a UNESCO Open Science Partner, COAR brings this perspective to the table (as 
I’m sure some others will too).

All the best, Kathleen


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



> On Jun 26, 2020, at 11:47 AM, Glenn Hampson  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Heather, Anis, Rob,
>  
> It’s also important to note the emerging UNESCO model, which will be 
> presented to the UN General Assembly for consideration in late 2021. I 
> suspect (and hope) this model will be more “polycentric” and “adaptive” than 
> any of the current plans.
>  
> As you know, many organizations have had an opportunity to submit comments on 
> UNESCO’s plan; indeed, global consultations are still ongoing. OSI’s 
> recommendations are listed here: https://bit.ly/2CL4Nm7 
> <https://bit.ly/2CL4Nm7>. The executive summary is this: “Open” is a very 
> diverse space. Not only do our definitions of open differ greatly, so too do 
> our perceptions of the etymology of open (whether we use BOAI as the starting 
> point or just one point among many). Also, critically, our open goals and 
> motives differ greatly in this community; open progress and approaches vary 
> by field of study; and different approaches have different focus points, 
> principles, incentives, and financial considerations. In short, our challenge 
> of creating a more open future for research defies one-size-fits all 
> description, and it certainly defies one-size fits-all solution. 
>  
> Recognizing and respecting this diversity, OSI’s recommendations, which are 
> based on five years of global consultations in collaboration with UNESCO, are 
> that a just and workable global plan for the future of open must do the 
> following:
>  
> DISCOVER critical missing pieces of the open scholarship puzzle so we can 
> design our open reforms more effectively;
> DESIGN, build and deploy an array of much needed open infrastructure tools to 
> help accelerate the spread and adoption of open scholarship practices;
> WORK TOGETHER on finding common ground perspective solutions that address key 
> issues and concerns (see OSI’s Common Ground policy paper for more detail); 
> and
> REDOUBLE OUR COLLECTIVE EFFORTS to educate and listen to the research 
> community about open solutions, and in doing so design solutions that better 
> meet the needs of research.
>  
> In pursuing these actions, the international community should:
>  
> Work and contribute together (everyone, including publishers); 
> Work on all pieces of the puzzle so we can clear a path for open to succeed; 
> Discover missing pieces of information to ensure our efforts are 
> evidence-based; 
> Embrace diversity. No one group has a perfect understanding of the needs and 
> challenges in this space, and different groups have different needs and 
> challenges. 
> Develop big picture agreement on the goals ahead and common ground approaches 
> to meet these goals; and
> Help build UNESCO’s global open roadmap.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Glenn
>  
>  
> Glenn Hampson
> Executive Director
> Science Communication Institute (SCI) 
> Program Director
> Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) 
>  
>  
>  
> From: scholcomm-requ...@lists.ala.org 
> <mailto:scholcomm-requ...@lists.ala.org>  <mailto:scholcomm-requ...@lists.ala.org>> On Behalf Of Rob Johnson
> Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 11:42 PM
> To: Heather Morrison  <mailto:heather.morri...@uottawa.ca>>; scholc...@lists.ala.org 
> <mailto:scholc...@lists.ala.org>; Global Open Access List (Successor of 
> 

Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly Communications: A Call for Action

[Kathleen Shearer]

Glen,

You are woefully misrepresenting the OSI “community” to the world.

As someone that was invited and attended one OSI meeting (and then was added to 
the mailing list), that does not imply that I am part of the OSI community. Nor 
does in mean that I participated in the development of this document.

It is disingenuous to state that all of the people who once attended one of the 
OSI meetings are supportive of what you are doing.

I actually disagree with your plan and take great exception to your use of my 
name and organization on the website. I’m sure that I am not the only one.

When you talk about your community, you should be referring to only the people 
who have signed on to the plan. I see there are only a few individuals and 
organizations that have endorsed it so far.

Best, Kathleen



Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



> On Apr 21, 2020, at 11:14 AM, Glenn Hampson  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Sam, Peter,
>  
> Thanks so much for your emails. I’m sorry for the delay in responding---we’re 
> a half a world apart and I’m just getting my morning coffee 
>  
> You ask a number of important questions. I’ll try to respond concisely, and 
> then just please let me know (directly or on-list) if you need more 
> information:
>  
> High level: OSI’s purpose was (and remains) to bring together 
> leaders in the scholarly communication space to share perspectives. A good 
> number of the OSI participants (plus alumni and observers) have been 
> executive directors of nonprofits, vice-presidents of universities, 
> vice-presidents of publishing companies, library deans, directors of research 
> institutes, journal editors, and so on. Also represented are leaders in the 
> open space, and leaders of “born open” journals and efforts who are household 
> names in this space. You can see a rather outdated (sorry) list of OSI 
> partcipants, alumni and observers at http://osiglobal.org/osi-participants/ 
> <http://osiglobal.org/osi-participants/>; a graphic is also pasted here 
> (which may or may not survive the emailing). About 18 different stakeholder 
> groups are represented in all---covering 250+ institutions and 28 
> countries---on a quota system that gives the most weight to university 
> representation.
>  
> The intent here was not at all to bypass grassroots activism. Quite to the 
> contrary, the intent was to cut to the chase---to bring together the leaders 
> in this space who could speak most knowledgably about the issues and 
> challenges at hand, and work together directly (instead of through 
> intermediaries) to find common ground. We are always adding people to the 
> group. If you’re interested in participating, please just say the word. 
>  
> Going forward: OSI’s work has been rich and fascinating. But OSI may not end 
> up being in charge of Plan A---tbd. This plan represents the best thinking 
> and recommendations of OSI, but whether these recommendations go anywhere is 
> going to depend on Plan A signatories. You’re right---no plan, however 
> well-intended, can be foisted on the rest of the world unless it is truly 
> inclusive. That’s been a primary concern of everyone in OSI since day 
> 1---that even though this is a remarkably diverse group, it simply isn’t set 
> up to be a policy making body and inclusive as it is, still doesn’t include 
> enough representation from researchers and from all parts of the globe. It’s 
> a wonderful deliberative body, but we can’t decide anything amongst 
> ourselves, which is alternately enlightening and frustrating. It’s going to 
> take a different deliberative mechanism to create common ground policy (which 
> is why we’re also supporting UNESCO with their roadmap effort---they have the 
> tools and minister-level involvement to make policy). Our hope is that Plan A 
> signatories will lead this effort---we’ll know more in the coming months 
> about whether we have enough signatories to do this, whether we have the 
> budget, etc. The “financial” tab on the Plan A site describes what we’ll be 
> able to do with various levels of funding.
>  
> That’s my short answer. Does this help? I’m happy to elaborate---probably 
> off-list unless there’s a groundswell of support for having me send another 
> 5000 word email to the list 
>  
> Thanks again for your interest and best regards,
>  
> Glenn
>  
>  
> Glenn Hampson
> Executive Director
> Science Communication Institute (SCI) 
> Program Director
> Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) 
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: Peter Murray-Rust mailto:pm...@cam.ac.uk>> 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 3:21 AM
> To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)  <mailto:goal@eprints.org>>
> Cc: 

Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly Communications: A Call for Action

[Kathleen Shearer]

and answering these questions and 
> are we sure the questions and answers we’re providing (via our narrow group 
> of debate participants) actually represent the best interest of global 
> research and global researchers?
> To be clear the scholarly communication community’s limited and exclusive 
> groups have collaborated over the years with vigor and success. There has 
> been broad cooperation and collaboration between aligned interest groups, 
> advocacy groups, groups with similar regional interests, groups with similar 
> ideological bents and so on. This kind of cooperation and collaboration has 
> helped push forward progress on open and raise the profile of the need for 
> open. Also, as Şentürk (2001) noted, there is power in the fact that 
> different parts of the scholarly communication community understand and adopt 
> their own understanding of openness in different ways depending on their 
> norms and processes. Neither of these dynamics—limited engagements or a 
> variety of adoption paths—should change.
> What is missing is that it’s unlikely only limited engagement and/or varied 
> adoption paths will ever by themselves result in broad and comprehensive 
> solutions to scholarly communication’s systemic issues. And these dynamics 
> certainly won’t result in off-the-shelf global, universally-acceptable 
> solutions or solutions that work for groups whose needs differ from those of 
> the negotiating groups. It’s hard to envision a system more global and more 
> integrated than research; global approaches are needed.
> Best regards,
> Glenn
>  
> Glenn Hampson
> Executive Director
> Science Communication Institute (SCI) 
> Program Director
> Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) 
>  
>  
>  
> From: Kathleen Shearer  
> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2020 11:26 AM
> To: Richard Poynder 
> Cc: Glenn Hampson ; scholc...@lists.ala.org; 
> Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) 
> Subject: Re: [SCHOLCOMM] Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly 
> Communications: A Call for Action
>  
> Hi Richard,
>  
> I didn’t notice your question about cOAlition S overlap with COAR. There is 
> probably some small overlap in institutional membership, but most of the COAR 
> members are not funders and cOAlition S members generally are funders. That 
> said, COAR and cOAlition S are working together in the area of repositories. 
>  
> In terms of collaboration, I have been aware of Glen’s initiative, but my 
> co-authors and I (as well as many others) have a more ambitious goal. That 
> is, to move towards full, open access and at the same time support and 
> nurture bibliodiversity. 
>  
> In terms of collaboration, I think the “big tent” strategy can too easily 
> result in lowest common denominator, watered-down objectives as well as erase 
> any local, diverse, unique perspectives. A much more effective approach would 
> be (and I reiterate) to develop regional or national strategies between 
> funders, universities, libraries and researchers + international engagement 
> across each community (like Plan S for funders or COAR for repositories).
>  
> And, in response to Heather, of course the translation technologies are not 
> perfect, but this is about having “good enough” tools to support global 
> communications, while also ensuring local populations have access to their 
> local scientific and scholarly output.
>  
> Best, Kathleen
>  
>  
> Kathleen Shearer
> Executive Director
> Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
> www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>
>  
>  
> 
> 
>> On Apr 20, 2020, at 12:40 PM, Richard Poynder 
>> mailto:richard.poyn...@btinternet.com>> 
>> wrote:
>>  
>> Thanks for this Glenn, the fact that these two initiatives have emerged 
>> within days of each other without any apparent co-ordination (presumably 
>> because neither knew about the other one?) makes me wonder whether a new 
>> spirit of collaboration and cohesiveness is indeed emerging. 
>>  
>> I also wonder about the compatibility of the two groups. The Call for Action 
>> document appears to be a scholar-led initiative expressing concern about the 
>> role that what are referred to as the oligopolists are playing in the 
>> scholarly publishing space. For instance, it states, “For decades, 
>> commercial companies in the academic publishing sector have been carrying 
>> out portfolio building strategies based on mergers and acquisitions of large 
>> companies as well as buying up small publishers or journals. The result of 
>> this has been a concentration of players in the sector, which today is 
>> dominated by a small number of companies who o

Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly Communications: A Call for Action

[Kathleen Shearer]

Hi Richard,

I didn’t notice your question about cOAlition S overlap with COAR. There is 
probably some small overlap in institutional membership, but most of the COAR 
members are not funders and cOAlition S members generally are funders. That 
said, COAR and cOAlition S are working together in the area of repositories. 

In terms of collaboration, I have been aware of Glen’s initiative, but my 
co-authors and I (as well as many others) have a more ambitious goal. That is, 
to move towards full, open access and at the same time support and nurture 
bibliodiversity. 

In terms of collaboration, I think the “big tent” strategy can too easily 
result in lowest common denominator, watered-down objectives as well as erase 
any local, diverse, unique perspectives. A much more effective approach would 
be (and I reiterate) to develop regional or national strategies between 
funders, universities, libraries and researchers + international engagement 
across each community (like Plan S for funders or COAR for repositories).

And, in response to Heather, of course the translation technologies are not 
perfect, but this is about having “good enough” tools to support global 
communications, while also ensuring local populations have access to their 
local scientific and scholarly output.

Best, Kathleen


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



> On Apr 20, 2020, at 12:40 PM, Richard Poynder 
>  wrote:
> 
> Thanks for this Glenn, the fact that these two initiatives have emerged 
> within days of each other without any apparent co-ordination (presumably 
> because neither knew about the other one?) makes me wonder whether a new 
> spirit of collaboration and cohesiveness is indeed emerging. 
>  
> I also wonder about the compatibility of the two groups. The Call for Action 
> document appears to be a scholar-led initiative expressing concern about the 
> role that what are referred to as the oligopolists are playing in the 
> scholarly publishing space. For instance, it states, “For decades, commercial 
> companies in the academic publishing sector have been carrying out portfolio 
> building strategies based on mergers and acquisitions of large companies as 
> well as buying up small publishers or journals. The result of this has been a 
> concentration of players in the sector, which today is dominated by a small 
> number of companies who own thousands of journals and dozens of presses.”
>  
> OSI appears to have been receiving funding from precisely these kind of 
> companies, including legacy publishers and other for-profit organisations 
> (http://osiglobal.org/sponsors/ <http://osiglobal.org/sponsors/>). In fact, 
> in 2019 it seems to have received funding only from for-profit organisations. 
> Or am I misreading? I realise the sums concerned are small, but it does make 
> me wonder whether OSI can really do meaningful business with the authors of 
> the Call to Action.
>  
> I realise you were anticipating “a few boo birds” on mailing lists on the 
> announcement of Plan A 
> (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/osi2016-25/J9dJdeLyIng/0ryVgZ78AgAJ 
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/osi2016-25/J9dJdeLyIng/0ryVgZ78AgAJ>) 
> , and perhaps you will view me as one of those boo birds. However I do wish 
> both initiatives all the very best and I hope something good can come of 
> them. My main concern is that no one has yet solved the collective action 
> problem.
>  
> I also wish that Kathleen had answered this part of my question: “How many 
> members of COAR are also members of cOAlition S?"
>  
> Richard Poynder
>  
>  
> From: Glenn Hampson  
> Sent: 20 April 2020 16:05
> To: 'Kathleen Shearer' ; 
> richard.poyn...@btinternet.com; scholc...@lists.ala.org; 'Global Open Access 
> List (Successor of AmSci)' 
> Subject: RE: [SCHOLCOMM] Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly 
> Communications: A Call for Action
>  
> Hi Kathleen, Richard,
> Can I suggest another way to look at these questions? First some background. 
> As you know, the Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) is launching Plan A today 
> (http://plan-a.world <http://plan-a.world/>). Plan A is OSI’s 2020-25 action 
> plan, representing five years of deep thinking that OSI participants have 
> invested in the many questions related to the future of scholarly 
> communication reform.
> Plan A looks at the “bibliodiversity” challenge a little differently. For 
> OSI, diversity has also meant inclusion---listening to everyone’s ideas 
> (including publishers), valuing everyone’s input, trying to develop a 
> complete understanding of the scholarly communication landscape, and trying 
> to reach a point where we can work together on common ground toward goals 
> that se

Re: [GOAL] Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly Communications: A Call for Action

[Kathleen Shearer]

Hello Richard,

Yes, indeed, you are right, the coordinated actions required for 
bibliodiversity are similar to the efforts needed to deal with the covid19 
pandemic. 

For your second question, the way I am envisioning the collaborations taking 
place is as follows: much of the discussions across the different stakeholder 
communities will happen at the national and sometimes regional level, while the 
international coordination will take place, in parallel, within each different 
stakeholder community. Although not a perfect solution, because some countries 
are more cohesive than others, many communities already have fairly strong 
regional and international relationships with their peers, including scholarly 
societies, libraries, funders (e.g. the funders forum at RDA), governments, as 
well as publishers, and repositories.

