Other Open Access

OPERAS Advocacy White Paper

Elisabeth Heinemann; Andrea Bertino; Francesca Di Donato; Aysa Ekanger; Elena Giglia; Barbara Jędraszko; Michael Kaiser; Lisa Matthias; Alessia Smaniotto

Other(s)
Stavroula Sant-Geronikolou

This White Paper has been prepared by the OPERAS (Open Access in the European Research Area
through Scholarly Communication) Working Group on Advocacy for Open Access Publishing in the
Social Sciences and Humanities. OPERAS is a European research infrastructure for the development
of open scholarly communication, particularly in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). The
consortium comprises 36 organisations from 13 European countries and is coordinated by a core
group of nine members. OPERAS’ members come from diverse backgrounds and include publishers
and publication platforms, infrastructure providers, libraries, universities, and research organisations.

The paper addresses the importance of Open Science for the SSH, highlighting the role of a distributed
research infrastructure like OPERAS in advocating for Open Access publishing models. Furthermore,
the paper discusses the importance of the SSH in Open Science, showing how Open Science itself
benefits from considering and accommodating the needs of researchers from different disciplinary
backgrounds. While OPERAS does not endorse a specific Open Access publishing model, the
infrastructure partners advocate for publication processes that can meet the present demand for
Open Access, transparency, and open source tools in scholarly communication.

This document is intended for all stakeholders actively involved in Open Access in the SSH. This
includes publishers and publication platforms as well as libraries and infrastructure providers.
However, the White Paper ultimately focuses on advocacy targeting researchers at different career
stages. In order to support stakeholders in advocating for Open Access, the White Paper presents the
benefits of Open Access publishing for scholars, while also addressing common concerns in the SSH
research community. These include, but are not limited to, reputation, research evaluation, financial
issues, a general lack of information, intellectual property rights and other legal concerns, and the
availability of Open Access publishing models.

This White Paper draws on experiences from OPERAS partners to illustrate researchers’ concerns and
to develop a guide with FAQs and solutions to address these issues. The White Paper concludes with
advocacy suggestion sheets tailored to different stakeholders involved in Open Access in the SSH.

Files (801.7 kB)
Name Size
operas_advocacy_white_paper_july2018.pdf
md5:30692340d38b4f50b212118a7b2d370a 		801.7 kB Download

  • Adie, E. (2014, October 24). Attention! A study of open access vs non-open access articles. https://doi. org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1213690.v1

  • AEUP – Association of European University Presses. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://www. aeup.eu

  • AISA. (n.d.). Politiche. Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://aisa.sp.unipi.it/politiche

  • AISA. (n.d.). Proposta di modifica alla legge italiana sul diritto d'autore. Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://aisa.sp.unipi.it/attivita/diritto-di-ripubblicazione-in-ambito-scientifico/novella

  • Author Rights: Using the SPARC Author Addendum. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https:// sparcopen.org/our-work/author-rights/brochure-html/

  • Beddoes, D., Brodie, E., Clarke, R., & Hoong Sin, C. (2012). Benefits of Open Access to Scholarly Research for Voluntary and Charitable Sector Organisations (Other including Programme/Project deposits). Retrieved from http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/576/

  • Blanchard, A. (2010). Ce que le blog apporte à la recherche. In M. Dacos (Ed.), Read/Write Book: Le livre inscriptible (pp. 157–166). Marseille: OpenEdition Press. Retrieved from http://books. openedition.org/oep/172

  • Borghi, M. (2011). Copyright and Truth. Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 12(1), 1–27. https://doi. org/10.2202/1565-3404.1261

  • Bourdieu, P. (1975). The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Social Science Information, 14(6), 19–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847501400602

  • Choose a License. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://creativecommons.org/choose

  • CNI: Coalition for Networked Information. (2018). Scholarly Communication: Deconstruct & Decentralize? Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4nUe-6Ln-8

  • COAR. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://www.coar-repositories.org

  • Common Law of Business Balance. (2018). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ index.php?title=Common_law_of_business_balance&oldid=846630617

