1. RCUK Policy on Open Access: Terms and Compliance Repositories Support Project Event London, May 2013 Mari Williams BBSRC

2. Summary What? How? Why?

3. Research is essential to the growth, prosperity and wellbeing of the UK. Ensuring the widest possible access to research, both within and outside of the research community, will mean that the ground-breaking discoveries made in science and research can have a greater impact on our lives. Doug Kell, RCUK EG ‘Champion’ for Information, May 2011. Why ?

4. Openness agenda UK Government’s commitment to openness and transparency. Make the results of publicly funded research open, accessible and exploitable. Transparency and openness to drive innovation and growth, and to increase trust in research. RCUK Position Statement – 2005: –Accessibility; Quality; Efficiency & cost effectiveness; Long-term availability.

5. Which means …..? Research outputs must be accessible to enable exploitation. Research funders have a responsibility to ensure accessibility. Dissemination is part of the research process and has to be paid for. Journals, libraries, repositories & publishers have a key role to play in the process. Get the stuff out there and get it used!

6. RCUK Policy on Open Access Definitions Scope RCUK’s expectations of –Researchers –Journals –Research Institutions Implementation and compliance

7. RCUK definition of ‘Open Access’ Unrestricted, on-line access to peer reviewed and published scholarly research papers. Specifically a user must be able to do the following free of any publisher-imposed access charge: 1. Read published research papers in an electronic format. 2. Search for and re-use (including download) the content. Allows unrestricted use of manual and automated text and data mining tools, as well as unrestricted re-use of content with proper attribution (as defined by CC-BY).

8. Scope Peer - reviewed research articles Published in journals or conference proceedings Acknowledging RCUK funding Submitted for publication from 1 April 2013 “Accepted for publication”

9. Expectations: Researchers Publish in RCUK Open Access compliant journal Include RC funding acknowledgement: RIN guidance Where relevant, include statement on accessing underlying research materials

10. Expectations: Journals Journal either provides: –Immediate, unrestricted access to final version on its website –Using CC-BY licence –Immediate deposit in other repositories –No restriction on re-use Or consents to: –Deposit of final accepted MS in any repository –No restriction on commercial re-use –Within defined period

11. Expectations: Institutions Institutions receiving RCUK OA block grants must: –Establish institutional publication funds –Develop processes to manage and allocate funds transparently and fairly between disciplines and researchers RCUK expects the primary use to be payments of APCs RCUK preference is gold OA, but decision lies with authors and institutions

12. Repositories Repository choice: –MRC/ESRC –Other RCs Repositories to feature: –OA and funder metadata –Consistent aggregation and searching Current RIN projects: –Interoperability: RIOxx –Vocabularies for OA: V4OA

13. Implementation Some flexibility Five year transition period Aiming for 75% gold OA by 2018, and 100% compliance with policy Supporting guidance provided FAQs 2014: evidence-based review being planned Further reviews …

14. 2014 Review: Scope International landscape Impact of policy on –Disciples –Peer review –Research collaboration Impact of licences Embargo periods Overall costs Block funds and costs of managing them

15. 2014 Review: Evidence Information: All articlesSource DOIROS / Researchfish Gold*/Green/Other/not knownROS / Researchfish The licence which applies (including confirmation of CC ‐ BY for articles flagged as ‘gold’) Sherpa/FACT service (based on Journal ‐ level data) Whether article carries Funder Acknowledgement Random dipstick checking by RCs (incl. through use of available bibliometric data e.g. Web of Science data) Article carries statement on access to underlying research materials Random dipstick checking by RCs (incl. through use of available bibliometric data e.g. Web of Science data) Information: All articles not made immediately OA with CC ‐ BY on publisher’s website Source URLROS / Researchfish Embargo period –Sherpa/FACT service (based on Journal ‐ level data)

16. 2014 Review: Evidence Section A – ‘Expenditure by Publisher’ To include all spend connected with publishing individual articles, i.e. APCs, page charges, colour charges, etc Publisher A£-Number of articles published as a result of this spend Publisher B£-Number of articles published as a result of this spend Publisher C£-Number of articles published as a result of this spend Publisher D£-Number of articles published as a result of this spend etc… (add rows as necessary)

17. 2014 Review: Evidence Section B Other expenditure analysis Other Expenditure to achieve OA - 1 £ - Brief description (500 characters, incl punctuation and spaces) of activity funded Other Expenditure to achieve OA – 2 £ - Brief description (500 characters, incl punctuation and spaces) of activity funded Other Expenditure to achieve OA – 3 £ - Brief description (500 characters, incl punctuation and spaces) of activity funded etc(add rows as necessary) sub-total paid to publishers£ - sub-total of other expenditure £ - If balance is negative, a brief description (500 characters incl punctuation and spaces) of source funds used in addition to RCUK block grant Balance of block grant remaining £ -

18. Monitoring: working in partnership Identify with Research Organisations: –Minimum achievable level of reporting –Data gathering mechanisms RIN ‘HEI Best Practice Project’ –Cooperative framework for monitoring progress towards OA –Working Group being set up

19. Further information RCUK Policy http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/outputs.aspx http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/outputs.aspx RCUK Blogs http://blogs.rcuk.ac.uk http://blogs.rcuk.ac.uk Finch Group report http://www.researchinfonet.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Finch- Group-report-FINAL-VERSION.pdf http://www.researchinfonet.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Finch- Group-report-FINAL-VERSION.pdf Royal Society Report http://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/science-public-enterprise/report/ http://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/science-public-enterprise/report/ openaccess@rcuk.ac.uk

20. QUESTIONS ?