> Are translation technologies adequate to the task envisaged for them in the 
> document?


I’m not an expert on translation technologies, but my colleagues tell me that 
for some languages the technologies are quite far along already and work well 
(e.g. Spanish, French, Portuguese, Chinese), for others it will take a bit 
longer. They are suggesting a timeline for most languages to have fairly good 
translation tools available within the next 5 years.

> Might it be that the different interests and priorities of these stakeholders 
> are such that joint action is not possible, certainly in a way that would 
> satisfy all the stakeholders? After all, funders got involved with open 
> access because after 20+ years the other stakeholders had failed to work 
> together effectively. However, in doing so, these funders appear (certainly 
> in Europe) to be pushing the world in a direction that the authors of this 
> report deprecate. What, practically, can the movement do to achieve the 
> aspirations of the document beyond making a call to action or further 
> declarations?

The point of this call to action is to raise awareness with funders and others 
about this important issue. I’m not so cynical to think organizational 
perspectives can never change. Strategies can (and should) evolve as we gain a 
better understanding of the landscape, and adopt new ideas and principles. We 
hope that this call to action will have that type of impact.

And, yes of course not all interests will align, but we are already seeing more 
cohesiveness at the national level than in the past. In Canada, where I am 
based, for example, the funders, libraries and local Canadian publishers are 
now in regular dialogue and collaborating to work on common action items and to 
better align policies, funding and infrastructure. This is also happening in 
other jurisdictions such as France with its Committee for Open Science 
<https://www.ouvrirlascience.fr/the-committee-for-open-science/> and Portugal 
where the national funder, universities (including libraries and university 
presses) and scholarly societies have created and maintain a national 
infrastructure for Open Access (hosting repositories and journals) and aligned 
policies.

All the best, 
Kathleen


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



> On Apr 16, 2020, at 1:31 AM, Richard Poynder  
> wrote:
> 
> “Designing a system that fosters bibliodiversity, while also supporting 
> research at the international level is extremely challenging. It means 
> achieving a careful balance between unity and diversity; international and 
> local; and careful coordination across different stakeholder communities and 
> regions in order to avoid a fragmented ecosystem.”
>  
> That seems to me to be a key paragraph in this document. And the pandemic — 
> which requires that information is shared very quickly and broadly, and 
> across borders — does certainly highlight the fact that the current scholarly 
> communication system leaves a lot to be desired.
>  
> I have three questions:
>  
> Are translation technologies adequate to the task envisaged for them in the 
> document?
>  
> How is it envisaged that researchers, policymakers, funders, service 
> providers, universities and libraries from around the world will all work 
> together, and by means of what forum? I know there are a number of 
> organisations and initiatives focused on the different issues raised in the 
> document (not least COAR) but how exactly, and by what means, will these 
> different stakeholders coordinate and work together to achieve the stated 
> aims? I know there are a number of library-led organisations (like COAR), but 
> is not a more diverse forum (in terms of the different stakeholders) needed? 
> How many members of COAR are also members of cOAlition S for instance?
>  
> Might it be that the different interests and priorities of these stakeholders 
> are such that jo

[GOAL] Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly Communications: A Call for Action

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Apologies for the cross posting)

Dear all,
Today, my colleagues and I are issuing a “Call for Action!”

With the publication of this paper, Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly 
Communications: A Call for Action 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/fostering-bibliodiversity-in-scholarly-communications-a-call-for-action/>,
 we are calling on the community to make concerted efforts to develop strong, 
community-governed infrastructures that support diversity in scholarly 
communications (referred to as bibliodiversity).

Diversity is an essential characteristic of an optimal scholarly communications 
system. Diversity in services and platforms, funding mechanisms, and evaluation 
measures will allow the research communications to accommodate the different 
workflows, languages, publication outputs, and research topics that support the 
needs and epistemic pluralism of different research communities. In addition, 
diversity reduces the risk of vendor lock-in, which inevitably leads to 
monopoly, monoculture, and high prices.

We are living through unprecedented times, with a global pandemic sweeping the 
world, leading to illness, death, and unparalleled economic upheaval.  Although 
our concerns about bibliodiversity have been growing for years, the current 
crisis has exposed the deficiencies in a system that is increasingly homogenous 
and prioritizes profits over the public good.

Stories abound about the urgent need for access to the research literature, as 
illustrated, for example, by this message by Peter Murray-Rust posted 
<http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/2020-March/005395.html> to the 
GOAL mailing list on March 31, 2020

“My colleague, a software developer, working for free on openVirus software,  
is spending most of his time working making masks in Cambridge Makespace to 
ship to Addenbrooke’s hospital. When he goes to the literature to find 
literature on masks, their efficacy and use and construction he finds paywall 
after paywall after paywall after paywall ….”

For those who were not in favour of open access before, this global crisis 
should settle the debate once and for all.

We must move away from a pay-to-read world in which researchers, practitioners 
and the public cannot afford to access critical research materials, or have to 
wait for embargo periods to lift before they can develop life saving 
techniques, methods and vaccines. Access to the research is simply too 
important. Yet, pay-to-publish, the open access model being advanced by many in 
the commercial sector, is also inappropriate as it places unacceptable 
financial barriers on researchers’ abilities to publish.

It is time to reassess some of the basic assumptions related to scholarly 
communications, including competition, prestige, and the role of commercial 
entities. The same values that underlie our research and education systems 
should also guide research communications.

To that end, we are calling on researchers, policy makers, funders, service 
providers, universities and libraries from around the world to work together to 
address the issue of bibliodiversity in scholarly communication.

The problems we encounter have never been more complex and urgent, nor has the 
need for solutions been greater. There is a real danger that new budget 
constraints and an increasing proportion of funds directed towards large 
commercial entities could lead to greater homogeneity and monopolization, 
further hampering the free flow of research needed to address the critical 
challenges we face.

Read the blog post here 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/fostering-bibliodiversity-in-scholarly-communications-a-call-for-action/>
 and full paper here <http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3752923>
Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR Annual Meeting in Cusco and Lima, Peru

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Sorry for the cross posting)

We are pleased to announce that registration for the COAR Annual Meeting and 
Conference from April 20-24, 2020 in Cusco and Lima, Peru is now open.

The theme of this year’s meeting is Fostering Diversity in Scholarly 
Communication

Diversity is an important characteristic of any healthy ecosystem, including 
scholarly communications. As we continue on the path towards full and immediate 
open access (and open scholarship more broadly) we must consider how to ensure 
diversity can be nurtured and will flourish. This meeting will be an 
opportunity to learn about new trends and models in scholarly communications 
including Pubfair: A distributed framework for open publishing services 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/pubfair-version-2-now-available/>
 (tambien disponible en espanol 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/pubfair-disponible-en-espanol/>);
 and to discuss the role of repositories in supporting diversity, with a 
special focus on the Latin American perspective.

The meeting will be hosted by the Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas 
<https://www.upc.edu.pe/en/> and is organized by COAR 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/> in conjunction with CONCYTEC 
<https://portal.concytec.gob.pe/> and LA Referencia 
<http://www.lareferencia.info/en/>.

Several pre-conference workshops will be held in Cusco, Peru on April 20-21, 
focusing on topics of next generation repositories, peer-review and overlay 
services for repositories, national and regional network services, as well as a 
workshop for DSpace users. 

The main COAR Annual Meeting will be held in Lima, Peru on April 23-24, and 
include an international round table with participants from Africa, Asia, North 
and South America, and Europe; a panel on research assessment; and several 
keynote speakers.

The COAR community is very international and therefore most of the sessions 
will take place in English. The preconference will offer participants 
simultaneous translation (English-Spanish)

Registration costs for the meeting are €105 for COAR members, €125 for 
non-members.

Space is limited, so please register soon.

For more information about the conference, please visit the conference website 
<https://biblioteca.upc.edu.pe/coar2020/>.

CONFERENCE PAGE <https://biblioteca.upc.edu.pe/coar2020/> REGISTRATION 
<https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?utm_source=upc.edu.pe_medium=urlshortener=nqplKssl7kiFm3JpfMgFXD81E90GGGREv8-I8U_DjzlUOVNLU1pFUjE1RUhTUk8zT1NSTDhBVzc5Ry4u>
   PAYMENT FOR REGISTRATION 
<https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/coar-2020-annual-meeting-general-assembly-tickets-94849460289>




Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Developing a technical architecture for distributed peer review on repository resources

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Sorry for the cross posting)

Communiqué: Meeting participants agree to work together on a technical 
architecture for distributed peer review on repository resources

On January 23-24, 2020, COAR (Confederation of Open Access Repositories) 
convened a meeting to investigate the potential for a common, distributed 
architecture that would connect peer review with resources in repositories. The 
aim of the meeting, hosted by Inria in Paris, France, was to share the current 
workflows of various projects and systems that are managing or developing 
overlay peer review on a variety of different repository types (institutional, 
preprint, data, etc.), and assess whether there is sufficient interest in 
defining a set of common protocols and vocabularies that would allow 
interoperability across different systems. 

Meeting participants reviewed and discussed a number of different use cases. 
While each case has its own unique attributes, it was clear that there are 
significant similarities in terms of functionalities and objectives. A draft 
architecture for distributed peer review on repositories, applying existing web 
technologies and standards such as Linked Data Notifications and Activity 
Streams 2.0, was presented by Herbert Van de Sompel of DANS and prototyped by 
Martin Klein of Los Alamos National Laboratory. By the end of the meeting, 
there was a consensus by participants that it would be worthwhile to further 
specify the proposed architecture, through detailing the use cases, developing 
a common model, and further profiling the technologies. This work will be 
undertaken in the coming weeks and months.

The outcome of this work could be extremely powerful. It would allow us to move 
away from the current ‘system to system’ approach to a highly distributed, 
technically efficient overlay peer review architecture, which would enable any 
compatible repository and peer review service to participate in the network. 
This profiling builds on previous work of COAR such as Next Generation 
Repositories <https://ngr.coar-repositories.org/> and Pubfair 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/pubfair-version-2-now-available/>.
 COAR will provide regular updates about the progress of this work and all 
results will be widely shared once stable outcomes are available. For more 
information, please contact Kathleen Shearer, COAR Executive Director: 
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org 
<mailto:kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org>

Meeting Participants
Serge Bauin, CNRS
Isabel Bernal, CSIC
Martin Klein, Los Alamos National Laboratory
Thomas Lemberger, EMBO
Pierre Mounier, OPERAS
Frans Oort, University of Amsterdam
Pandelis Perakakis, Open Scholar and University of Granada
Jessica Polka, ASAPbio
Travis Rich, Knowledge Futures Group
Laurent Romary, Inria
Eloy Rodrigues, COAR and University of Minho
Tony Ross-Hellauer, Graz University of Technology 
Kathleen Shearer, COAR
Herbert Van de Sompel, DANS
Raphael Tournoy, CCSD
Paul Walk, COAR and Antleaf
John Willinsky, PKP and Stanford University
Saskia Woutersen, Leiden University___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Is overlay of peer review the future of scholarly communications?

[Kathleen Shearer]

Dear all (and sorry for the cross-posting),

Some of you may have seen the paper published recently by COAR presenting a 
distributed framework for open publishing services called Pubfair 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/files/Pubfair-version-2-November-27-2019-2.pdf>
 (version 2, after community input), also available in Spanish 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/files/Pubfair-version-2-November-27-2019-espanol-2.pdf>.

Pubfair is a conceptual model for a modular, distributed open source publishing 
framework, which builds on the content contained in the network of repositories 
to enable the dissemination and quality-control of a range of research outputs 
including publications, data, and more. 

This idea is not new. It is based on the vision outlined in the COAR Next 
Generation Repositories report <https://ngr.coar-repositories.org/>  and builds 
on earlier conceptual models developed by Paul Ginsparg, Herbert Van de Sompel 
and others. And there are already overlay journals on arXiv, such as Discrete 
Analysis <https://discreteanalysisjournal.com/> and Advances in Combinatorics 
<https://advances-in-combinatorics.scholasticahq.com/>, and other platforms 
such as Episcience <https://www.episciences.org/?lang=en> in France, that 
demonstrate that this can be done at a very high level of quality, for a low 
price.

We are proposing to expand on these initiatives by developing a highly 
distributed architecture for overlay services. With decentralization, comes 
tremendous power. It takes us beyond an environment with many silos, in which 
every organization maintains its own separate system; to a global, 
interoperable architecture for scholarly communication. This model can scale; 
respond to different needs and priorities related to language, region, and 
domain; and has the potential to set free scholarly communications.

To advance this vision, we need to develop the standards and protocols that 
define the relationships between content resources (articles, data, etc.) and 
peer reviews, assessment and other publishing services. To that end, COAR will 
be convening a meeting in mid-January 2020 with technical experts (and other 
parties already working on this) to develop and begin to profile the 
technologies and architecture that can bring this vision to reality.

We will share the outcomes of this meeting widely for community input, 
consideration and possible implementation. Please stay tuned!

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Fostering diversity in open scholarship

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Sorry for the cross-posting)

The theme for OA week this year is “Open for Whom? Equity in Open Knowledge”

Diversity is an important characteristic of any healthy ecosystem, including 
scholarly communications. Diversity in services, platforms, funding mechanisms, 
and evaluation measures will allow the ecosystem to accommodate the needs of 
different research communities and support a variety of workflows, languages, 
scholarly outputs, and research topics. Diversity also contributes to equity 
and inclusion.

As we continue on the path towards full and immediate open access (and open 
scholarship more broadly) we need to create the conditions that allow diversity 
to exist and flourish.

During Open Access Week 2019, COAR <http://www.coar-repositories.org/> 
reiterates our support for the Jussieu Call 
<https://jussieucall.org/jussieu-call/>, which promotes bibliodiversity and 
innovation in scholarly communication.

At COAR we recognize and celebrate the diversity of our community. At the same 
time, we understand that diversity cannot thrive unless it is fostered in an 
intentional way, through strong coordination.
In the coming months, COAR will work with our community and other stakeholders 
to explore new pathways and models that will help to establish the conditions 
for a diverse, inclusive and healthy ecosystem for scholarly communications.

If your organization is interested in working with us, please get in touch 
<mailto:off...@coar-repositories.org>!

All the best,

Kathleen


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR and cOAlition S Supporting Repositories to Comply with Plan S

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Please excuse the cross posting)

COAR <http://www.coar-repositories.org/> and cOAlitionS 
<https://www.coalition-s.org/coar-supporting-repositories/> share a common aim 
to accelerate the transition to full and immediate open access to scholarly 
publications and COAR supports the vision and principles outlined in Plan S.
 
Repositories offer a low-cost, high-value option for providing open access and 
are also a mechanism for introducing innovation in scholarly communication, 
acting as vehicles for developing new dissemination models and providing access 
to a wide range of scholarly content. 
 
One of the routes for complying with Plan S is for authors to make the final 
published version or the Author’s Accepted Manuscript openly available in a 
Plan S compliant repository. cOAlitionS and COAR acknowledge that some of the 
specific technical requirements of Plan S will entail extra effort for some 
repositories, however, these requirements can for the most part be addressed by 
the community. 
 
In order to ensure that repositories can comply with Plan S, COAR and 
cOAlitionS intend to work together to support repositories in adhering to the 
requirements through the following activities:
· COAR will engage with the most widely adopted repository platforms to 
determine their current capabilities to support Plan S, identify any 
challenges, and provide expertise and knowledge to help with the adoption of 
technical requirements by the platforms.
· COAR will work through its members, partners and regional networks to 
provide leadership and guidance related to the adoption of persistent 
identifiers, standard vocabularies, and quality metadata in repositories.
· COAR will provide cOAlitionS with relevant feedback from different 
regions and the repository community about issues or barriers to the 
endorsement and implementation of Plan S.
· COAR and cOAlitionS will work on a strategic roadmap to strengthen 
and transform the role of repositories in supporting open access and open 
science.


