Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?

Tony Ross-Hellauer, Birgit Schmidt, Bianca Kramer

Publikation: Beitrag in einer FachzeitschriftArtikelForschungBegutachtung

Abstract

As open access (OA) to publications continues to gather momentum, we should continuously question whether it is moving in the right direction. A novel intervention in this space is the creation of OA publishing platforms commissioned by funding organizations. Examples include those of the Wellcome Trust and the Gates Foundation, as well as recently announced initiatives from public funders like the European Commission and the Irish Health Research Board. As the number of such platforms increases, it becomes urgently necessary to assess in which ways, for better or worse, this emergent phenomenon complements or disrupts the scholarly communications landscape. This article examines ethical, organizational, and economic strengths and weaknesses of such platforms, as well as usage and uptake to date, to scope the opportunities and threats presented by funder OA platforms in the ongoing transition to OA. The article is broadly supportive of the aims and current implementations of such platforms, finding them a novel intervention which stands to help increase OA uptake, control costs of OA, lower administrative burden on researchers, and demonstrate funders’ commitment to fostering open practices. However, the article identifies key areas of concern about the potential for unintended consequences, including the appearance of conflicts of interest, difficulties of scale, potential lock-in, and issues of the branding of research. The article ends with key recommendations for future consideration which include a focus on open scholarly infrastructure.

Originalspracheenglisch
FachzeitschriftSAGE Open
Jahrgang8
Ausgabenummer4
DOIs
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 1 Okt 2018

Fingerprint

open access
Conflict of Interest
Foster Home Care
Cost Control
Research
Publications
Economics
Research Personnel
Organizations
Health
conflict of interest
European Commission
Open Access
communications
funding
commitment
threat
infrastructure
costs
health

Schlagwörter

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Geisteswissenschaftliche Fächer (insg.)
    • !!Social Sciences(all)

    Dies zitieren

    Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea? / Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Schmidt, Birgit; Kramer, Bianca.

    in: SAGE Open, Jahrgang 8, Nr. 4, 01.10.2018.

    Publikation: Beitrag in einer FachzeitschriftArtikelForschungBegutachtung

    Ross-Hellauer, Tony ; Schmidt, Birgit ; Kramer, Bianca. / Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?. in: SAGE Open. 2018 ; Jahrgang 8, Nr. 4.
    @article{d17d7226686b405187ab9d5ebebc3c00,
    title = "Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?",
    abstract = "As open access (OA) to publications continues to gather momentum, we should continuously question whether it is moving in the right direction. A novel intervention in this space is the creation of OA publishing platforms commissioned by funding organizations. Examples include those of the Wellcome Trust and the Gates Foundation, as well as recently announced initiatives from public funders like the European Commission and the Irish Health Research Board. As the number of such platforms increases, it becomes urgently necessary to assess in which ways, for better or worse, this emergent phenomenon complements or disrupts the scholarly communications landscape. This article examines ethical, organizational, and economic strengths and weaknesses of such platforms, as well as usage and uptake to date, to scope the opportunities and threats presented by funder OA platforms in the ongoing transition to OA. The article is broadly supportive of the aims and current implementations of such platforms, finding them a novel intervention which stands to help increase OA uptake, control costs of OA, lower administrative burden on researchers, and demonstrate funders’ commitment to fostering open practices. However, the article identifies key areas of concern about the potential for unintended consequences, including the appearance of conflicts of interest, difficulties of scale, potential lock-in, and issues of the branding of research. The article ends with key recommendations for future consideration which include a focus on open scholarly infrastructure.",
    keywords = "open access, publishing platforms, research funders, scholarly communications",
    author = "Tony Ross-Hellauer and Birgit Schmidt and Bianca Kramer",
    year = "2018",
    month = "10",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1177/2158244018816717",
    language = "English",
    volume = "8",
    journal = "SAGE open medicine",
    issn = "2050-3121",
    publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
    number = "4",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?

    AU - Ross-Hellauer, Tony

    AU - Schmidt, Birgit

    AU - Kramer, Bianca

    PY - 2018/10/1

    Y1 - 2018/10/1

    N2 - As open access (OA) to publications continues to gather momentum, we should continuously question whether it is moving in the right direction. A novel intervention in this space is the creation of OA publishing platforms commissioned by funding organizations. Examples include those of the Wellcome Trust and the Gates Foundation, as well as recently announced initiatives from public funders like the European Commission and the Irish Health Research Board. As the number of such platforms increases, it becomes urgently necessary to assess in which ways, for better or worse, this emergent phenomenon complements or disrupts the scholarly communications landscape. This article examines ethical, organizational, and economic strengths and weaknesses of such platforms, as well as usage and uptake to date, to scope the opportunities and threats presented by funder OA platforms in the ongoing transition to OA. The article is broadly supportive of the aims and current implementations of such platforms, finding them a novel intervention which stands to help increase OA uptake, control costs of OA, lower administrative burden on researchers, and demonstrate funders’ commitment to fostering open practices. However, the article identifies key areas of concern about the potential for unintended consequences, including the appearance of conflicts of interest, difficulties of scale, potential lock-in, and issues of the branding of research. The article ends with key recommendations for future consideration which include a focus on open scholarly infrastructure.

    AB - As open access (OA) to publications continues to gather momentum, we should continuously question whether it is moving in the right direction. A novel intervention in this space is the creation of OA publishing platforms commissioned by funding organizations. Examples include those of the Wellcome Trust and the Gates Foundation, as well as recently announced initiatives from public funders like the European Commission and the Irish Health Research Board. As the number of such platforms increases, it becomes urgently necessary to assess in which ways, for better or worse, this emergent phenomenon complements or disrupts the scholarly communications landscape. This article examines ethical, organizational, and economic strengths and weaknesses of such platforms, as well as usage and uptake to date, to scope the opportunities and threats presented by funder OA platforms in the ongoing transition to OA. The article is broadly supportive of the aims and current implementations of such platforms, finding them a novel intervention which stands to help increase OA uptake, control costs of OA, lower administrative burden on researchers, and demonstrate funders’ commitment to fostering open practices. However, the article identifies key areas of concern about the potential for unintended consequences, including the appearance of conflicts of interest, difficulties of scale, potential lock-in, and issues of the branding of research. The article ends with key recommendations for future consideration which include a focus on open scholarly infrastructure.

    KW - open access

    KW - publishing platforms

    KW - research funders

    KW - scholarly communications

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057952117&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1177/2158244018816717

    DO - 10.1177/2158244018816717

    M3 - Article

    VL - 8

    JO - SAGE open medicine

    JF - SAGE open medicine

    SN - 2050-3121

    IS - 4

    ER -