Journal article Open Access

Feedback to Coalition S on Plan S Implementation Guidelines

Jonathan Tennant; Mark C. Wilson; Dmitri Zaitsev; Christian Gogolin

Dublin Core Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="" xmlns:oai_dc="" xmlns:xsi="" xsi:schemaLocation="">
  <dc:creator>Jonathan Tennant</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Mark C. Wilson</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Dmitri Zaitsev</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Christian Gogolin</dc:creator>
  <dc:description>Feedback to Coalition S on Plan S Implementation Guidelines

	(Dr) Jonathan Tennant, Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education 
	(Dr) Mark C. Wilson, University of Auckland; cofounder Free Journal Network and Publishing Reform Forum, board member MathOA 
	(Dr) Dmitri Zaitsev, School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin; cofounder Publishing Reform Forum and Free Journal Network, strategy at MathOA
	(Dr) Christian Gogolin, University of Cologne, cofounder Quantum - the open journal for quantum science; board member Free Journal Network

We argue that Coalition members should favour, both in words and via their spending decisions, community-controlled, no-author-fee journals over commercially owned journals charging APCs. This is for reasons of fairness, economic efficiency, and sustainability. We see Plan S as a strong statement and step in the right direction, but encourage Coalition members to be more forward-thinking about how they want the future scholarly publishing market to look, and make sure that they are giving due consideration to the non-commercial elements of the ecosystem.</dc:description>
  <dc:subject>Open Access</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Plan S</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Scholarly Publishing</dc:subject>
  <dc:title>Feedback to Coalition S on Plan S Implementation Guidelines</dc:title>
All versions This version
Views 2,8242,829
Downloads 1,0971,097
Data volume 447.1 MB447.1 MB
Unique views 2,6592,664
Unique downloads 766766


Cite as