Difference between revisions of "Trip Report: Open-Access-Tage2012"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
PD Dr. Björn Brembs, FU-Berlin und Universtität Leipzig | PD Dr. Björn Brembs, FU-Berlin und Universtität Leipzig | ||
===Crises 1: dysfunctional scholarly literature=== | |||
*limited access | |||
*no global search | |||
*no hyperlinks | |||
*no data visualization | |||
*no submission standards | |||
*almost no statistics | |||
*no text-/data-mining | |||
*no effective way to sort, filter and and discover | |||
*no scientific impact analysis | |||
*no networking feature | |||
: --> It's like the web in 1995 | : --> It's like the web in 1995 | ||
===Crisis 2: Scientific data in peril=== | |||
*cut of fundings | |||
*no funds for persistent software development | |||
: --> data is in danger | : --> data is in danger | ||
===Crisis 3: Non-existent software-archives=== | |||
*reproduction as qualitiy-assurance for scientific publication is not possible | |||
===My digital utopia (technical almost feasable today)=== | |||
*no more corporate publishers: librarys archive everything and make it publicy accessible according to a world-wide standard. | |||
*single semantic, decentralized database of literature, data and software | |||
===Roadblocks=== | |||
*more scientists, more publications | |||
*only read publications of high-rank journals | |||
*job applications request publications in high-rank journals | |||
*only publish in high-rank journals | |||
: --> political issues | : --> political issues | ||
===Metriken=== | |||
*impact factor: negotiable, irreproducible, mathematically unsound | |||
*article metric levels are relevant! Journal metrics don't promote. | |||
===Money=== | |||
*corporate publishers' profits can easily finance all reforms | |||
: --> Roadblocks are political issues | : --> Roadblocks are political issues | ||
Revision as of 12:32, 4 October 2012
26. September - 27. September 2012 an der Universität Wien
Eröffnunskeynote: Limited access is a symptom, not the disease[edit]
PD Dr. Björn Brembs, FU-Berlin und Universtität Leipzig
Crises 1: dysfunctional scholarly literature[edit]
- limited access
- no global search
- no hyperlinks
- no data visualization
- no submission standards
- almost no statistics
- no text-/data-mining
- no effective way to sort, filter and and discover
- no scientific impact analysis
- no networking feature
- --> It's like the web in 1995
Crisis 2: Scientific data in peril[edit]
- cut of fundings
- no funds for persistent software development
- --> data is in danger
Crisis 3: Non-existent software-archives[edit]
- reproduction as qualitiy-assurance for scientific publication is not possible
My digital utopia (technical almost feasable today)[edit]
- no more corporate publishers: librarys archive everything and make it publicy accessible according to a world-wide standard.
- single semantic, decentralized database of literature, data and software
Roadblocks[edit]
- more scientists, more publications
- only read publications of high-rank journals
- job applications request publications in high-rank journals
- only publish in high-rank journals
- --> political issues
Metriken[edit]
- impact factor: negotiable, irreproducible, mathematically unsound
- article metric levels are relevant! Journal metrics don't promote.
Money[edit]
- corporate publishers' profits can easily finance all reforms
- --> Roadblocks are political issues
Open Access in Horizon 2020 and the European Research Area[edit]
Daniel Spichtinger, Policy Officer, European Commission
- The European Commission is:
- Policy Maker: consultations, debates, proposes for EU legislation
- Funding agency: FP7,Horizon 2020, sets access and dissemination
rules for funded research
- (Infra)structure funder and capacity builder: pan-European Open Data Portal, OpenAIRE etc., Supports networking activities
- Two commissionars of open access:
- Vice-President Neelie Kroes: Digital Agenda, Digital single market
- Commissioner Máire Geoghegan-Quinn: Research & Innovation, European Research Area (ERA, Innovation Union
- Objectives
- Develop and implement open access to research results from projects funded by the EU Research Framework Programmes (Including fund research and support activities in the
area of open access)
- Encourage national policy initiatives aiming at improving access to and preservation of scientific information
- Contribute to policy co-ordination between Member States
- OA in FP7
- OA Pilot in FP7
- best efforts to provide OA mandate
- 7 research areas (>than 1300 projects)
- 20% of FP7 total budget (2007-2013)
- survey (summer 2011)
- European Research Council
- Updated scientific Council guidlines for OA (2011)
- OPENAIRE
- EU-funded portal (incl. monitoring, 27 000 publications, 9577 are OA)
- OPENAIRE+: Linking of publications with datasets
- OA Pilot in FP7
- Gold Open Access in FP7
- OA publishing costs are eligible in FP7
- Since the beginning of FP7, for all projects
- Limited to duration of projecs
- EC survey (Summer 2011)
- >50% did not know the possibility
- Only 8 projects out of 194 answers reported they used it
- For 72% of respondents, reimbursement of Gold OA is restricted by the fact that most publishing activities occur after the project end
- Almost 70% of respondents think it is better to use selfarchiving to satisfy the OA requirement in FP7
- OA publishing costs are eligible in FP7
- What are we proposing for OA in Horizon 2020:
- OA mandate: Obligation to provide OA
- All areas
- Peer-reviewed publications
- Allowed embargos: 6/12 months
- Plus: 'pilot' for research data
- OA publishing costs
- Eligible while project runs
- Plus (tbc): possibility to cover later publications, under conditions to define Gold
- OA mandate: Obligation to provide OA