Please feel free to get in touch with me if you have any questions.

Best, 
Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Inviting community input - Pubfair: A Framework for Sustainable, Distributed, Open Science Publishing Services

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Sorry for the cross-posting)

COAR is inviting community feedback on a white paper authored by Tony 
Ross-Hellauer, Benedikt Fecher, Kathleen Shearer and Eloy Rodrigues.

The white paper, entitled Pubfair – A Framework for Sustainable, Distributed, 
Open Science Publishing Services <https://comments.coar-repositories.org/>, 
provides the rationale and describes the high level architecture for an 
innovative publishing framework that positions publishing functionalities on 
top of the content managed by a distributed network of repositories.

You can find the white paper in web format here 
<https://comments.coar-repositories.org/> or download the full text in pdf 
format here 
<https://comments.coar-repositories.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Pubfair_-A-Framework-for-Sustainable-Distributed-Open-Science-Publishing-Services.pdf>.
 Please provide your comments directly on the website.
We welcome all relevant input by September 30, 2019.

All the best, 

Kathleen


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access and Open Science in Africa - strengthening local and regional services

[Kathleen Shearer]

Hi all,

Since we don’t hear a lot about activities in Africa, I thought I’d share with 
you an initiative being led by the West and Central African Research and 
Education Network, with numerous other African and international collaborators 
(including COAR).

Best, 
Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
www.coar-repositories.org



LIBSENSE is building communities of practice and strengthening local and 
national services to support open science, open access and research in Africa.

Open science is an international trend aimed at sharing the results of research 
widely. It is transforming the way research is done, and increasing the value 
and impact of research by accelerating the pace of scientific discoveries and 
expanding the adoption of research outcomes for everyone. 

Although global in nature, there are important local and regional aspects of 
how open science and open access are implemented. It is important that the 
policies and infrastructures created to support open science are designed and 
delivered to meet the needs and requirements of the research communities in 
different regions.
This is the aim of LIBSENSE. The LIBSENSE initiative was launched in 2016 to 
bring together the research and education networks (RENs) and academic library 
communities in order to strengthen open access and open science in Africa. 
LIBSENSE provides a venue through which different stakeholder communities can 
work together to define priority activities, share knowledge, and develop 
relevant services together.

LIBSENSE is led by the West and Central African Research and Education Network 
(WACREN) in collaboration with sister regional African RENs (ASREN and 
UbuntuNet Alliance). Other participating partners include several national 
RENs, libraries, library associations, universities and research communities in 
Africa, in conjunction with COAR, EIFL, University of Sheffield, National 
Institute of Informatics (Japan), GEANT, and OpenAIRE.

From December 2018 - March 2019, LIBSENSE conducted workshops in each of the 
three major regions in Africa bringing the library and NREN communities 
together to define a shared agenda for progressing open science and open access 
in these regions. Each workshop, which contributed to priority setting in each 
region, also built upon the outcomes of preceding discussions. So far, there 
have already been several concrete outcomes of the LIBSENSE initiative, 
including: Terms of Reference for NREN-Library collaboration in African 
countries, metadata guidelines for repositories, plans for a regional 
repository hosting service, and national and institutional policy templates.

LIBSENSE will continue to assist countries and regions in Africa to undertake 
new activities and act as a forum for information exchange across the continent 
and amongst the different stakeholder communities.

For more information, visit the LIBSENSE website: 
https://spaces.wacren.net/display/LIBSENSE 
<https://spaces.wacren.net/display/LIBSENSE>






___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR's response to Plan S

[Kathleen Shearer]

Hi there, sorry for the cross-posting.

Members of this mailing list may be interested in COAR’s response to Plan S.



On September 4, 2018, a coalition of research funders in Europe published Plan 
S <https://www.scienceeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Plan_S.pdf>, an 
ambitious plan to accelerate Open Access in Europe.
COAR welcomes the strong stance taken towards open access by a coalition of 11 
European Funders, coordinated by Science Europe as outlined in Plan S and we 
strongly support the goal of accelerating the transition to open access.

Europe has been one of the leading regions in regards to Open Access and Open 
Science; nevertheless, it is important to appreciate that the policies and 
practices adopted in Europe will have an impact on other regions and countries 
outside of Europe. As such, COAR has three recommendations for these funders as 
the implementation of Plan S moves forward

Do not restrict the vehicles for providing open access to ‘journals’ and 
‘platforms’, but rather develop assessment criteria based on functions, like 
peer-review and other types of editorial services.
Make use of the existing organized and globally connected repository network to 
advance Open Access and Open Science across the world.
Be aware and responsive to the significant concerns in other regions and 
countries about the widespread adoption of the APC model.
COAR’s full response is available here 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/files/COAR-response-to-Plan-S-Sept-2018.pdf>
—

If you have questions, please get in touch.

Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>






___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] launch of new free and fair overlay mathematics journal

[Kathleen Shearer]

Today, a new journal in mathematics was launched by Timothy Gowers and Dan 
Kral. The journal, called ‘Advances in Combinatorics 
<https://advances-in-combinatorics.scholasticahq.com/>’, is an overlay journal, 
built entirely on articles contained in the arXiv repository. It is free to 
read and will not charge authors to publish. The relatively low costs of 
running the journal are being covered by Queen’s University Library in Ontario, 
Canada, which is also providing administrative support.

COAR <http://www.coar-repositories.org/> and Queen’s University Library were 
very keen to participate in the launch of this journal as it offers a model of 
overlay services on top of repositories, a model that could eventually be 
generalized beyond arXiv. “This aligns really well with our vision for next 
generation repositories”, says Kathleen Shearer, executive director of the 
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR), “on top of which we can build 
services such as peer review”. 

According to the journal’s founder <https://gowers.wordpress.com/>, Timothy 
Gowers, research professor at the University of Cambridge, ‘Advances in 
Combinatorics’ was created in order to “give people the option... to submit to 
a journal that is not complicit in a system that uses its monopoly power to 
ruthlessly squeeze library budgets”.

The extreme profit seeking of some of the commercial publishers (it has been 
reported 
<https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/elseviers-profits-swell-more-ps900-million>
 that Elsevier made profits of approximately $1.2 billion US dollars in 2017) 
is stretching library budgets to the limit. In addition, it has created 
significant barriers in access to research and -with the advent of article 
processing charges (APCs)- it is exacerbating inequalities in researchers' 
ability to publish.

Martha Whitehead, vice-provost (digital planning) and university librarian at 
Queen’s University says, “As libraries, we need to nurture and invest in new 
models that will contribute to a more sustainable and inclusive system for 
research communications. We are delighted to be able to support this innovative 
approach to journal publishing.”

The journal plans to set a high bar for acceptance. Currently there are no 
non-commercial publishing venues that cater for combinatorics articles at the 
level envisaged. The aim is to offer an ethical alternative by launching a 
journal that publishes high quality papers, but does not charge publishing fees 
or for subscriptions.

---


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer
www.coar-repositories.org





___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] COAR Annual Meeting and new Executive Board

[Kathleen Shearer]

Well I’m sure Jean Claude could do a much better job in explaining than I,
but the idea is to build into a distributed system a way to support solving
problems and intellectual dialogue and exchange on specific domains, fields
of studies and problems. Journals bring together content that is related.
We also want to do this but in a distributed, global repository network
that is currently very multidisiplinary.

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 12:19 PM Peter Murray-Rust <pm...@cam.ac.uk> wrote:

> Replying only to GOAL...
>
> Thank you very much for this report.
>
> One question:
>
>
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Kathleen Shearer <
> m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Jean-Claude Guédon, Professor at the Université de Montreal and
>> respected open access advocate, urged us to consider two important
>> principles within our repository network: intellectual proximity and
>> problem solving complementarity.
>
>
> Could you please expand on these as I don't understand what they mean in
> detail.
> Thanks
>
> P.
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader Emeritus in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dept. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR Annual Meeting and new Executive Board

[Kathleen Shearer]

upport: Leibniz
Information Centre for Economics, Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Global Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition, OpenAIRE,
SPARC North America, and the University of Alberta Libraries. All the
presentations are now available on the COAR website.

If you have comments or question, please feel to get in touch.

All the best,

Kathleen Shearer, COAR Executive Director
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR: building a global knowledge commons

[Kathleen Shearer]

(please excuse the cross posting)



On May 14-17, 2018, COAR will have its Annual Meeting in Hamburg, Germany. The 
meeting will bring together a growing and active community that aims to 
transform scholarly communication by developing a global knowledge commons that 
will be more inclusive, sustainable and innovative, and better serve the needs 
of the international research community.
 
Next generation repositories, based at universities and research institutions 
(and their libraries) around the world, represent the infrastructure to support 
this vision. On top of the collective content contained in repositories - 
articles, data, and other valuable research products - we intend to build new 
services, including peer review, citation and usage metrics, and a transparent 
social network. 

The global knowledge commons must be distributed in order to better reflect the 
diverse needs and requirements of different communities and perspectives, and 
to protect from buyout or enclosure. To support strengthening regional and 
national services, the event will include a meeting with 14 repository networks 
from around the world at which we will discuss the principles, functionalities 
and standards needed to pave the way for greater global interoperability and 
enhanced services.
 
These meetings will be a significant step in progressing our vision of a global 
knowledge commons.

For more information, please see the COAR website 
<http://www.coar-repositories.org/>.

Kathleen


---

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>






___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR publishes recommendations for next generation repositories

[Kathleen Shearer]

(please excuse the cross-posting)



COAR publishes recommendations for next generation repositories

Browse Technologies 
 
In November 2017, the COAR Next Generation Repositories Working Group published 
a report outlining new behaviours and technologies for repositories.
The aim is to position repositories as the foundation for a distributed, 
globally networked infrastructure for scholarly communication, on top of which 
layers of value added services will be deployed, thereby transforming the 
system, making it more research-centric, open to and supportive of innovation, 
while also collectively managed by the scholarly community.
The behaviours and technologies are now available on a dedicated website 
 and through GitHub 
. We welcome community feedback 
about existing recommendations and suggestions for other technologies not yet 
identified.

 
Towards a global knowledge commons
 
  
 

COAR e.V.
www.coar-repositories.org 
off...@coar-repositories.org 

 

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Recommendations for Next Generation Repositories

[Kathleen Shearer]

(sorry for the cross-posting)



COAR is pleased to announce the publication of the work of the Next Generation 
Repositories Working Group, Behaviours and Technical Recommendations of the 
COAR Next Generation Repositories Working Group 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/working-group-next-generation-repositories/>
 
In April 2016, the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) launched 
the Next Generation Repository Working Group to identify new functionalities 
and technologies for repositories. In this report, we are pleased to present 
the results of the work of this group, including recommendations for the 
adoption of new technologies, standards, and protocols that will help 
repositories become more integrated into the web environment and enable them to 
play a larger role in the scholarly communication ecosystem.
The current system for disseminating research, which is dominated by commercial 
publishers, is far from ideal. In an economic sense, prices for both 
subscriptions and APCs are over-inflated and will likely continue to rise at 
unacceptable rates. Additionally, there are significant inequalities in the 
international publishing system both in terms of access and participation. The 
incentives built into the system, which oblige researchers to publish in 
traditional publishing venues, perpetuate these problems and greatly stifle our 
ability to evolve and innovate.

At COAR, we believe the globally distributed network of more than 3000 
repositories can be leveraged to create a more sustainable and innovative 
system for sharing and building on the results of research. Collectively, 
repositories can provide a comprehensive view of the research of the whole 
world, while also enabling each scholar and institution to participate in the 
global network of scientific and scholarly enquiry. Building additional 
services such as standardized usage metrics, peer review and social networking 
on top of a trusted global network of repositories has the potential to offer a 
viable alternative.

The vision underlying the work of Next Generation Repositories is,

To position repositories as the foundation for a distributed, globally 
networked infrastructure for scholarly communication, on top of which layers of 
value added services will be deployed, thereby transforming the system, making 
it more research-centric, open to and supportive of innovation, while also 
collectively managed by the scholarly community.

An important component of this vision is that repositories will provide access 
to a wide variety of research outputs, creating the conditions whereby a 
greater diversity of contributions to the scholarly record will be accessible, 
and also formally recognized in research assessment processes.

Our vision is aligned with others, such as MIT’s Future of Libraries Report 
<https://future-of-libraries.mit.edu/> and Lorcan Dempsey’s notion of the 
“inside-out” library 
<https://www.liberquarterly.eu/articles/10.18352/lq.10170/>, that are defining 
a new role of libraries in the 21st century. This future involves a shift away 
from libraries purchasing content for their local users, towards libraries 
curating and sharing with the rest of the world the research outputs produced 
at their institution. COAR’s mission is to ensure that, as libraries and 
research organizations invest in and enhance their local services, they adopt 
common standards and functionalities that will allow them to participate in the 
global network. We very much hope that the recommendations provided in this 
report will contribute to the transition towards this new role for repositories 
and libraries.

This was a truly collaborative effort. We would like to sincerely thank the 
members of the Next Generation Repositories Working Group 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/working-group-next-generation-repositories/next-generation-repositories-working-group/>
 for their generous contributions and significant efforts towards this 
undertaking. They have brought a breadth and depth of expertise, without which 
we would not have been able to accomplish this work. We are very grateful!

Eloy Rodrigues, COAR Chairman and Kathleen Shearer, COAR Executive Director


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer
www.coar-repositories.org





___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Beyond open access - towards a sustainable knowledge commons

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Sorry for the cross-posting)

Open access is about the democratization of knowledge.
However, as open access becomes widely adopted, there is a risk that we will 
accentuate the inequalities and unsustainability of scholarly publishing, 
through widespread implementation of pay to publish business models.

At COAR, we recognize that we need to go beyond open access, to consider how to 
create an open and fair system for sharing research outcomes.

To that end, we have identified 5 prerequisite for a sustainable knowledge 
commons (see below)
Our full infographic is available here. 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/open-science-and-sustainable-development/>
 También, disponible en español aqui. 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/open-science-and-sustainable-development/>
Please feel free to use and share.

Kathleen




Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer
www.coar-repositories.org





___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Latin American and Caribbean consortia express concerns about APCs

[Kathleen Shearer]

(sorry for any cross-posting)

Dear colleagues, 

I wanted to share with you a recent declaration that was issued during a 
meeting of national consortia from Latin America, the Caribbean and Spain. The 
meeting, which took place in Mexico in early September 2017, was organized by 
the Ministries of Science and Technology from Mexico, Chile and Brazil [1], and 
attended by representatives from 10 countries responsible for negotiating with 
publishers for national access to scientific/research publications.

The statement expresses the concerns of the participating organizations over 
the costs of APCs (article publishing charges) and outlines their perspective 
on international discussions around flipping subscriptions to APC open access. 

Most notably, the consortia were in agreement that APCs will not help to reduce 
costs, but rather contribute to the already inflationary situation with the 
current international scholarly publishing system.

