Influencing policy and practice for Open Access to scholarly and scientific publications
Submitting Institution
Loughborough UniversityUnit of Assessment
Communication, Cultural and Media Studies, Library and Information Management Summary Impact Type
SocietalResearch Subject Area(s)
Information and Computing Sciences: Data Format
Studies In Human Society: Policy and Administration
Law and Legal Studies: Law
Summary of the impact
    Research at LU carried out from 2003 to 2011 has made a significant
      impact on the practical realisation of Open Access (OA) to scholarly
      publications at an international level. Research into publisher's
      Copyright Transfer Agreements underpinned the development of the
      SHERPA/RoMEO service, widely used by repository managers across Europe
      [impact 4.1]; a cost-benefit model of scholarly publishing in relation to
      the main routes to OA influenced the publishing industry, and research
      strategy amongst UK funding agencies [impact 4.2]; further research
      influenced Research Councils UK (RCUK) policy in relation to mandates
      [impact 4.3], and the work of the European Commission in the development
      of its digital agenda [impact 4.4].
    Underpinning research
    Four strands of research at LU since 2003 have contributed to shaping
      scholarly communication policy and practice:
    2.1) Research into OA began with the Jisc-funded RoMEO project (Rights of
      Metadata for Open Archiving) [G3.1] led by Professor Charles
      Oppenheim (1998-2009) and Dr Steve Probets (Lecturer; 2001 to date), which
      investigated stakeholder needs with regard to the specification of the
      intellectual property of research articles deposited in OA repositories.
      Publishers' copyright transfer agreements (CTAs) were analysed which
      identified the range of conditions and restrictions specified by
      publishers and how these could affect an author's right to deposit their
      work in an OA repository. Eight journal articles based on the project have
      been published, three focussing on the analysis of CTAs [3.1]. In
      2004, complementary research [G3.2] by Dr Fytton Rowland (Senior
      Lecturer; 1995-2008), Probets, Dr Ann O'Brien (Lecturer; 1987 to date),
      Oppenheim and Dr Adrienne Muir (Senior Lecturer; 2000 to date)
      investigated technical models, preservation, and political/cultural issues
      affecting OA repositories. This Jisc-funded project was undertaken in
      association with Cranfield University and consultants Key Perspectives,
      and concluded that a distributed model for OA repositories should be
      adopted in which content was maintained in institutional repositories with
      metadata harvested to support a range of additional services [3.2].
      This model provides a sound technological basis to underpin
      self-archiving.
    2.2) In 2006, Oppenheim and Dr Eric Davies (Director, LISU, 1994-2007)
      collaborated with Outsell UK [G3.3] to prepare an evidence-based
      analysis of data concerning scholarly journal publishing, for the Research
      Information Network (RIN), RCUK and the Department of Trade &
      Industry. Their Baseline Report identified gaps in the evidence base [3.3],
      which served to focus further research into OA. In 2007-08, Claire Creaser
      (Director, LISU, 1994 to date), Oppenheim (lead investigator), and
      Professor Anne Morris (Professor, 1985 to date) collaborated with
      Professor J. Houghton (University of Victoria, Australia) on a project
      commissioned by Jisc [G3.4] investigating the economic
      implications of alternative scholarly publishing models. The aim was to
      inform policy discussion and enable stakeholders better to understand the
      institutional, budgetary and wider economic and social implications of the
      three emerging models of scholarly publication — subscription journals,
      open access journals and self-archiving in repositories. The costs and
      benefits of each were described, and a functional operational economic
      model created [3.4].
    2.3) Also in 2007-08, Creaser was PI for the LU's contribution to a
      research project [G3.5] led by a commercial partner for RCUK,
      investigating the effects and impacts of OA on publishing models and
      institutional repositories in light of national and international trends [3.5].
      The report concluded that the impact of the Research Councils' open access
      mandates had been limited, and led to action by the Research Councils to
      strengthen their policies on open access to research outputs.
    2.4) Subsequent research includes a two year project [G3.6],
      completed in 2011, funded by the Europe-wide Publishing and the Ecology of
      European Research (PEER) consortium, to inform their members (including
      the International Association of Science, Technical and Medical Publishers
      (STM) and the European Science Foundation) about author and reader
      behaviour towards journals, with a specific focus on self-archiving
      articles on a European level [3.6]. Led by Dr Jenny Fry (Senior
      Lecturer, 2007 to date), Probets and Creaser, this project combined
      existing expertise in the research group with new expertise in the
      disciplinary shaping of scholarly communication contributed by Fry.
    References to the research
    
3.1. Jenkins, C., Oppenheim, C., Probets, S.G. and
      Hubbard, W., ''Romeo Studies 7: creation of a controlled vocabulary to
      analyse copyright transfer agreements'', Journal of Information
        Science, 34(3), 2008, 290-307. DOI: 10.1177/0165551507084141
      (`Peer-reviewed international journal of high repute', ranked amongst the
      top-third of information and library science journal titles (2011 Journal
      Citation Reports), Altmetrics rank score of 9 — placing article in the top
      25% of all articles by attention (LU institutional repository stats
      11/06/13).
     