  • Contat, O., & Gremillet, A.-S. (2015). Publier : à quel prix ? Étude sur la structuration des coûts de publication pour les revues françaises en SHS. Revue française des sciences de l'information et de la communication, (7). https://doi.org/10.4000/rfsic.1716

  • CRUI. (2013). Linee Guida per la redazione di policy e regolamenti universitari in materia di accesso aperto alle pubblicazioni e ai dati della ricerca. Retrieved from https://www.crui.it/images/allegati/ biblioteca/linee_guida_policy.pdf

  • Cullen, R., & Chawner, B. (2011). Institutional Repositories, Open Access, and Scholarly Communication: A Study of Conflicting Paradigms. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(6), 460– 470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.07.002

  • Curry, S. (2018). Let's move beyond the rhetoric: it's time to change how we judge research. Nature, 554, 147.

  • Dacos, M., & Mounier, P. (2010). Les carnets de recherche en ligne, espace d'une conversation scientifique décentrée. Albin Michel.

  • Dacos, M., & Mounier, P. (2011). L'édition électronique. Communications, (88), 47–57.

  • Dallmeier-Tiessen, S., Darby, R., Goerner, B., Hyppoelae, J., Igo-Kemenes, P., Kahn, D., … van der Stelt, W. (2011a). Highlights from the SOAP project survey. What Scientists Think about Open Access Publishing. ArXiv:1101.5260 [Cs]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.5260

  • Dallmeier-Tiessen, S., Darby, R., Goerner, B., Hyppoelae, J., Igo-Kemenes, P., Kahn, D., … van der Stelt, W. (2011b). Highlights from the SOAP project survey. What Scientists Think about Open Access Publishing. ArXiv:1101.5260 [Cs]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.5260

  • Deegan, M. (2017). Academic Book of the Future Project Report: A Report to the AHRC and the British Library Marilyn Deegan (p. 105). London. Retrieved from https://academicbookfuture.files.wordpress. com/2017/06/project-report_academic-book-of-the-future_deegan2.pdf

  • DOAB. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://www.doabooks.org

  • DOAJ. (n.d.). Directory of Open Access Journals. Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://doaj.org

  • DORA. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://sfdora.org

  • Eve, M. P. (2014). Open Access and the Humanities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 17 July 2018, from http://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/11765/1/11765.pdf

  • Ferwerda, E., Pinter, F., & Stern, N. (2017). A Landscape Study on Open Access and Monographs: Policies, Funding and Publishing in Eight European Countries. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.815932

  • Fitzpatrick, K. (2011). Planned obsolescence: Publishing, technology, and the future of the academy. NYU press.

  • FORCE11. (2014). The FAIR Data Principles. Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://www.force11.org/group/fairgroup/fairprinciples

  • Geschuhn, K., & Stone, G. (2017). It's the workflows, stupid! What is required to make 'offsetting' work for the open access transition. Insights, 30(3). https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.391

  • HIRMEOS Project. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://www.hirmeos.eu

  • Hypothes.is. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://web.hypothes.is

  • ISIDORE - Access to digital data of Humanities and Social Sciences. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://www.rechercheisidore.fr

  • Jussieu Call for Open Science and Biodiversity. (2017). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://jussieucall. org/index.html

  • Knowledge Unlatched. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://www.knowledgeunlatched.org

  • Kotilava – Finnish academic journals towards immediate Open Access | Kotilava. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://kotilava.fi/19-elokuu-2016-1247/ kotilava-%E2%80%93-finnish-academic-journals-towards-immediate-open-access

  • Kramer, B. and Bosman, J. (2018, May 16). Linking impact factor to 'open access' charges creates more inequality in academic publishing. Times Higher Education (THE). Retrieved from https://www. timeshighereducation.com/blog/linking-impact-factor-open-access-charges-creates-more-inequalityacademic- publishing

  • Language Science Press. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://langsci-press.org