Additionally, among other things, the consortia pledged to:
Strengthen their local and regional publishing efforts (and try to prevent the 
internationalization of local and regional journals)
Reflect on what they can do to address the big deal lock-in, and analyze that 
potential of title by title purchase
Share information across consortia and work more closely together.
For more information, you can read the declaration in Spanish 
<http://reuniondeconsorcios.conricyt.mx/index.php/acuerdos/> and English 
<http://reuniondeconsorcios.conricyt.mx/index.php/acuerdos/?lang=en>. The 
website for the consortium is here: http://reuniondeconsorcios.conricyt.mx/ 
<http://reuniondeconsorcios.conricyt.mx/>


[1] The meeting was organized by: El Consorcio Nacional de Recursos de 
Información Científica y Tecnológica (CONRICYT) in Mexico
la Comisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (CONICYT) and el 
Consorcio para el Acceso a la Información Científica de Chile (CINCEL) in Chile
el Instituto Brasileiro de Informaḉão em Ciência e Tecnologia (IBICT) in Brazil

-

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer
www.coar-repositories.org <http://www.coar-repositories.org/>___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Elsevier's interpretation of CC BY-NC-ND

[Kathleen Shearer]

And then these “researcher driven initiatives" will eventually just get bought 
out by Elsevier or another big publisher, or lag because they can’t find stable 
funding.

That is why we need a community-based infrastructure, governed and managed in a 
distributed way, which will allow researchers to innovate and build their 
services on top.

Some of us are coalescing around an ecosystem that looks like this:

1. Libraries support and manage open content locally (that is actually the 
mission of a library)

2. Value added networked services are built on top - including peer review and 
annotation

3. Move subscription funds towards local content management and to support 
network services

4. Adopt governance principles for this global research infrastructure as 
recommended in Bilder G, Lin J, Neylon C (2015) Principles for Open Scholarly 
Infrastructure-v1, retrieved [date], 
http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1314859

We need to find solutions that are “at scale” if we want to change the system.

Best, Kathleen



> On Jun 20, 2017, at 10:14 AM, Couture Marc  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
>  
> What’s to conclude from this perplexing answer?
>  
> I did check Elsevier’s policy, in case it had changed overnight... but it 
> didn’t: manuscripts under embargo still must bear CC licenses allowing 
> anybody (except the authors, who are bound by the publishing agreement they 
> have signed) to post them on a non-commercial site (that includes all 
> institutional repositories, as far as I can see).
>  
> I can just assume that “it wouldn’t really work very well for very long” 
> means that if it does works (that is, if enough researchers and repository 
> staff members do what is needed), Elsevier will simply (again) change its 
> policy, like they did before after mandates became more prevalent.
>  
> Will this cat-and-mouse play ever end?
>  
> Researchers could - and should - be the ones calling the shots, deciding how 
> and under what conditions their results are made public. Some are already 
> showing the way ( <>MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from 
> "openlibhums.org" claiming to be http:/openlibhums.org 
> , http://episciences.org , 
> http://discreteanalysisjournal.com , 
> etc.).
>  
> Marc Couture
>  
>  
> De : goal-boun...@eprints.org  
> [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org ] De la 
> part de Hersh, Gemma (ELS-CAM)
> Envoyé : 20 juin 2017 02:18
> À : Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
> Objet : Re: [GOAL] Elsevier's interpretation of CC BY-NC-ND
>  
> Dear Richard
> 
> Elsevier's hosting policy 
>  explains how 
> platforms can host Elsevier content. This includes enabling institutional 
> repositories to share their employee's or student's accepted manuscripts 
> publicly after an embargo period, but not beforehand. 
>  
> The challenge with the proposal below is that it wouldn’t really work very 
> well for very long; an embargo period is needed to enable the subscription 
> model to continue to operate, in the absence of a separate business model.
>  
> Best wishes
>  
> Gemma 
>  
> Gemma Hersh
> VP, Policy and Communications
> Elsevier I 125 London Wall I London I EC2Y 5AS
> M: +44 (0) 7855 258 957 I E: g.he...@elsevier.com 
> 
> Twitter: @gemmahersh
>  
> 
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org 
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal 
> 
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] International Accord for Repository Networks

[Kathleen Shearer]

Sorry for the cross posting




 
 
 
 
International Accord for Repository Networks
Venice, Italy
On May 8, 2017, several regional and national repository networks and 
stakeholder groups formally endorsed an international accord 
<http://coar.cmail20.com/t/d-i-kyiiuuk-l-r/> that will lead to the greater 
alignment of repository networks around the world. The aim of the accord is to 
improve cooperation between national and regional repository networks by 
identifying common principles and areas of collaboration that will lead to the 
development of global services.
Repositories play a fundamental and expanding role in supporting open access 
and open science, and there are thousands of repositories deployed around the 
world that provide access to research articles, data and other types of 
content. Increasingly, these repositories are connected through regional and 
national repository networks that define standards for their communities and 
offer valuable services on top of repository content. However, given the 
international nature of research, it is critical that these repository networks 
work together to ensure they are interoperable, while also supporting the 
unique needs of their local communities.
The international accord, developed by COAR, the Confederation of Open Access 
Repositories, will foster closer relationships between the regional networks 
and act as a framework for undertaking specific activities including metadata 
exchange across networks, the adoption of common standards and APIs, and 
implementation of common functionalities. The accord was signed by network 
representatives from Australasia, Canada, China, Europe, Latin America, Japan, 
South Africa, and the United States.
“We share a common vision of a distributed, community-based open science 
infrastructure around the world”, says Eloy Rodrigues, chairman of COAR. “But 
to achieve this vision, we need to work together.” Kathleen Shearer, COAR 
Executive Director says, “This accord brings us one step closer to our goal of 
transforming the system to make it more research-centric, open to and 
supportive of innovation, while also collectively managed by the scholarly 
community.”
In the coming weeks, COAR, along with the signatories, will work to define the 
various levels of collaboration, with the eventual aim of positioning 
repositories as the foundation of a global knowledge commons.
The accord is available here: 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/aligning-repository-networks-across-regions/
 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/aligning-repository-networks-across-regions/>
For more information, please contact Kathleen Shearer, 
off...@coar-repositories.org <mailto:off...@coar-repositories.org>
Photo credit: NASA Solar System Montage, 2001
 
 
 




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Internet Archive Mirroring in Canada to Protect from Trump

[Kathleen Shearer]

Hi Heather, all.

I think OA repositories are already moving in that direction. 

At COAR we are trying to promote widespread data exchange between repository 
networks so that there is redundancy across networks and multiple copies around 
the world. 

There is already significant sharing of metadata across networks -OpenAIRE, LA 
Referencia, SHARE, JAIRO (Japan), CORE and others - but I foresee in the near 
future that this will move beyond just metadata to fulltext. Actually some 
networks already are harvesting full text.

Fundamental to our vision is that there is distribution of the control of 
scholarly resources (pre-prints, post-prints, research data, supporting 
software, etc.). Without this, a small number of actors can gain too much 
control.

Best, Kathleen


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer




> On Nov 30, 2016, at 2:52 PM, Donat Agosti <ago...@amnh.org> wrote:
> 
> May be switzerland as an alternative – but then what happened to Snowden 
> might not be stimulating enough…
> 
> Donat
>  
>  
>  
> From: goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org> 
> [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org>] On Behalf 
> Of Heather Morrison
> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 6:53 PM
> To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <goal@eprints.org 
> <mailto:goal@eprints.org>>
> Cc: jisc-repositories <jisc-repositor...@jiscmail.ac.uk 
> <mailto:jisc-repositor...@jiscmail.ac.uk>>
> Subject: Re: [GOAL] Internet Archive Mirroring in Canada to Protect from Trump
>  
> Thank you for the alert, Stevan.
>  
> This might be a good moment to consider / re-consider the question of 
> archiving for sustainable long-term open access. It is true that Canada is 
> not the U.S. - but the U.S. is our main trading partner and a friendly 
> neighbour but also a very powerful neighbour with whom we share not only a 
> very long border but also intelligence information.
>  
> I argue that multiple copies of archives, not only in friendly neighbouring 
> countries but also in regions that are different both geographically and 
> politically, is in the best long-term interests of ongoing sharing of our 
> collective knowledge.
>  
> Thoughts?
>  
>  
> Heather Morrison
>  
> On 2016-11-30, at 11:12 AM, Stevan Harnad <amscifo...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:amscifo...@gmail.com>>
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> We're only just beginning to see the long, dark reach of what the deplorables 
> have wrought upon the planet... (Thank goodness the Canadian government today 
> is Trudeau's liberals and not Harper's "conservatives.")
>  
> MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from 
> "na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com" claiming to 
> behttp://thenextweb.com/politics/2016/11/30/trump-scares-internet-archive-canada/
>  
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fthenextweb.com%2Fpolitics%2F2016%2F11%2F30%2Ftrump-scares-internet-archive-canada%2F=01%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7C701b91713d7d40a1d10908d4194fb601%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C1=lLkU8YzTtKuaa%2BaiRx5IPlKnEQn9VHSQHeIkOkxXGW8%3D=0>
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org <mailto:GOAL@eprints.org>
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal 
> <http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal>
>  
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org <mailto:GOAL@eprints.org>
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal 
> <http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal>
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open access week webinar - COAR Next Generation Repositories

[Kathleen Shearer]

COAR is pleased to offer a webinar for Open Access Week on the topic of “Next 
Generation Repositories”.

The nearly ubiquitous deployment of repository systems in higher education and 
research institutions provides the foundation for a distributed, globally 
networked infrastructure for scholarly communication. However, repository 
platforms are still using technologies and protocols designed almost twenty 
years ago, before the boom of the Web and the dominance of Google, social 
networking, semantic web and ubiquitous mobile devices. This is, in large part, 
why repositories have not fully realized their potential.

In April 2016, COAR launched a Working Group 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/working-group-next-generation-repositories/>
 to identify the core functionalities for the next generation of repositories. 
These functionalities include more web-friendly architectures, embedding 
repositories into the workflow of researchers, open peer review and quality 
assessment of content, and better impact and usage measures.

With these new functionalities, we aim to position repositories as the 
foundation for a distributed, globally networked infrastructure for scholarly 
communication, on top of which layers of value added services will be deployed, 
thereby transforming the system, making it more research-centric, open to and 
supportive of innovation, while also collectively managed by the scholarly 
community.

COAR invites you to join us for presentations and a discussion about the future 
potential for repositories in the coming years.

The webinar will be live streamed twice on Tuesday, October 25, 2016, to ensure 
it can be attended by people in several different regions: 8h GMT and 15h GMT. 
See the GMT Converter  <http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/gmt-converter/>to find 
out the time in your location.

The webinar will be openly available to all and you are welcome to offer this 
webcast as part of the open access activities in your institution: 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/webinar-and-discussion/webinar-next-generation-repositories/

Please register by October 21st:
Registration form <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TN5TDY9> for 8h GMT
Registration form <https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/T3D93BW> for 15h GMT
————


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Q with CNI's Clifford Lynch: Time to re-think the institutional repository?

[Kathleen Shearer]

 proposed 
ResourceSync <http://www.openarchives.org/rs/toc>, based on Sitemaps, for 
discovery and synchronization of repository resources. A major outcome for the 
COAR Next Generation Repositories Working Group will be recommendations about 
new standards for repository interoperability.

And so, there is an African proverb that I often quote in my presentations 
about the future of repositories, ‘If you want to go fast, go alone. If you 
want to go far, go together’. Indeed, it has taken longer than we had 
anticipated to coalesce around a common vision in a distributed, global 
environment, but we are now well positioned to offer a viable alternative for 
an open and community led scholarly communication system.

Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director, COAR



> On Sep 23, 2016, at 2:59 AM, Richard Poynder <richard.poyn...@cantab.net> 
> wrote:
> 
> Seventeen years ago 25 people gathered in Santa Fe, New Mexico, to discuss 
> ways in which the growing number of e-print servers and digital repositories 
> could be made interoperable.
>  
> As scholarly archives and repositories had begun to proliferate a number of 
> issues had arisen. There was a concern, for instance, that archives would 
> needlessly replicate each other’s content, and that users would have to learn 
> multiple interfaces in order to use them. What was therefore needed was to 
> develop tools and protocols that would allow repositories to work in concert 
> on a distributed basis. Above all, there was a need to make distributed 
> archives interoperable so that their content could be aggregated into a 
> single searchable virtual archive of (eventually) all published research. 
>  
> The meeting led to the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata 
> Harvesting (OAI-PMH), and to the institutional repository movement. Today 
> there are thousands of institutional repositories around the world.
>  
> Yet 17 years later the interoperability promised by OAI-PMH has not really 
> materialised, few third-party service providers have emerged to leverage the 
> content in repositories, and duplication has not been avoided. Moreover, to 
> the exasperation of green OA advocates, authors have proved reluctant to take 
> on the task of depositing their papers in these repositories. Some therefore 
> now believe that the institutional repository faces an existential threat. At 
> the very least, they say, it is time to rethink the role and purpose of the 
> institutional repository. 
>  
> These and other matters are discussed in an interview with Clifford Lynch, 
> director of the Washington-based Coalition for Networked Information and one 
> of those who attended the Santa Fe meeting. 
>  
> The Q (plus introduction) can be accessed here: 
> http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/q-with-cnis-clifford-lynch-time-to-re_22.html
>  
> <http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/q-with-cnis-clifford-lynch-time-to-re_22.html>
>  
>  
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org <mailto:GOAL@eprints.org>
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal 
> <http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal>
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Call for action! (was Prophylactic Against Elsevier Predation)

[Kathleen Shearer]

Call for action!

A new ecology for scholarly communications is emerging which involves openness 
and sharing of publications, data, research administrative information, and 
other research outputs.

Libraries and universities are already contributing to this ecology by hosting 
systems and platforms that provide access to content. But the time has come to 
increase our participation and bring back control of the system to the 
scholarly community. This will ensure that the system reflects the value of 
research as a public good that should be shared widely for the benefit of 
society, rather than driven and manipulated to support profit making by 
companies through locking up content and controlling scholarly workflows.

In order to ensure widespread access and participation in the system, scholarly 
services and platforms should be as open as possible. There are already 
thousands of repositories being managed by research institutions across the 
world, essentially representing a global knowledge commons. They have coalesced 
into networks and communities of practice at regional and national levels, and 
are working at the global level through COAR to ensure interoperability and 
improve repository platforms so they can expose content in more flexible ways 
and develop  services that support scholarly communication, such as peer 
review, metrics and researchers’ profiles. To prevent the further takeover of 
the knowledge commons by corporate interests, we must intensify and build on 
these early efforts to greatly improve the functionality of our systems, raise 
awareness of their value, and better support the needs of the research 
community.

Given our shared values and mission, we call on the scholarly community to work 
together to support and contribute to a system that is truly open, functional, 
and driven by the needs of the research community.

One of COAR’s major objectives for 2016-17 is to identify the core 
functionalities for the next generation of repositories 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/working-group-next-generation-repositories/>,
 as well as the architectures and technologies required to implement them; and 
to work with the repository community to help adopt these functionalities. We 
also aim to create a global standard for repositories that establishes 
repositories as a central place for the daily research and dissemination 
activities of researchers.

Please let me know if you are interested in this activity. We are looking for 
ways to bring in broader participation.


