Open Access Dr Richard Masterman Director Research Innovation Services

WELCOME!

Context RCUK Position Statement –Ideas and knowledge available and accessible –Rigorous quality assurance through peer review –Efficient and cost effective –Preserved and accessible for future

Mechanisms Author pays –Implications for fEC methodology Self-archiving –Deposit outputs in an acceptable repository –Copyright and licensing policies –Amended grant guidelines –Impact on subscription journals

Implications Transforming traditional system of scholarly communication Publishers policies on self-archiving and copyright (SHERPA) Pre-prints and peer review Metadata tagging Searches and data mining Who pays? Financial sustainability New economic models of journal publishing

Comments and responses The UK is losing around £1.5bn annually because of its failure to embrace open access publishing, according to an open access advocate. Guardian 16 Sept 2005 But publishers who fear that open access will hit sales and damage the UK's 25% share in the £7bn worldwide learned journals market have lobbied hard against the proposal. Guardian 16 Sept 2005 Among the potential dangers are that researchers will stop submitting papers or subscribing to existing journals, particularly if they choose only to deposit papers in repositories and archives. Royal Society

University response All authors should be encouraged to deposit copies of their papers in the Nottingham ePrints repository; papers will then be forwarded to other repositories as appropriate. The University should identify a central budget upon which all authors in the institution can call to fund publications/OA charges. Wellcome-funded authors should be reminded of the availability of funds to pay for their publications/OA charges. Further internal publicity should be carried out in order to inform academic staff of the new requirements of funders. Arrangements should be put in place to monitor the University's compliance with funder requirements.