  • LIBER. (2014). Text and Data Mining: The need for change in Europe. Retrieved from https:// libereurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Liber-TDM-Factsheet-v2.pdf

  • Licences for Europe - European Commission. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu/ internal_market/copyright/licensing-europe/index_en.htm

  • Look, H. and Marsh, K. (2012). Benefits of Open Access to Scholarly Research to the Public Sector: A report for the Open Access Implementation Group. Retrieved from http://wiki.lib.sun.ac.za/images/e/ e3/Report-to-oauk-benefits-of-open-access-public-sector.pdf

  • McKiernan, E. C. (2017). Imagining the "open" university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education. PLOS Biology, 15(10), e1002614. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002614

  • Morais, R., Bauer, J. & Borrell-Damian, L. (2017). Open Access: 2015-2016 EUA Survey Results. Retrieved from http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage-list/oa-survey-2015-2016-results

  • Mounier, P. (2018). Welcome Speech at the OPERAS Conference: Open Scholarly Communication in Europe. Addressing the Coordination Challenge on 31 May 2017 in Athens (min. 11:06 et sqq). Retrieved 30 July 2018, from http://helios-eie.ekt.gr/EIE/handle/10442/15719

  • Mozilla Science Fellowships. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://science.mozilla.org

  • Murray, D-E. (2014, March 6). 10 point guide to dodging publishing pitfalls. Times Higher Education (THE). Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/10-point-guide-to-dodgingpublishing- pitfalls/2011808.article

  • Neylon, C. (2015). PolEcon of OA Publishing I: What is it publishers do anyway? Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://cameronneylon.net/blog/polecon-of-oa-publishing-i-what-is-it-publishers-do-anyway

  • Neylon, C., Montgomery, L., Ozaygen, A., Saunders, N., & Pinter, F. (2018). The Visibility of Open Access Monographs in a European Context: Full Report. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1230342

  • Nordic Perspectives on Open Science. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://septentrio.uit.no/ index.php/nopos

  • OA@unito.it. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://www.oa.unito.it/new

  • Open Access Directory. (n.d.). Author addenda. Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://oad.simmons.edu/ oadwiki/Author_addenda

  • Open Library of Humanities. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://www.openlibhums.org

  • Open-access mandate. (2018). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index. php?title=Open-access_mandate&oldid=846705742

  • OpenAccess.gr. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://www.openaccess.gr

  • OpenAIRE. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://www.openaire.eu

  • OPERAS. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://operas.hypotheses.org

  • PaperHive. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://paperhive.org

  • Parsons, D. and Holland, J. (2011). Benefits to the Private Sector of Open Access to Higher Education and Scholarly Research: A Research Report to JISC from HOST Policy Research. Retrieved from http:// citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.368.1820&rep=rep1&type=pdf

  • Picarra, M. (2015). Open Access to scientific information: facilitating knowledge transfer and technological innovation from the academic to the private sector. Retrieved from http://www. pasteur4oa.eu/sites/pasteur4oa/files/resource/Brief_OA%20and%20knowledge%20transfer%20 to%20the%20private%20sector.pdf

  • Publish. (n.d.). The Oxford English Dictionary. Cited in: Klein, A. (n.d.) publish. The Chicago School of Media Theory. Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/mediatheory/ keywords/publish/

  • Rathgeb Smith, S. (2015). Open Access Journals and Public Engagement. PS: Political Science & Politics, 48(S1), 119–121. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096515000748

  • Resources | OAPEN. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://www.oapen.org/content/ reports#OAHumanities

  • ROARMAP. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://roarmap.eprints.org

  • Schmidt, B., Bertino, A., Beucke, D., Brinken, H., Jahn, N., Matthias, L., … Bargheer, M. (2018). Open Science Support as a Portfolio of Services and Projects: From Awareness to Engagement. Publications, 6(2), 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications6020027

  • SHERPA Juliet. (n.d.-a). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/julie

  • SHERPA/RoMEO. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php

  • Shieber, S. (2015). A Model Open Access Policy. Retrieved from https://osc.hul.harvard.edu/assets/ files/model-policy-annotated_12_2015.pdf