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer




> On May 19, 2016, at 7:16 AM, WALK Paul <p.w...@ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> "The best way to keep Elsevier from dominating the space would be for there 
> to be plenty of lean and hungry startups seeing opportunities here."
> 
> That seems demonstrably untrue, when such lean and hungry startups often have 
> acquisition as their main exit strategy...
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
>> On 19 May 2016, at 11:17, William Gunn <william.g...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for your comments, Eric F! If we want to improve scholarly 
>> communications, we have to drop the idea that top-down grant funded projects 
>> are the ideal. The best way to keep Elsevier from dominating the space would 
>> be for there to be plenty of lean and hungry startups seeing opportunities 
>> here. 
>> 
>> 
>> William Gunn
>> +1 (650) 614-1749
>> http://synthesis.williamgunn.org/about/
>> 
>> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Eric F. Van de Velde 
>> <eric.f.vandeve...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Eric Archambault:
>> This is quite impressive and potentially very helpful.
>> 
>> Stevan:
>> We started with IRs that would grow organically. When that did not work, we 
>> pursued institutional mandates. Now, it is national funder mandates. This 
>> attitude of top-down enforced innovation is at odds with today's tech 
>> culture of bottom-up innovation. The top-down approach is just too slow.
>> 
>> Libraries have now been managing IRs for over 15 years without any 
>> significant changes to IRs. They still have no social component, like 
>> Figshare or academia.edu. As we have seen elsewhere, the social component is 
>> crucial to achieve organic growth.
>> 
>> Worse than not adding features is the attitude that IRs are the goal. The 
>> real goal should be better scholarly communication. This may require a new 
>> IR: Individual Repositories. Social platforms are far more suited for the 
>> individual researcher.
>> 
>> I am not an a

[GOAL] COAR Next Generation Repositories Project

[Kathleen Shearer]

COAR Next Generation Repositories Project
The nearly ubiquitous deployment of repository systems in higher education and 
research institutions provides the foundation for a distributed, globally 
networked infrastructure for scholarly communication. However, repository 
platforms are still using technologies and protocols designed almost twenty 
years ago, before the boom of the Web and the dominance of Google, social 
networking, semantic web and ubiquitous mobile devices. In order to leverage 
the value of the repository network, we need to equip them with a wider array 
of roles and functionalities, which can be enabled through new levels of 
web-centric interoperability.
The vision behind this work is to position repositories as the foundation for a 
distributed, globally networked infrastructure for scholarly communication, on 
top of which layers of value added services will be deployed, thereby 
transforming the system, making it more research-centric, open to and 
supportive of innovation, while also collectively managed by the scholarly 
community.
In April 2016, COAR launched a working group to help identify functionalities 
and technologies for repositories and develop a roadmap for their adoption. The 
group will share preliminary results with repository and scholarly communities 
in order to validate recommendations and ensure community input. The aim is to 
have a final report published in early 2017.
Members of the Working Group are:
Eloy Rodrigues, chair (COAR, Portugal)
Andrea Bollini (CINECA, Italy)
Alberto Cabezas (LA Referencia, Chile)
Donatella Castelli (CNR, Italy)
Les Carr (Southampton University, UK)
Leslie Chan (University of Toronto at Scarborough, Canada)
Rick Johnson (University of Notre Dame, US)
Paolo Manghi (CNR, Italy)
Lazarus Matizirofa (NRF, South Africa)
Pandelis Perakakis (Open Scholar, Spain)
Oya Rieger (Cornell University, US)
Jochen Schirrwagen (University of Bielefeld, Germany)
Kathleen Shearer (COAR, Canada)
Tim Smith (CERN, Switzerland)
Herbert Van de Sompel (Los Alamos National Laboratory, US)
Paul Walk (EDINA, UK)
David Wilcox (Duraspace/Fedora, Canada)
Kazu Yamaji (National Institute of Informatics, Japan)

For more details, see the COAR website: 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/working-group-next-generation-repositories/
 
<https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/working-group-next-generation-repositories/>

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Joint UNESCO-COAR Statement on Open Access

[Kathleen Shearer]

(sorry for the cross posting)

Joint COAR-UNESCO Statement on Open Access

Open access is a global trend, with policies and practices rapidly being 
adopted around the world. As the world enters a new era of sustainable 
development, openness and inclusiveness in scientific research will become 
increasingly critical. While most governments agree on the underlying 
principles of open access, there is significant diversity in the way countries 
have approached its implementation. These differences reflect a range of 
perspectives, values, and priorities of the different regions. Clearly, there 
is no “one-size-fits-all” solution to implementing open access.

It is imperative that governments and the research community encourage a 
variety of approaches to the implementation of OA. This will result in a 
healthier and more innovative ecosystem for scholarly publishing, and 
ultimately lead to greater use and impact of research.

Some organizations are promoting a large-scale shift from subscriptions to open 
access via article processing charges (APC’s). However, there are a number of 
issues that need to be addressed in this model:
Consider institutions with smaller budgets and developing countries. Authors 
will be unable to publish once limited funds have been exhausted. Such a system 
will need to support researchers who cannot pay APCs – to avoid further skewing 
a scholarly publishing system that is already biased against the research 
undertaken in certain disciplines and countries.
Avoid further concentration in the international publishing industry. A flip to 
APCs will further consolidate the large-scale monopoly of the international 
publishing industry. In the current system, the five largest publishers publish 
over 50% of the research papers produced.(1) A mere shift towards the 
pay-to-publish model will institutionalize the influence of these companies, 
and discourage new entrants and models other than APC models.
Explore ways to reduce costs. Recent studies indicate that, at current APC 
costs, there would be a buffer of minimum 40% when subscriptions would be 
transferred to an open access model. New models should build in mechanisms that 
ensure cost reductions.(2) Globally, we are already paying billions of 
Euros/Dollars per year on subscription access to journals. Simply shifting 
payments to support APCs may lead to higher systemic costs, curb innovation, 
and inhibit the scholarly community’s ability to take advantage of new models 
and tools.
There are numerous high quality and economically viable journals that do not 
rely on APCs. Additionally, while journals play an important role, repositories 
have been established around the world and they represent the primary 
mechanisms for implementing open access in the vast majority of countries. 
Individual repositories are linked via national and regional discovery services 
like OpenAIRE and LA Referencia, and regional services are entering into 
agreements about data exchange that will ensure truly international and 
cost-effective coverage of publication output, and support the development of 
innovative, value added services on top of the global network.

As noted in UNESCO’s World Science Report, “The creation and transfer of 
scientific knowledge are critical to building and sustaining socio-economic 
welfare and integration in the global economy. In the long run, no region or 
nation can remain a simple ‘user’ of new knowledge but must also become a 
‘creator’ of new knowledge.”(3) A large-scale continental shift towards a pay 
to publish model in Europe may have significant unintended consequences for 
both Europe and elsewhere by impeding global participation in the system and 
contribute to a more consolidated and costly scholarly publishing system.

The full text available here: 
http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/news/coar_unesco_oa_statement.pdf
 
<http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/news/coar_unesco_oa_statement.pdf>
--

For more information, please contact:

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] {Disarmed} COAR Meeting: The Role of Collaboration in Building a Global Knowledge Commons

[Kathleen Shearer]

 
 
 
 
 
The role of collaboration in building a global knowledge commons
The Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) and the University of 
Vienna are pleased to announce the upcoming COAR Annual Meeting and Conference, 
which will take place at the University of Vienna on April 12 & 13, 2016. 
The major themes for this year's meeting are new roles for repositories and 
international collaboration. The conference will offer participants the 
opportunity to learn about international trends in open science/open access, 
engage with colleagues from around the world, and pursue collaborative projects 
with international partners.
The discussions will lay the foundation for COAR's work in 2016-17 around new 
functionalities for repositories, value-added services, and improving the flow 
of research knowledge.
Registration fees are very affordable: 
€50 Euros (for members of COAR and e-Infrastructure Austria)
€80 Euros (for non-members).
Register now 
Conference themes and speakers
Next generation repositories: The meetings will kick off with two 
thought-provoking speakers talking about new technologies and roles for 
repositories.
Pandelis Perakakis, Open Scholar and University of Granada
Herbert Van de Sompel, Los Alamos National Laboratory 
Focus on China: There will be a session offering an overview of the current 
state of open science in China.
Xiaolin Zhang, Chinese Academy of Sciences
Dr. Liping Ku, Chinese Academy of Sciences
International collaboration: Several presentations will report on existing 
international, collaborative work.
Daisy Selematsela, National Science Foundation, South Africa
Gerald Beasley, University of Alberta, Canada
Plus speakers from Latin America, Europe and the United States
Improving the flow of knowledge: The conference will close with an open, 
interactive discussion about how we can improve the flow of knowledge around 
the world. 

View the full programme 
 
    
 
 
 



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Major repository networks agree to adopt common guidelines

[Kathleen Shearer]

Sorry for the cross posting

Please see the announcement below about a meeting last week in Rio de Janeiro 
between COAR, LA Referencia and OpenAIRE to discuss further alignment of these 
two major repository networks. The announcement will be available in English, 
Spanish and Portuguese on the LA Referencia website: 
http://lareferencia.redclara.net/rfr/ <http://lareferencia.redclara.net/rfr/>

A major, important outcome was an agreement between the two networks that they 
would adopt common metadata guidelines (OpenAIRE Guidelines) and participate 
together in their further development over time. This will ensure much greater 
interoperability between the content in the repositories in these regions. 

Please feel free to get in touch with me if you have any questions.

Best, Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer


---

Communiqué

Rio de Janeiro, November 25 & 26, 2015

There is growing recognition worldwide that our substantial global investments 
in research have much greater impact if they are widely shared and openly 
available to everyone. LA Referencia, OpenAIRE and COAR reaffirm their strong 
support for a shared vision of a global network of repositories as fundamental 
infrastructure for providing sustainable and open access to research outputs, 
ensuring that all researchers and citizens have access to the results of 
publicly funded research.

On November 25 and 26, 2015 representatives from LA Referencia, OpenAIRE and 
COAR met in Rio de Janeiro to discuss the adoption of common metadata 
guidelines for repository networks and identify areas for further 
collaboration. The meeting was hosted by the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 
along with Ibict (Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia), 
and is part of the Aligning Repository   Networks work being lead 
by COAR.

OpenAIRE and LA Referencia represent two of the most advanced regional networks 
of open access repositories in the world. Closer collaboration between these 
two networks will enhance the usability and visibility of the collective 
content in the networks and enable the development of value added services 
across the two regions.

The three organizations therefore resolve to pursue their common vision through 
the following activities:

LA Referencie and OpenAIRE will adopt common metadata practices, based on the 
current OpenAIRE guidelines and the vocabularies being developed in the context 
of COAR, for repository networks and develop these guidelines in collaboration.

COAR, LA Referencia, and OpenAIRE will explore ways to build capacity for 
managing repositories and repository networks in Latin America, particularly in 
terms of the implementation of best practices.

Under the auspices of COAR, LA Referencia, and OpenAIRE will continue to work 
with other national and regional networks to promote the vision of a global 
repository network and investigate common services in support of open access 
and open science.

--

LA Referencia is the network of open access repositories from eight Latin 
American countries. It supports national open access strategies in Latin 
America through shared standards and a single discovery platform. LA Referencia 
harvests scholarly articles and theses & dissertations from national nodes, 
which, in turn, harvest from repositories at universities and research 
institutions. This initiative is based on technical and organizational 
agreements between public science and technology organizations (National 
Ministries and Science & Technology Departments) with RedCLARA.

OpenAIRE, funded by the European Commission under H2020,  is the Open Access 
Infrastructure for Research in Europe, based on  the network of open access 
repositories.


The Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) is an international 
association with over 100 members and partners from around the world 
representing libraries, universities, research institutions, government funders 
and others. COAR brings together the repository community and major repository 
networks in order build capacity, align policies and practices, and act as a 
global voice for the repository community.


Participants:

Amaro, Bianca – Ibict, Brazil
Amórtegui, Miguel Ángel – RENATA, Colombia
Apollaro, Alberto – Mincyt, Argentina
Azrilevich, Paola - LA Referencia/Mincyt, Argentina
Cabezas, Alberto - LA Referencia, Chile
Granados, Diana – Colciencias, Colombia
Labbé, Carmen Gloria - COAR/RedCLARA, Chile
Matas, Lautaro - LA Referencia, Argentina
Merino, Sonia Elsy - Min. de Educación, El Salvador
Muñoz, Patricia – CONACYT, Chile
Rasseli, Luiz Alberto - LA Referencia, Brazil
Recavarren, Isabel – Concytec, Peru
Ribeiro, Washington - Ibict, Brazil
Rodrigues, Eloy - OpenAIR

[GOAL] Re: Inside Higher Ed: All six editors and all 31 editorial board members of Lingua resign over Elsevier

[Kathleen Shearer]

I respectfully disagree with J Beall. 

Libraries have always made decisions about purchases based on costs and other 
factors. Furthermore, they have the absolute right to (and probably should) 
make decisions that help to leverage change in the direction towards a more 
sustainable system. 

On a related note, see the statement below in support of the Lingua Editors 
released yesterday by Association of Research Libraries, American Association 
of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) <http://aascu.org/>, the American 
Council on Education (ACE) <http://www.acenet.edu/Pages/default.aspx>, the 
Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) 
<http://www.carl-abrc.ca/en.html>, the Confederation of Open Access 
Repositories (COAR) <https://www.coar-repositories.org/>, EDUCAUSE 
<http://www.educause.edu/about/mission-and-organization>, and the Scholarly 
Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) <http://www.sparc.arl.org/>.

Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer

---

Higher Education Groups Support Lingua Editors, Open Access

Following in the footsteps of other editors and authors 
<http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Journal_declarations_of_independence>, the six 
editors and thirty-one editorial board members of the Elsevier journal Lingua 
resigned on October 27, 2015, in protest of Elsevier’s practices. The Lingua 
editors argued that the journal’s price has steadily increased year after year, 
far outpacing the cost of production. The editors also cited Elsevier’s refusal 
to transition the journal to a “fair open access 
<http://www.lingoa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/151012Linguists-to-publish-journal-articles-in-fair-open-access-def-1.pdf>”
 model that would charge low and transparent article processing fees for 
authors, while allowing authors to retain copyright to their articles.
Despite the clear benefits for Lingua authors and the broader community, 
Elsevier will not consider the adoption of a fair open access model for this 
journal. Furthermore, the Lingua journal imposes a 36-month embargo for article 
sharing via repositories and other mechanisms, in contrast to US and other 
funders around the world that, for the most part, require articles to be made 
available within 12 months of publication <http://roarmap.eprints.org/>. As a 
result, the editors decided to leave Lingua and announced a plan to launch an 
open access journal, Glossa, to be published by the nonprofit Open Library of 
Humanities. According to Wired 
<http://www.wired.com/2015/11/editors-of-the-journal-lingua-protest-quit-in-battle-for-open-access/>,
 Glossa will be able to support its journal for about $400 per article, while 
Elsevier charges Lingua authors about $1,800 for their articles to be freely 
available. By transitioning to a fair open access model, the Lingua editors 
will establish a journal that diverts far fewer of researchers’ limited 
resources from conducting research. The actions of the Lingua editors reflect 
the underlying values of scholarship that knowledge should be shared as widely 
as possible for the benefit of research and society.

Joining us in supporting the actions of the Lingua editors and editorial board 
are: the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) 
<http://aascu.org/>, the American Council on Education (ACE) 
<http://www.acenet.edu/Pages/default.aspx>, the Canadian Association of 
Research Libraries (CARL) <http://www.carl-abrc.ca/en.html>, the Confederation 
of Open Access Repositories (COAR) <https://www.coar-repositories.org/>, 
EDUCAUSE <http://www.educause.edu/about/mission-and-organization>, and the 
Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) 
<http://www.sparc.arl.org/>.

As organizations committed to the principle that access to information advances 
discovery, accelerates innovation, and improves education, we share the 
significant concerns raised by the Lingua editors and we support sustainable 
open access models. Furthermore, research is becoming increasingly 
international and we must develop a system that fosters global participation, 
regardless of geographical location or size of institution. To that end, we 
strongly support the Lingua editors’ decision to pursue an alternative 
solution, which will better serve the needs and values of higher education and 
the public that sustains it.