3.2. Swan, A., Needham, P., Probets, S.G., Muir, A.,
      Oppenheim, C., O'Brien, E.A., Hardy, R. and Rowland,
        J.F.B., ''Developing a Model for e-Prints and Open Access Journal
      Content in UK Further and Higher Education'', Learned Publishing,
      18(1), 2005, 25-40. DOI: 10.1087/0953151052801479
      (`Major international journal', peer-reviewed, submitted to RAE 2008,
      cited 7 times in Scopus (LU institutional repository stats 11/06/13) and 5
      times in Web of Knowledge (19/06/13)).
     
3.4. Houghton, J, Rasmussen, B, Sheehan, P, Oppenheim, C,
        Morris, A, Creaser, C, Greenwood, H, Summers, M and Gourlay, A, Economic
        implications of alternative scholarly publishing models: Exploring the
        costs and benefits, London: JISC, 2009. Report available at http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/rpteconomicoapublishing.pdf
      (accessed 14-9-12)
      (Submitted to REF 2014, Cited 77 times (excl. self-citations) according to
      Google Scholar (11/06/2013)
     
3.5. Creaser, C., "Open access to research outputs — institutional
      policies and researchers' views: results from two complementary surveys",
      New Review of Academic Librarianship 16(1) 2010, 4-25 DOI:
      10.1080/13614530903162854
      (Peer-reviewed, submitted to REF 2014, cited 8 times (excl.
      self-citations) according to Google Scholar and 3 citations (excl.
      self-citations) in Scopus (19/06/2013).
     
3.6. Fry, J., Probets, S.G., Creaser, C., Greenwood
        H.R., Spezi, V.C.L. and White, S.U., "PEER
      Behavioural Research: Authors and Users vis-à-vis Journals and
      Repositories. Final report"', PEER, 2011. Available at
      http://www.peerproject.eu/fileadmin/media/reports/PEER_D4_final_report_29SEPT11.pdf
      (accessed 14-9-12)
      (Reviewed by the PEER Executive, a subsequent article has been published
      in the Journal of Documentation (DOI: 10.1108/JD-01-2012-0008),
      which is an international peer-reviewed journal article, submitted to REF
      2014)
     
Grants Awarded:
    G3.1. Oppenheim; Machine Readable Rights Metadata (in response
        to JISC's C1/02 Focus on Access to Institutional Resources); JISC;
      August 2002 - July 2003; £66,930 (competitive tendering process)
    G3.2. Rowland; Delivery, Management and Access Model for
        Eprints and Open Access Journals within Further and Higher Education;
      JISC; April 2004 - June 2004; £29,962 (competitive tendering process)
    G3.3. Davies; Evidence-based analysis of data concerning
        scholarly journal publishing, Electronic Publishing Services Ltd,
      2006, £8,200 (commissioned project)
    G3.4. Oppenheim; Economic Implications of alternative
        scholarly publishing models; JISC; November 2007 - November 2008;
      £100,000 (commissioned project)
    G3.5. Creaser; Study on open access to research outputs;
      RCUK; December 2007 - August 2008; £32,600 (competitive tendering process)
    G3.6. Fry; Behavioural research: Authors and users vis2011à2011vis
        journals and repositories; PEER; April 2009 - June 2011; €186,000
      (competitive tendering process)
    Details of the impact
    The underpinning research described above has contributed to improved
      services to the scholarly publishing community and influenced national and
      international OA policy decisions regarding investment in institutional
      repositories — by June 2013, 172 institutions worldwide had mandates for
      research publications in place compared to fewer than 10 in 2003, and
      fewer than 50 in 2008 (source: ROARMAP — http://roarmap.eprints.org/).
    4.1) The research described in 2.1 contributed to the acceptance and
      development of distributed OA repositories, which have been widely adopted
      in the UK academic community — ROAR (the Registry of Open Access
      Repositories — http://roar.eprints.org)
      reports the creation of 197 UK repositories since 2005. In outlining
      publishers' conditions for uploading articles to distributed repositories,
      the RoMEO project was critical to the development of the institutional
      repository infrastructure, providing the foundation for the Sherpa Romeo
      service http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/faq.php?fIDnum=|&mode=simple&la=en#operators)
      [5.1]. This service provides a search interface to CTA data
      based on a rigorous controlled vocabulary, and is widely used by authors
      and repository librarians to determine the conditions by which articles
      state of publishers' acceptance of self-archiving, having been extended
      and exploited by Sherpa and now used internationally; for the period
      2010-11, there have been 457,629 visits, of which 85,493 are from the UK,
      64,293 from the USA and 32,032 from Australia, and a total of 2,176,548
      page views [5.2].
    4.2) Research described in 2.2 made a major contribution to understanding
      the potential benefits of OA and was recognised as having driven the
      JISC's OA policy forward [5.3]. RCUK commented: "RCUK welcomes
      this substantial and interesting report. It will be of great use to the
      Research Councils as we develop our future policies in relation to
      publishing and in particular open access" [5.4]. The Open Access
      Implementation Group described its impact as "profound" in
      that it generated discussions between scholarly publishing stakeholders,
      provided a method for costing OA, was cited in the Finch report to support
      its conclusions that OA is beneficial to the UK, and substantially
      influenced the RCUK's policy on OA [5.5]. The significance of the
      contribution of this work to the HE sector and to the UK economy is also
      evidenced by the national media coverage generated [5.6]. The
      report, and subsequent research inspired by the economic model presented
      therein, sparked animated discussions with the commercial publishing
      sector. The research generated a forum for discussions between the
      Publishers Association, the ALPSP (Association of Learned and Professional
      Society Publishers), and the STM Association on the one hand and the JISC
      on the other, over issues of immediate importance to the UK HE sector and
      the UK economy, including two specific points: how can the dissemination
      of research outputs be made more effective through the internet and Web
      technologies; and why are subscription costs continuing to rise at rates
      above inflation? [5.7]
    4.3) Research described in 2.3 outlined a way forward for the UK Research
      Councils in relation to OA, building on the extensive activities already
      supported through repositories such as UK PubMed Central and ESRC Society
      Today. In response to the study, the Chief Executives of the Research
      Councils agreed that, over time, the UK Research Councils will support
      increased open access, by:
    