  • Signers – DORA. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://sfdora.org/signers

  • Sivertsen, G. (2016). Publication-Based Funding: The Norwegian Model. In Research Assessment in the Humanities (pp. 79–90). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29016-4_7

  • Solomon, D. J., & Björk, B.-C. (2011). Publication fees in open access publishing: Sources of funding and factors influencing choice of journal. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1), 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21660

  • Speicher, L., Armando, L., Bargheer, M., Eve, M., Fund, S., Leão, D., Mosterd, M., Pinter, F., & Souyioultzoglou, I. OPERAS Open Access Business Models White Paper. Zenodo. https://zenodo.org/ record/1323707

  • Suber, P. (2010). Thoughts on prestige, quality, and open access. Logos, 21(1), 115–128. https://doi. org/10.1163/095796510X546959

  • Suber, P. (2012). Open Access. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • THATCamp. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://thatcamp.org

  • The Open Access Citation Advantage Service (OACA). (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://sparceurope.org/what-we-do/open-access/sparc-europe-open-access-resources/ open-access-citation-advantage-service-oaca

  • The Shuttleworth Foundation. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://shuttleworthfoundation.org

  • Think. Check. Submit. (n.d.). Retrieved 11 July 2018, from https://thinkchecksubmit.org

  • University of Turin. (2012). Statuto di Ateneo. Retrieved 17 July 2017, from https://www.unito.it/sites/ default/files/statuto.pdf

  • Unsworth, J. (2000). Scholarly Primitives: what methods do humanities researchers have in common, and how might our tools reflect this? Presented at the Symposium on 'Humanities Computing: formal methods, experimental practice' sponsored by King's College, London. Retrieved from http://people. virginia.edu/~jmu2m/Kings.5-00/primitives.html

  • van der Graaf, M. (2017a). Financial And Administrative Issues Around Article Publication Costs For Open Access. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.438030

  • van der Graaf, M. (2017b). Paying For Open Access: The Author's Perspective. Zenodo. https://doi. org/10.5281/zenodo.438037

  • Vanity press. (2018). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index. php?title=Vanity_press&oldid=835095585

  • Walker Rettberg, J. (2003, June 6). not documenting, doing. Retrieved 11 July 2018, from http://jilltxt. net/?p=184

  • Willinsky, J. (2018). The Intellectual Properties of Learning: A Prehistory from Saint Jerome to John Locke. University of Chicago Press.

  • Zuccala, A. (2011). The lay person and Open Access. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 43(1), 1–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2009.1440430115

1,256
573
views
downloads
All versions This version
Views 1,2561,256
Downloads 573573
Data volume 459.4 MB459.4 MB
Unique views 1,1641,164
Unique downloads 517517
More info on how stats are collected.
Indexed in
Publication date:
July 30, 2018
DOI:
10.5281/zenodo.1324036

Zenodo DOI Badge

DOI 

10.5281/zenodo.1324036

Markdown 

[![DOI](https://zenodo.org/badge/DOI/10.5281/zenodo.1324036.svg)](https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1324036)

reStructedText 

.. image:: https://zenodo.org/badge/DOI/10.5281/zenodo.1324036.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1324036

HTML 

<a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1324036"><img src="https://zenodo.org/badge/DOI/10.5281/zenodo.1324036.svg" alt="DOI"></a>

Image URL 

https://zenodo.org/badge/DOI/10.5281/zenodo.1324036.svg

Target URL 

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1324036

Keyword(s):
Open Access Open Science advocacy social sciences and humanities
Grants:
European Commission:
  • OPERAS-D - Design for Open access Publications in European Research Areas for Social Sciences and Humanities (731031)
Communities:
License (for files):
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

Versions

Version 1 10.5281/zenodo.1324036 Jul 30, 2018
Cite all versions? You can cite all versions by using the DOI 10.5281/zenodo.1324035. This DOI represents all versions, and will always resolve to the latest one. Read more.

Share

Cite as

Export