The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) noted in a 
statement on this issue 
<http://www.aplu.org/news-and-media/News/aplu-statement-on-resignation-of-linguas-editors--editorial-board-members-in-protest-of-elseviers-pricing-policies>
 last week that the current system of scholarly publishing is 

[GOAL] Open Access in Latin America: A paragon for the rest of the world

[Kathleen Shearer]

Open Access in Latin America: A paragon for the rest of the world

August 17, 2015

Latin America is one of the world’s most progressive regions in terms of open 
access and adoption of sustainable, cooperative models for disseminating 
research; models that ensure that researchers and citizens have access to the 
results of research conducted in their region.

SciELO is a remarkable decentralized publishing platform harboring over 1,200 
peer-reviewed journals from fifteen countries located in four continents - 
South America. Central-North America, Europe and Africa. Redalyc, based in 
Mexico, is another extraordinary system hosting almost 1,000 journals from 
fourteen Latin American countries plus Spain and Portugal. Governments around 
the world spend billions of dollars on infrastructure to support research 
excellence; platforms such as SciELO and Redalyc are extensions of this much 
larger investments in research. They reflect an enlightened understanding in 
Latin America that the wide dissemination of and access to research results is 
as important as the research itself. The rest of the world would do well to 
take note.

In a recent blog post , these two initiatives were discredited by Jeffrey 
Beall. In the post, Beall compared the two publishing platforms to favelas, 
resulting in a mean-spirited insult to both favela dwellers on the one hand, 
and SciELO and Redalyc on the other. Rather than maligning these initiatives, 
they should be held up as examples of best practice for the rest of the world.

Furthermore, just because some in North America do not know about SciELO and 
Redalyc does not render them irrelevant. This is an extremely elitist and 
narrow view of the world. Although these platforms may not be well known in 
some places, SciELO and Redalyc do raise the visibility and accessibility of 
the journals they host, particularly with their local communities. If these 
journals were published by the big commercial publishers, the vast majority of 
researchers in Latin America would simply not have access to the articles in 
those journals. What value is visibility, if people cannot access the articles?

One of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, which were finalized 
on August 1, 2015, is to “Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and 
sustainable industrialization and foster innovation”. Both Scielo and Redalyc 
are excellent exemplars of this type of infrastructure. These types of 
networked meta-publishers allow for central governance of policies, procedures 
and controls, but are intentionally decentralized to support the development of 
local capacity and infrastructure ensuring greater sustainability and alignment 
with local policies and priorities. What Beall advocates for, namely to let 
powerful foreign players come in and take over local capacity building, is 
exactly the opposite of what sustainable development is about.

For these reasons, we believe that SciELO and Redalyc are very nice 
neighbourhoods indeed!

Signed by,

Juan Pablo Alperin, Public Knowledge Project and Simon Fraser University, Canada
Dominique Babini, CLACSO, Argentina
Leslie Chan, University of Toronto Scarborough, Canada
Eve Gray, University of Cape Town, South Africa
Jean-Claude Guédon, University of Montréal, Canada
Heather Joseph, SPARC, United States
Eloy Rodrigues, University of Minho, Portugal
Kathleen Shearer, COAR, Canada/Germany
Hebe Vessuri, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico and Instituto Patagónico 
de Ciencias Sociales y Humanas, Argentina


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Community consultation: COAR draft vocabulary element, resource type

[Kathleen Shearer]

COAR Launches Draft “Resource Type” Vocabulary for Open Access Repositories

Open access repositories are evolving in terms of the roles they play and the 
attributes they aim to express in their records. Users want to know about 
additional metadata elements used for describing repository items, such as open 
access status, research funder, institutional affiliation, and so on. Given the 
truly international and collaborative nature of research, repositories must be 
connected and aligned around policy and practices, and standard controlled 
vocabularies are an extremely important aspect of this alignment. Through an 
active, internationalEditorial Board 
http://purl.org/coar/igcv#editorialboard, COAR has begun to develop a series 
of controlled vocabularies for open access repositories.

The aim of this work is to build broad international consensus around 
vocabulary items for open access repositories. The Editorial Board has reviewed 
existing regional and topical metadata schemas including info:eu-repo (and 
OpenAIRE Guidelines), NISO Access and License Indicators, RIOXX, CERIF Semantic 
Vocabulary, CASRAI Dictionary and others. For each vocabulary element, a 
definition is provided, and the item has been translated into several languages 
that will be connected via linked data principles.

As a first step, the Editorial Board is making the first draft version 
controlled vocabulary, resource type, available for comment by the broader 
community. COAR invites you to provide feedback on the definition and the 
vocabulary terms that are provided in English and several other language 
(Catalan, Chinese, French, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, German, and Russian). 
All comments can be posted from the COAR website for consideration. The period 
for input will be two months from August 1 to October 1, 2015.

In the coming months the Editorial Board will be working on other vocabularies 
that will also be made available to the community for comment. This work 
contributes to COAR’s broader objective to develop and maintain a set of 
international controlled vocabularies for open access repositories and ensure 
they are adopted widely.

The Resource Type Vocabulary Draft v.1.0 (July 2015) is available to read and 
for comment here 
http://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/ig-controlled-vocabularies-for-repository-assets/deliverables/.
 
(https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/ig-controlled-vocabularies-for-repository-assets/deliverables/
 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/ig-controlled-vocabularies-for-repository-assets/deliverables/)
 

Support for this work has been provided by:

The COAR Controlled Vocabularies Editorial Board and COAR Interest Group 
Controlled Vocabularies for Repository Assets
ART (Artificial Intelligence Research http://art.uniroma2.it/) at University 
of Tor Vergata and the Food and Agriculture Organization http://www.fao.org/ 
of the United Nations that are providing the expertise and infrastructure for 
the creation and maintenance of the COAR Vocabularies, particularly as Linked 
Open Data.
For more information, please contact:

Jochen Schirrwagen, Controlled Vocabularies Interest Group Coordinator (email 
mailto:jochen.schirrwa...@uni-bielefeld.de)
Imma Subirats, Controlled Vocabulary Editorial Board Coordinator (email 
mailto:imma.subir...@fao.org)
Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director, COAR (email 
mailto:kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org)

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Major repository networks agree to collaborate on data exchange, technological development, and metadata

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Please excuse the cross-posting)

Major repository networks agree to collaborate on data exchange, technological 
development, and metadata

July 16, 2015 -- On July 9 and 10, three major regional open access repository 
networks and aggregators (OpenAire, LA Referencia, and SHARE), along with the 
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) and Center for Open Science 
(COS) met in Charlottesville, Virginia to discuss synergies and potential areas 
of collaboration.

Open access repositories are being adopted around the world to support and 
promote open science, a trend which maximizes our investments in research by 
making research outputs freely available to the world. Many of these 
repositories are connected via regional aggregators, which form sustainable, 
distributed repository networks that provide access to and preservation of the 
valuable content created through research and scholarship.

However, research is international, with researchers collaborating across 
regions and continents to solve the world’s most critical problems such as 
climate change, health, economics, and so on.  The aim of this meeting was to 
ensure that regional repository networks are complementary, more integrated, 
and working together to create a seamless global network.

The meeting was very productive and revealed that the objectives, technologies 
and use cases for all three networks are highly aligned and that there is a 
strong willingness to work together. In particular, a number of specific areas 
were identified in which the networks commit to collaborate on:

Regular data exchange: Exchange data and develop agreements around 
jurisdictional harvesting and aggregation leading to greater coverage and 
efficiencies across regions.

Common metadata and vocabularies: Work towards consensus about key metadata 
elements and common vocabularies to express funders and institutional 
affiliations, open access status, and project IDs. This will contribute to the 
COAR-CASRAI work already underway aimed at developing common metadata elements 
and will support repository managers in better exposing their collections.

Common technological services: Assess the feasibility of adopting common 
broker/router technologies and other services.

Ongoing dialogue: Meet regularly to share approaches and perspectives about 
technical and strategic challenges.


Over the next several weeks, the groups will develop a more detailed plan for 
achieving specific outcomes.

A list of meeting participants is available here 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/aligning-repository-networks-across-regions/collaboration-on-data-exchange-technological-development-and-metadata/.

For more information about the meeting, please contact: Kathleen Shearer, 
Executive Director, COAR:  
mailto:kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.orgkathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org
 mailto:kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org. 



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Update on statement against Elsevier's new sharing policy

[Kathleen Shearer]

(sorry for the cross-posting)

In the last two weeks, over 1,600 individuals and organizations from 52 
countries around the world have signed a statement 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/petition-against-elseviers-sharing-policy/
 opposing Elsevier’s new article sharing and hosting policy, underscoring that 
many in the scholarly community do not support the new policy.

The policy imposes unacceptably long embargo periods for making articles 
available, the vast majority of which range from 12 months to 4 years after 
publication. It also requires researchers to apply licenses that restrict the 
full re-use of articles.

Research funders from around the world are adopting policies that ensure fast 
access, use and impact of research outputs. Most of these funders' require open 
access to articles within 12 months of publication or less. Elsevier's policy 
is in direct opposition to the trend towards encouraging greater access to and 
impact of research results.

Since the statement was published on May 20, 2015, public support has continued 
to grow, demonstrating the deep, global support for open access to research 
outputs.

COAR and SPARC renew our call 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/petition-against-elseviers-sharing-policy/#comment-1394
 for Elsevier to revise their policy 
http://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-updates-its-policies-perspectives-and-services-on-article-sharing
 in order to better align it with the interests of the research community and 
broader society.___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: COAR-recting the record

[Kathleen Shearer]

(sorry for any cross-posting)

In its recently released “Sharing and Hosting Policy FAQ”, Elsevier 
“recognize(s) that authors want to share and promote their work and 
increasingly need to comply with their funding body and institution's open 
access policies.” However there are several aspects of their new policy that 
severely limit sharing and open access, in particular the lengthy embargo 
periods imposed in most journals- with about 90% of Elsevier journals 
http://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/121293/external-embargo-list.pdf
 having embargo periods of 12 months or greater. This is a significant rollback 
from the original 2004 Elsevier policy which required no embargos for making 
author’s accepted manuscripts available; and even with the 2012 policy change 
requiring embargoes only when authors were subject to an OA mandate.

With article processing charges (APCs) that can cost as much as $5000 US 
dollars 
https://www.elsevier.com/journal-authors/open-access/sponsored-articles for 
publishing in one of Elsevier’s gold open access titles or hybrid journals, 
this is not a viable option for many researchers around the world. Furthermore, 
the rationale for lengthy embargo periods is to protect Elsevier’s subscription 
revenue. We do not believe that scientific, economic and social progress should 
be hindered in order to protect commercial interests. In addition, there is 
currently no evidence that articles made available through OA repositories will 
lead to cancellations. 

Elsevier’s new policy also requires that accepted manuscripts posted in open 
access repositories bear a CC-BY-NC-ND license. This type of license severely 
limits the re-use potential of publicly funded research. ND restricts the use 
of derivatives, yet derivative use is fundamental http://oaspa.org/why-cc-by/ 
to the way in which scholarly research builds on previous findings, for example 
by re-using a part of an article (with attribution) in educational material. 
Similarly, this license restricts commercial re-use greatly inhibiting 
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/9/11/16331/0655 the potential impact of 
the results of research.

Elsevier’s Director of Access  Policy, Alicia Wise states that they “have 
received neutral-to-positive responses from research institutions and the wider 
research community.” Yet, since the “Statement against Elsevier’s sharing 
policy 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/petition-against-elseviers-sharing-policy/”
 was published just one week ago (on Wednesday May 20, 2015), it has been 
signed by close to 700 organizations and individuals, demonstrating that there 
is significant opposition to the policy.

Elsevier has indicated that they “are always happy to have a dialogue to 
discuss these, or any other, issues further.”  We would like to offer the 
following concrete recommendations to Elsevier to improve their policy:

Elsevier should allow all authors to make their “author’s accepted manuscript” 
openly available immediately upon acceptance through an OA repository or other 
open access platform.

Elsevier should allow authors to choose the type of open license (from CC-BY to 
other more restrictive licenses like the CC-BY-NC-ND) they want to attach to 
the content that they are depositing into an open access platform.

Elsevier should not attempt to dictate author’s practices around individual 
sharing of articles. Individual sharing of journal articles is already a 
scholarly norm and is protected by fair use and other copyright exceptions. 
Elsevier cannot, and should not, dictate practices around individual sharing of 
articles.

We strongly encourage Elsevier to revise their policy in order to better align 
with the interests of the research community. We would also be pleased to meet 
to discuss these recommendations with Elsevier at any time.


Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director, COAR

Heather Joseph, Executive Director, SPARC



 
 On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF) a.w...@elsevier.com 
 mailto:a.w...@elsevier.com wrote:
 Hello everyone –
 
  
 Just a quick note to draw your attention to our article, posted today in 
 Elsevier Connect and in response to yesterday’s statement by COAR: 
 http://www.elsevier.com/connect/coar-recting-the-record 
 http://www.elsevier.com/connect/coar-recting-the-record.  I’ll also append 
 the full text of this response below.
 
  
 You might also be interested in this Library Connect webinar on some of the 
 new institutional repository services we are piloting 
 (http://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/articles/2015-01/webinar-institutional-research-repositories-characteristics-relationships-and-roles
  
 http://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/articles/2015-01/webinar-institutional-research-repositories-characteristics-relationships-and-roles)
  and reading our policies for yourselves:
 
  
 Sharing – http://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-posting-policy 
 http

[GOAL] Global coalition of organizations denounce Elsevier's new sharing policy

[Kathleen Shearer]

Please excuse the cross posting.

For Immediate Release  
Wednesday, May 20, 2015 

Contact:
Ranit Schmelzer (SPARC)
202-538-1065
sparcme...@arl.org mailto:sparcme...@arl.org 
 
Katharina Müller (COAR)
49 551 39-22215
off...@coar-repositories.org mailto:off...@coar-repositories.org
- 

NEW POLICY FROM ELSEVIER IMPEDES OPEN ACCESS AND SHARING

Global coalition of organizations denounce the policy and urge Elsevier to 
revise it

Washington, DC and Göttingen, Germany – Elsevier’s new sharing and hosting 
policy 
http://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-updates-its-policies-perspectives-and-services-on-article-sharing
 represents a significant obstacle to the dissemination and use of research 
knowledge, and creates unnecessary barriers for Elsevier published authors in 
complying with funders’ open access policies, according to an analysis by the 
Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) and the 
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR). 

“Elsevier’s policy is in direct conflict with the global trend towards open 
access and serves only to dilute the benefits of openly sharing research 
results,” said Heather Joseph, Executive Director of SPARC and Kathleen 
Shearer, Executive Director of COAR, in a joint statement. “Elsevier claims 
that the policy advances sharing but in fact, it does the opposite. We strongly 
urge Elsevier to revise it.” 

The new stance marks a significant departure from Elsevier’s initial policy, 
established in 2004, which allowed authors to self-archive their final accepted 
manuscripts of peer-reviewed articles in institutional repositories without 
delay.  While the stated purpose of the new revision is, in part, to roll back 
an ill-conceived 2012 amendment prohibiting authors at institutions that have 
adopted campus-wide Open Access policies from immediate self archiving, the net 
result of the new policy is that Elsevier has placed greater restrictions on 
sharing articles.