      - building on their mandates on grant-holders to deposit research papers
        in suitable repositories within an agreed time period, and;
- extending their support for publishing in open access journals,
        including through the pay-to-publish model.
This was taken forward by the Research Councils and HEFCE, and open
      access to research outputs is now mandated by all UK Research Councils [5.8].
    4.4) The research described in 2.4 provided a deeper understanding and a
      fuller picture of author and reader attitudes towards OA, and particularly
      self-archiving, for the scholarly publishing industry and the OA
      community. The findings have been discussed at length, for example [5.9],
      and enabled the research community, including publishers and research
      institutions, to engage in an open discussion of OA. The multiform
      evidence base gathered, as well as specific findings of the Behavioural
      strand led by Fry, is influencing the work of the European Commission in
      the development of its digital agenda [5.10].
    The impact of this group of studies is significant in that access to
      published scholarly material has been broadened out to those end-users who
      otherwise might not be able to access such material due to financial
      constraints. This has been achieved through development of end-user
      services, informing policy on Open Access mandates, and contributing to
      the empirical evidence to support wider discussion on Open Access
      publishing at the International level.
    Sources to corroborate the impact 
    5.1. Letter of support, Chair of the UK Council of Research
      Repositories( UKCoRR )
    5.2. SHERPA/RoMEO usage figures, via email from SHERPA Technical
      Development Officer dated 21.06.12
    5.3. JISC, Open Access for UK research. JISC's contributions,
      2010. Available at: www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/programme/2010/jiscoamainbrochure.pdf
    5.4. RCUK website — support statement Available at
	  www.jisc.ac.uk/news/stories/2009/01/houghton.aspx
      (PDF provided)
    5.5. OAIG letter of support, from Programme Director, Digital
      Infrastructure (Information Environment), JISC.
    5.6. Times Higher Education, 5 Feb 2009, Analysis backs
        open-access path for scholarly publishing, Available at: www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/
        story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=405222 (PDF provided)
    5.7. A series of letters are linked from: ALPSP, ALPSP
        Statements & Position Papers, 16.04.2010. Available at: www.alpsp.org/Ebusiness/Aboutalpsp/ALPSPStatements/StatementDetails.aspx?ID=98
      (PDFs provided)
    5.8. RCUK website, 2012. Formerly available at : www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/outputs.aspx
      [accessed June 2012] (PDF provided)
    5.9. Times Higher Education, 5th July 2012, Gold or green:
        which is the best shade of open access?, Available at:
		www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=420454
      (PDF provided)
    5.10. Opening speech of the PEER end-of-project conference,
      Brussels, 29th May 2012. Available at
      commentneelie.eu/speech.php?sp=SPEECH/12/392 (PDF provided)