1. The Finch Report and RCUK policies Michael Jubb Research Information Network 5 th Couperin Open Access Meeting 24 January 2013

2. The Political Context  innovation  transparency  returns on investment  a key principle  ‘the results of research that has been publicly funded should be freely accessible in the public domain’

3. Some related developments  Review of Intellectual Property and Growth (‘Hargreaves Report’)  orphan works  text mining  Royal Society report on Science as an Open Enterprise  intelligent access  Open Data White Paper  Research Transparency Sector Board  Justice Committee Post Legislative Scrutiny of FOI Act  Administrative Data Task Force  EU Commission  Communication: towards better access to scientific information  Recommendation on access to and preservation of scientific information  Amendments to public sector information directive

4. The Question and the Process  how to expand access, in a sustainable way, to peer-reviewed research publications  group of 13 representatives of universities, libraries, funders, learned societies, publishers  different groups with different interests  no perfect solution: ‘best-fit’

5. The Global Picture  2m. research publications a year  increasing at c.4% a year  25k scholarly journals  most subscription-based  8k open access  growth of hybrid journals  commercial publishers and learned societies

6. Scholarly Communications and the UK Research Community  120k publications in 2010  13% humanities, social science & business  45% life sciences and medicine  42% physical sciences and engineering  strong competitive position  more articles and more citations per researcher and per £ spent  more usage per article published  citation impact and share of highly-cited papers second only to US  factors underpinning this success

7. Monographs  library expenditure on monographs declining in real terms, while expenditure on serials is increasing  rising prices and declining print runs  no clear open access business model as yet, but some experiments  OAPEN-UK project ( http://oapen-uk.jiscebooks.org/ ) http://oapen-uk.jiscebooks.org/

8. Mechanisms and Success Criteria  more UK articles available globally  more global articles available in the UK  sustain high-quality research  sustain high-quality services to authors and readers  financial health of publishing and learned societies  costs to HE and funders  open access journals  repositories  licence extensions

9. Conclusions  no single mechanism meets all the success criteria  a mixed economy  transition to OA should be accelerated in an ordered way  tensions between interests of key stakeholders, and risks to all of them  costs  global environment  promote innovation and sustain what is valuable

10. Recommendations  clear policy direction towards Gold open access  better funding arrangements, focusing responsibilities in universities, not funders  minimise restrictions on use and re-use  expand and rationalise licensing  HE and NHS  SMEs, public libraries  deal with subscriptions and APCs in a single negotiation  experiment with OA monographs  develop repository infrastructure  caution about embargoes

11. Some responses  Govt acceptance of recommendations  £10m one-off funding  RCUK policy announcement  requirement for  Gold + CC-BY (preferred), or  Green with 6month embargo (12 months for humanities and social sciences)  consultation on REF 2020 awaited  universities establishing publication funds and policies BUT  no co-ordinated implementation process

12. Research Councils UK (RCUK) policies  requirement from 1 April 2013 for  Gold with a CC-BY licence (preferred), or  Green with 6 months maximum embargo (12 months for humanities and social sciences)  block grant to universities to meet costs of article processing charges (APCs)  assumes c45% of articles from Research Council-funded projects will be published in Gold OA journals in 2013-14, rising to 75% by 2017-18  some discussions continuing on issues including scope of papers covered, embargo periods, and CC-BY licences  management of publication process put firmly in hands of universities  reporting and monitoring arrangements  research data?

13. Conclusion: some implementation issues  development of Green repository infrastructure  metadata standards and interoperability  development of Gold infrastructure  arrangements for payment of APCs  monitoring and evaluation of progress  performance indicators?  university policies and procedures  mandates, compliance, performance management….  implications of REF 2020  research data?

14. Thank you Questions? Michael Jubb www.researchinfonet.org