Twenty-three groups today released the following statement in opposition to the 
policy:

“On April 30, 2015, Elsevier announced a new sharing and hosting policy for 
Elsevier journal articles. This policy represents a significant obstacle to the 
dissemination and use of research knowledge, and creates unnecessary barriers 
for Elsevier published authors in complying with funders’ open access policies. 
In addition, the policy has been adopted without any evidence that immediate 
sharing of articles has a negative impact on publishers’ subscriptions.

“Despite the claim by Elsevier that the policy advances sharing, it actually 
does the opposite. The policy imposes unacceptably long embargo periods of up 
to 48 months for some journals. It also requires authors to apply a 
non-commercial and no derivative works license for each article deposited 
into a repository, greatly inhibiting the re-use value of these articles. Any 
delay in the open availability of research articles curtails scientific 
progress and places unnecessary constraints on delivering the benefits of 
research back to the public.

“Furthermore, the policy applies to all articles previously published and 
those published in the future making it even more punitive for both authors 
and institutions. This may also lead to articles that are currently available 
being suddenly embargoed and inaccessible to readers.

“As organizations committed to the principle that access to information 
advances discovery, accelerates innovation and improves education, we support 
the adoption of policies and practices that enable the immediate, barrier free 
access to and reuse of scholarly articles. This policy is in direct conflict 
with the global trend towards open access and serves only to dilute the 
benefits of openly sharing research results.

“We strongly urge Elsevier to reconsider this policy and we encourage other 
organizations and individuals to express their opinions.”

The statement is available here 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/petition-against-elseviers-sharing-policy/
 and we welcome others to show their support by also endorsing it.

The statement has been signed by the following groups:

COAR: Confederation of Open Access Repositories
SPARC: Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition
ACRL: Association of College and Research Libraries
ALA: American Library Association
ARL: Association of Research Libraries
Association of Southeastern Research Libraries
Australian Open Access Support Group
IBICT: Brazilian Institute of Information in Science and Technology
CARL: Canadian Association of Research Libraries
CLACSO: Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales
COAPI: Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions
Creative Commons
Creative Commons (USA)
EIFL
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Greater Western Library Alliance
LIBER: European Research Library Association
National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences
OpenAIRE
Open

[GOAL] Aligning Repository Networks Communiqué

[Kathleen Shearer]

Sorry for the cross posting

Communiqué: International repository networks reinforce their aim to develop a 
global, open access knowledge commons 
May 7, 2015: For a second year in a row, major open access repository networks 
have met to develop closer ties and further align their expanding repository 
networks. The meeting, organized by the Confederation of Open Access 
Repositories (COAR), was held on April 16, 2015 in Porto, Portugal and included 
representatives from Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America, and North America. 
Amidst the intensifying global debate about the most sustainable ways to 
implement open access and research infrastructures, meeting participants 
reinforced their aim to foster solutions that reflect the diversity of 
approaches and capacities across different regions.
Repository networks are being developed around the world to support open access 
to research outputs. However, given the truly international and collaborative 
nature of research, these networks must be connected and aligned around issues 
such as policy, standards and services. At the meeting, delegates shared 
updates about their local networks. Many networks have evolved significantly 
over the last year and are now in a better position to collaborate more deeply. 
The group also reviewed the progress of the aligning repository networks 
activities since their meeting last year. Specific outcomes from the previous 
year’s work include the publication of a joint statement 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/aligning-repository-networks-across-regions/statement-about-embargo-periods/
 against embargo periods, the launch of a technical working group seeking to 
harmonize open access elements and metadata schemas, and improved visibility of 
repository networks worldwide.
Participants also discussed priorities for further aligning their networks for 
the coming year. Activities will include closer cooperation around the 
development of guidelines and tools, and several bilateral collaborations 
between networks were suggested. In addition, it was agreed that a 
communication strategy be developed to continue to raise the visibility of 
repository networks as key infrastructure components. Support was also 
expressed for further engaging with policy makers and other stakeholders to 
ensure adoption of balanced open access policies.
COAR will work with the community to accomplish these activities in the coming 
year. A full list of participants and a report about the meeting will be 
available soon on the COAR website https://www.coar-repositories.org/.
For more information, contact Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director, COAR 
(kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org 
mailto:kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org)___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR-SPARC Conference: Last week to register at early bird rates

[Kathleen Shearer]

Sorry of the cross posting

Please join us in the beautiful city of Porto, Portugal for an exciting program 
featuring dynamic speakers from around the world, Connecting Research Results, 
Bridging Communities Opening Scholarship on April 15  16, 2015

Keynote speakers are John Wilbanks, Chief Commons Officer, Sage Bionetworks and 
Dominique Babini, Coordinator of Open Access Projects, CLACSO

Session will be a mixture of thought provoking presentations and discussion 
about the future of scholarly communication and the role of libraries in this 
future,

The evolving policy environment for data and publications — Measuring the real 
value of research outputs — How we can align ourselves globally? — New 
organizational models for managing research data. 

The full program is available here: 
http://www.sparc.arl.org/events/joint-coar-sparc-conference

Early bird rates are 50€ (Euros) for COAR/SPARC members and 100€ (Euros) for 
non-members.

Early bird rates end on Friday March 13, 2015.

For more information, please visit the SPARC or COAR websites.

——

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleenshearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR-SPARC Conference Announcement

[Kathleen Shearer]

Connecting Research Results, Bridging Communities, Opening Scholarship

SPARC and COAR are delighted to announce their upcoming joint conference, 
Connecting Research Results, Bridging Communities, Opening Scholarship on April 
15th and 16th in Porto, Portugal. Registration is now open!

Click here https://indico.cern.ch/event/369875/registration/ to register for 
the 2015 COAR-SPARC Conference

Co-hosted by the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) 
and the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR), the meeting will 
offer a thought-provoking program with dynamic speakers from around the world 
to discuss the opportunities and challenges for libraries in a world of open 
science and open content, provide a valuable opportunity for participants to 
make connections, and learn best practices from colleagues around the world.

The conference is deliberately structured to deliver both an overview of the 
most important policy and philosophical developments as well as pragmatic 
sessions to help participants become more effective in their roles on a 
day-to-day basis. Featured keynote speakers include:

John Wilbanks, Chief Commons Officer, Sage Bionetworks  
   
Dominique Babini, Coordinator of Open Access Projects, CLACSO

The intended audience for the conference are library directors, librarians and 
repository managers, researchers, university administrators, funding agencies, 
and students.

Space is limited, so please register early! 100 places are reserved for COAR 
and SPARC members.

The early bird conference rates if you register before March 13, 2015:

€55.50 EUR for COAR and SPARC members (approximately $65 US)
€105.50 EUR for non-members (approximately $120 US)

After March 13, 2015

€80.50 EUR for COAR and SPARC members (approximately $92 US)
€155.50 EUR (approximately $180 US)


Please visit the SPARC 
http://www.sparc.arl.org/events/joint-coar-sparc-conference and COAR 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-media/coar-sparc-conference-2015-connecting-research-results-bridging-communities-opening-scholarship/
 websites for more details and to register for the conference.

The conference will offer a poster session. Posters can be submitted while 
registering for the conference or emailed to Maxie Putlitz at 
putl...@sub.uni-goettingen.de by March 13, 2015.

We hope you are able to join us in Porto, Portugal!


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR)
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com - +1 514 992 
9068
Skype: kathleenshearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer


---
In a rapidly evolving world, academic and research institutions must think 
about becoming agents of change, with greater flexibility and responsiveness 
than ever before. Part of this change is a shift away from the notion that 
researchers simply conduct research and produce publications, but rather the 
research community itself must begin to take on responsibility for ensuring 
research outputs are widely and openly disseminated, properly curated, and 
preserved. In this sense, the institution becomes one node in a larger, 
interconnected network of content producers and stewards.

There are both challenges and opportunities inherent in this new environment. 
For instance, how do we create a seamless global research network in which all 
countries and researchers can participate? How can we evaluate research outputs 
based on their quality, and not on whether they are attached to a prestige 
publication? How can we manage increasingly large and complex data to support 
new modes of science and innovation? And how can we ensure that content is 
appropriately licensed, annotated and preserved to allow it to be re-used and 
integrated with other related content? Clearly, libraries and institutions must 
forge new partnerships, nurture new skills and competencies, and develop new 
organizational structures.

This conference, co-hosted by SPARC and COAR, will address some of the 
important challenges facing our libraries as we attempt to re-define our roles 
in an age of constant flux.





___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Major international associations reaffirm their support for immediate open access to research articles

[Kathleen Shearer]

(sorry for any cross posting)

Major international associations reaffirm their support for immediate open 
access to research articles
On the occasion of Open Access Week, COAR and other international associations 
are reaffirming their support for immediate open access to research results. 

As organizations committed to the principle that access to information advances 
discovery, accelerates innovation and improves education, we endorse the 
policies and practices that enable Open Access – immediate, barrier free access 
to and reuse of scholarly articles.

Policies that promote Open Access are increasingly being adopted world wide by 
research funders, academic institutions and national governments in order to 
improve the use and value of scholarly research. We fully support such policies 
and the dual avenues for implementing them: open access repositories and open 
access journals. These policies play an important role in creating an 
environment where our collective investments in research can be maximized for 
the benefit of the public, and for society at large.

Many policies have employed the use of embargo periods – delayed access to 
research articles for a short period of time to help protect publishers’ 
subscription revenue as they shift to new business models. We consider the use 
of embargo periods as an acceptable transitional mechanism to help facilitate a 
wholesale shift towards Open Access. However, embargo periods dilute the 
benefits of open access policies and we believe that, if they are adopted, they 
should be no more than 6 months for the life and physical sciences, 12 months 
for social sciences and humanities.  We further believe that mechanisms for 
reducing – or eliminating – embargo periods should be included in any Open 
Access policy.

Any delay in the open availability of research articles curtails scientific 
progress and stifles innovation, and places unnecessary constraints in 
delivering the benefits of research back to the public.

We urge all organizations and individuals that support immediate open access to 
endorse the statement available here.
 
Numerous associations and institutions from around the world have already lent 
their support to this statement.
 
Current signatories are:
COAR: Confederation of Open Access Repositories
EIFL: Electronic Information for Libraries
LIBER: Ligue des Bibliothèques Européennes de Recherche – Association of 
European Research Libraries
National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences
OpenAIRE: Open Access Infrastructure for Research in Europe
SPARC: Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition
Electronic Frontier Foundation, USA
Research Libraries of the United Kingdom
Coaliton for Action “Copyright for Education and Research” (Aktionsbündnis 
“Urheberrecht für Bildung und Wissenschaft”), Germany
Australian National University
AOASG: Australian Open Access Support Group
INRIA: Institut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique, France
NEREUS: Network of European Libraries in Economics and Social Sciences
Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Association of Southeastern Research Libraries, USA
SPARC Europe
CLASCO: Latin America Council of Social Sciences
 
For more information, please contact:
 
Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, COAR
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org
www.coar-repositories.org
Skype: kathleen.shearer2
+1 514 847 9068___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Major regional repository networks launch international group to improve interoperability

[Kathleen Shearer]

(Sorry for any cross posting)

Major repository networks launch international group to improve interoperability

Open access (OA) repositories are key components of the research 
infrastructure. They provide open access to the products of research and 
reflect an emerging commitment by research institutions towards the stewardship 
of the research outputs. Repositories are also becoming an important source of 
administrative information for governments, funding agencies and for tracking 
research outputs and assessing the impact of the research they support.

Science is an increasingly global, distributed and cross-disciplinary endeavor. 
Repository infrastructures, therefore, should mirror the needs of the research 
community and enable researchers, regardless of location or disciplinary 
practice, to access research outputs worldwide.  All efforts should be made to 
avoid silos, which act as barriers to the usability of content.

Over the past several years, a number of regional and national OA repository 
networks have emerged. These networks have been developed to fulfill different 
requirements and they have adopted a variety of metadata standards and 
vocabularies. Greater interoperability across networks will improve discovery 
and enable the development of more sophisticated cross-repository services such 
as usage statistics or content analysis by text mining. In addition, a shared 
understanding and common approaches to vocabularies and metadata will help 
provide uniform information to governments and funding agencies about the 
products of funded research, and build confidence with users and stakeholders.

This international, multi-stakeholder working group will develop a strategy to 
ensure greater interoperability across repository networks as well as other 
platforms. The Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) will be the 
convener of the working group, and CASRAI will facilitate the process of 
developing the strategy. Members of the working group will be representatives 
from major regional repository networks (e.g. La Referencia, OpenAIRE, SHARE 
and others) as well as EuroCRIS and CASRAI. Participants are committed to 
adopting any outcomes resulting from their work.

In order to ensure input from all relevant stakeholders, a review circle will 
be formed to consult with the broader community at major milestones. The group 
will commence its work in Oct 2014 via a mix of teleconference and online 
collaboration tools.

For more information, please visit the COAR website or contact Kathleen 
Shearer, Executive Director of COAR: kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: Library Vetting of Repository Deposits

[Kathleen Shearer]

At COAR, we have been doing some work to promote the implementation of OA 
clauses in publishers' licenses. 

These types of clauses are starting to be requested by institutions and 
licensing agencies to secure the rights of authors to deposit into a 
repository, often in order to comply with OA policies.
They also relieve the burden of having to look up the policy for each article 
before depositing.

Some of you may have already seen the draft LIBLICENSE Model License language, 
which I understand has been successfully included in some licenses:
 
Notwithstanding any terms or conditions to the contrary in any author 
agreement between authors and Licensor, authors who are Authorized Users of 
Licensee (“Authors” whose work (“Content”) is accepted for publication by 
Licensor during the Term shall retain the non-exclusive, irrevocable, 
worldwide, royalty-free right to use their Content for scholarly and 
educational purposes, including self-archiving or depositing the Content in 
institutional, subject-based, national or other open repositories or archives 
(including the author’s own web pages or departmental servers), and to comply 
with all grant or institutional requirements associated with the Content. (pg. 
2-3)

While this may seem like an imperfect solution, it does help bring us one step 
closer to our goal of open access. 


Best, Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, COAR
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org
www.coar-repositories.org
Skype: kathleen.shearer2
+1 514 847 9068





On 2014-09-27, at 8:04 PM, Danny Kingsley danny.kings...@anu.edu.au wrote:

 Putting aside the tit for tat nature of some of this discussion, one of
 the big problems for making available works that have been deposited to
 repositories is the complexity of the copyright compliance.
 
 There are the rules imposed by publishers, and then the possibility that
 the institution or funder has a special Œarrangement¹ with publishers that
 then override the standard copyright position obtainable from their
 websites. And sometimes publishers change their rules - like the length of
 embargo. To add to this there is the confusion over whether the author is
 under a mandate - which affects the Elsevier situation. Yes, Stevan - I
 know you argue that Elsevier¹s position is semantics, but nonetheless it
 adds to the muddiness of the waters here.
 
 I wrote about this on 23 May last year: ³Walking in quicksand, keeping up
 with copyright agreements
 http://aoasg.org.au/2013/05/23/walking-in-quicksand-keeping-up-with-copyrig
 ht-agreements/
 
 
 My conclusion then was:
 
 These changing copyright arrangements mean that the process of making
 research openly accessible through a repository is becoming less and less
 able to be undertaken by individuals. By necessity, repository deposit is
 becoming solely the responsibility of the institution.²
 
 Danny
 
 Dr Danny Kingsley
 Executive Officer
 Australian Open Access Support Group
 e: e...@aoasg.org.au
 p: +612 6125 6839
 w: www.aoasg.org.au
 t: @openaccess_oz
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On 25/09/2014 1:46 am, Joachim SCHOPFEL
 joachim.schop...@univ-lille3.fr wrote:
 
 Here in France, librarians often are more or less unsatisfied with
 scientists because of lacking awareness, motivation and enthusiasm for
 open access. In the UK, some scientists seem unsatisfied with librarians
 because they do their job too carefully. Why not swap them? (I am joking,
 yet...why not?)
 
 :)
 
 
 
 
 Le Mercredi 24 Septembre 2014 16:29 CEST, Heather Morrison
 heather.morri...@uottawa.ca a écrit:
 
 Thanks for defending the profession, Jean-Claude and I think you've
 made some important points.
 
 However, there is nothing with service. Providing good service does not
 make one a servant. 20% of the work of an academic is commonly formally
 described as service. One could also describe teaching and research as
 service activities. A good leader of the country serves the country. If
 librarians are and should not be servants (I agree with this),
 nevertheless the library itself is a service, and it will be easier for
 libraries to make the case to sustain and grow their support if the
 library is perceived as a useful and valued service, IMHO. Many
 libraries fully understand this, and I am familiar with examples of
 libraries that excel in both service to their universities or colleges
 and academic service to their profession.
 
 The obligation to consider service true of academic departments and
 universities, too - if we want to survive and thrive we need to recruit
 , retain and graduate students and demonstrate the value of their
 education.
 
 My perspective is that it would be helpful to the transition in
 scholarly communication for librarians and faculty to understand each
 other better. Following is an overgeneralization that I'd critique in
 one of my students papers :) Some researchers do not fully appreciate
 the value of the library profession. Some librarians do not fully
 appreciate

[GOAL] Fwd: Open access and repository legislation in Mexico

[Kathleen Shearer]

Dear members of the GOAL list,

I am very pleased to pass on this information about new legislation passed in 
Mexico requiring open access to research outputs via OA repositories. It was 
announced yesterday by the President to Mexico, Peña Nieto, who said (loosely 
translated from Spanish):

This new law further democratizes the use of the information to allow Mexicans 
to have free access to the scientific and academic products financed partially 
or wholly by public funds.  

Mexico now joins Peru and Argentina as the third country in Latin America to 
have passed such a law.

Big congratulations to our Mexican and Latin American colleagues who have been 
working so hard to raise awareness of open access in that region!

See the announcement in Spanish below published by La Referencia, the 
organization that manages the Latin American network of repositories.

All the best, Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, COAR
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org
www.coar-repositories.org
Skype: kathleen.shearer2
+1 514 847 9068



México anuncia legislación nacional sobre Acceso Abierto y Repositorios
LA Referencia se complace en anunciar a México como el tercer país de la región 
que eleva una legislación nacional relacionada con el tema de Acceso Abierto, 
según fue comunicado hoy en una jornada oficial encabezada por el presidente de 
ese país, Enrique Peña Nieto. 
En la jornada denominada Acceso Abierto en la Sociedad del Conocimiento fueron 
anunciadas  las Modificaciones y Adiciones a la Ley de Ciencia y Tecnología en 
México, en materia de Acceso Abierto a la Información Científica,  mandato de 
Ley que establece la creación y puesta en operación del Repositorio Nacional de 
Información Científica, Tecnológica y de Innovación, bajo la responsabilidad 
del Conacyt.

Ver más


__
Ysabel Briceño
Responsable de Comunicación
LA Referencia
www.lareferencia.redclara.net
www.lareferencia.info
Twitter: @RepositoriosLA




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Fwd: CAS and NSFC issued OA policies

[Kathleen Shearer]

Hi there, 

I am passing along some very good news for OA. Please see this announcement 
about an OA policy being adopted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and 
National Natural Science Foundation of China.

Best, Kathleen

 May 15, 2014, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and the National Natural 
 Science Foundation of China (NSFC) both issued their Policy on Open Access to 
 Research Articles from Publicly Funded Research, during a briefing on the 
 coming Annual Meeting of the Global Research Council to be held in May 26-28, 
 2014, in Beijing, China. 
 
 CAS requires its researchers and graduate students to deposit the final, 
 peer-reviewed manuscripts of their research articles resulted from any public 
 funding, submitted and consequently published since the issuing of the 
 policy, into the open access repositories of their respective institutes, to 
 be made open access within 12 months of their official publication. CAS also 
 encourages researchers to deposit previously published articles into their 
 respective institutional repositories as well. CAS will also support its 
 researchers to publish in open access journals with good quality control and 
 affordable APC.
 
 NSFC requires the researchers funded by it to deposit the final, 
 peer-reviewed manuscripts of research articles resulted from its funding,  
 submitted and consequently published since the issuing of the policy, into 
 the NSFC open access repository, to be made open access within 12 months of 
 their official publication in academic journals.
 
 The Chinese and English versions of the CAS OA Policy can be found in the 
 following reports (see the attachments):
 
 Chinese version: http://www.cas.cn/xw/yxdt/201405/t20140516_4121375.shtml 
 
 English version: http://english.cas.cn/Ne/CASE/201405/t20140516_121037.shtml
 
 The news from NSFC can be found at:
 
 http://www.nsfc.gov.cn/publish/portal0/tab88/info44456.htm
 
 
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR Aligning Repository Networks Meeting Report

[Kathleen Shearer]

(apologies for any cross posting)

Dear GOAL subscribers, 

The final report from the Aligning Repository Networks Meeting is now available.

--

COAR Launches Strategic Initiative to Align Repository Networks
At a meeting in March 2014, several major repository networks agreed to work 
together to further align their activities. The final report from this meeting 
is now available on the COAR website.

As research becomes increasingly global, it is critical to create 
infrastructure that can connect across geographic boundaries. At the meeting, 
convened by the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR), delegates 
from Australia, Canada, China, Europe, Latin America and the United States 
agreed on a common vision and the shared principles of openness, 
sustainability, interoperability and diversity. In addition, participants 
identified a number of priority areas in which they will begin working together 
in terms of technical interoperability, policies and services.

Work on the priority areas will begin immediately. COAR has established a 
Strategic Committee for Aligning Repository Networks, which will act as a forum 
for ongoing exchange between repository networks and to identify priorities. 
COAR is also developing practical strategies for the adoption of 
recommendations by repository networks and aims to work closely with all 
relevant stakeholders.

The full report of the meeting is available here: 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/community/events/aligning-repository-networks-meeting-2014/

For more information, please contact Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director, 
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR), 
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org or visit the COAR website 
www.coar-repositories.org


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Major repository infrastructure initiatives agree to align their networks

[Kathleen Shearer]

Of possible interest to members of this list:

Rome, March 24, 2014

Communiqué: Major repository infrastructure initiatives agree to align their 
networks

In a meeting in Rome on March 20-21, 2014 representatives from several major 
regional repository networks sat down to develop a strategy to better align 
their activities. The meeting brought together delegates from Australia, 
Canada, China, Europe, Latin America and the United States.

As research becomes increasingly global, it is critical to create 
infrastructure that can connect across geographic boundaries. Recently there 
have been significant efforts around the world to develop repository networks. 
These networks represent an important content layer within the research 
infrastructure system: They provide access to the products of research such as 
articles, data, and other content to researchers and to the world. They are 
also becoming an important source of information for governments, funding 
agencies and institutions about the impact of the research they support.

Regional repository networks have evolved within their specific local contexts 
and currently differ in a number of ways. Aligning networks will enable the 
exchange of data between them, greatly improve access to content across 
regions, and allow us to extract maximum value from the products of research. 
“This is a significant step forward for all regions”, says Prof. Norbert Lossau 
(Vice-President Göttingen University), chair of the meeting and chairman of the 
Confederation of Open Access Repositories, “it will enable us to identify 
global best practices and avoid regional silos.”

In Rome, delegates identified several key elements that will be addressed 
immediately and agreed to work together on an ongoing basis on other issues to 
further align their repositories. It was also established that these activities 
will take place under the auspices of the Confederation of Open Access 
Repositories (COAR), an international alliance of repository initiatives.

For more information please contact Kathleen Shearer, Executive Director, 
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR), 
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org or visit the COAR website 
www.coar-repositories.org



There will be more information about next steps in the coming weeks.

Kathleen___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR Aligning Repository Networks Meeting

[Kathleen Shearer]

sorry for any cross-posting

Aligning Repository Networks Meeting

Research is becoming increasingly international. Many of today’s most 
challenging issues such as climate change, poverty, health, and so on, are 
global in nature and must be addressed in collaborative ways by researchers 
across regional and disciplinary boundaries.

In this environment open access repositories are becoming key components of the 
research infrastructure. They support open access to publications, data 
sharing, and the stewardship of research outputs. They also reflect a growing 
commitment on behalf of institutions towards the development of a sustainable 
ecosystem for scholarly communication.

One of the important features of repositories is that they can be 
interconnected to create networks that provide unified access to essential 
research materials for researchers around the world. Many regions are investing 
in the development of repository networks. Although these networks reflect the 
requirements of unique jurisdictional contexts and research cultures, they 
should also be aligned in order to support the truly global nature of research 
and scholarly communication.

To that end, COAR (Confederation of Open Access Repositories) is convening a 
meeting to discuss the alignment of open access repository networks. The 
meeting, which will take place on March 20-21, 2014 will be hosted by the 
National Research Council of Italy and be attended by representatives from a 
number of regions including Australia, China, Europe, Latin America, and North 
America.

Participants will discuss priority areas for alignment and outline a plan for 
further cooperation. The meeting will lay the foundation for ongoing dialogue 
and collaborative actions that will be open to all regions and networks 
interested in participating.

For more information, please contact Kathleen Shearer, COAR Executive Director 
(kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org)





Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, COAR
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org
www.coar-repositories.org
Skype: kathleen.shearer2
+1 514 847 9068

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR Comments on NISO's Open Access Metadata and Indicators

[Kathleen Shearer]

 this in consideration COAR suggests that any recommended 
practice should also address research data.

[1] 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/ig-controlled-vocabularies-for-repository-assets/



Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, COAR
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org
www.coar-repositories.org
Skype: kathleen.shearer2
+1 514 847 9068





___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Interview with Dr. Alejandro Ceccatto (MINCyT)

[Kathleen Shearer]

Members of this list may be interested in reading a new interview published by 
COAR.

The interview is with the Dr. Alejandor Ceccatto, Secretary of Scientific and 
Technological Articulation from the Argentinian Ministry of Science, Technology 
and Innovation.  Dr Ceccatto was responsible for spearheading the new Open 
Access law in Argentina and this interview offers greater insight into the 
legislation and the network of repositories that has been established to 
support the law.

On November 13th, 2013, The Argentinian Senate unanimously passed legislation 
requiring Open Access to publicly funded research outputs.  A few days later, 
the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MINCyT) officially launched 
their national repository network, using the D-NET platform developed by the 
European DRIVER Project... With these developments, Argentina has become a 
world leader in Open Access and serves as an outstanding example for other 
countries, both in Latin America and the rest of the world.

The full interview is available here: 
https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-media/argentinian-senate-passes-law-requiring-open-access/


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, COAR
kathleen.shea...@coar-repositories.org
www.coar-repositories.org
Skype: kathleen.shearer2
+1 514 847 9068___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] COAR Report on Sustainable Practices for Populating Repositories

[Kathleen Shearer]

Please excuse any cross-posting

Of possible interest to members of this list:
The Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) announces the publication 
of the report, Incentives, Integration, and Mediation: Sustainable Practices 
for Populating Repositories. The report profiles a variety of successful 
practices for populating repositories collected from around the world. 

There is an active, thriving community of open access repositories worldwide 
and their visibility is rising as funding agencies and governments implement 
open access policies. Still,  repositories must continue to adopt strategies 
that demonstrate their value to the wider research community. The aim of this 
report is to assist the global repository community in implementing sustainable 
methods for recruiting content. The profiles were gathered from organizations 
across the globe, and represent a mixture of approaches involving the 
introduction of incentives/mandates; integration of the repository with other 
institutional services; and mediation of the deposit process. The practices 
reflect a tradition of innovation and openness in the repository community, and 
are characterized by creative approaches to staffing, imaginative software 
developments, and adoption of novel policies.

The report will also be available soon in Spanish.

COAR is a young, fast growing association of repository initiatives with a 
membership of over 100 institutions worldwide from 35 countries and 4 
continents. Its mission is to enhance the visibility and application of 
research outputs through a global network of open access digital repositories. 
For more information about COAR, please visit the website 
www.coar-repositories.org


Kathleen Shearer
Executive Director, COAR
http://www.coar-repositories.org/
m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com
@KathleeShearer
Skype: kathleen.shearer2___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: On the Need to Take Both Roads to Open Access

[Kathleen Shearer]

We have also discussed this option as one strategy for accumulating a
baseline of content in our repositories. However, it was assumed that
one would have to seek permission first from each author, and this could
become very time consuming...

Does anyone know whether author permission would be required for this?

It does seem like a good way to get some content into the repository in
the initial stages. The idea being that one could then showcase a
working repository to the faculty members when encouraging them to
begin self-archiving.

Kathleen

Kathleen Shearer
Research Associate
Canadian Association of Research Libraries
mkshea...@sprint.ca

- Original Message -
From: Stevan Harnad
To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: On the Need to Take Both Roads to Open Access Status: R

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, [Identity Deleted] wrote:

 Stevan,

 [Identity Deleted], our electronic resources coordinator, was
inspired by
 your quote of 55% of journals allowing self-archiving to ask why we
don't
 just go back and retrospectively add that 55% to a University
archive.
 [ http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2995.html ]

 I have been pushing [Ivy League University, identity deleted] to
establish
 such an archive.  I thought it was a great idea to get a collection
of
 content immediately.  Do you know of other Universities that are
doing
 this and if not, why not?

Thanks for your message.

(1) The 55% figure comes from the Romeo sample of 7000+ journals, of
which 55% already officially support author/institution
self-archiving.
(Many more journals will agree if asked.)

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ls/disresearch/romeo/Romeo%20Publisher=
%20Policies.htm

(2) In most cases the support probably extends to the retrospective
legacy
literature as this is not a great source of potential revenue and many
more journals (e.g., Science) already support self-archiving after an
interval -- from 6 months to three years -- after the publication
date.

(3) Although making a university's past research output openly
accessible is very valuable and desirable (and doing it is to be
strongly encouraged), making its *current* research output openly
accessible is even more valuable and desirable (and even more strongly
to be encouraged!).

(4) The 55% figure is actually an estimate of the *minimum* amount of
*current* research output that universities can already self-archive
immediately, without the need to make any further request of the
publisher, or any change in the copyright transfer of licensing
agreement. http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/#copyright1

(5) The challenge with self-archiving (whether current or legacy
research
output) is not, and has never been, publishers or copyright.
Publishers
will cooperate, in the interests of science and scholarship.
http://www.stm-assoc.org/infosharing/springconference-prog.html

(6) The real challenge is establishing a systematic institutional
self-archiving policy that will ensure the speedy self-archiving of
research output. The library can help
http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/#libraries-do
especially by offering a proxy self-archiving service
e.g. http://eprints.st-andrews.ac.uk/proxy_archive.html
but it is the university and its departments that need to strongly
encourage or even mandate self-archiving by its researchers
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/archpolnew.html
their policy backed up by the research funding agencies
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue35/harnad/

But going after retrospective research is a good idea too. I hope
universities that have been implementing this will reply and share
their
experience.

Stevan Harnad

NOTE: A complete archive of the ongoing discussion of providing open
access to the peer-reviewed research literature online is available at
the American Scientist September Forum (98  99  00  01  02  03):


http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html
or
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/index.html

Discussion can be posted to: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@amsci.org