1. Open Access: Institutional Response and Responsibilities Open Access ‘Good Practice Exchange’ The George Hotel, Edinburgh 8th October 2013 Bill Hubbard Director, Centre for Research Communications University of Nottingham

2. Open Access Access to research articles (and other outputs) that is free at point of use Use of research articles (and other outputs) free of most licensing restrictions Increasingly, Open Access to underlying research data as well

3. Routes to Open Access Depositing material in an open access repository AND publishing as normal (“Green”) Contrasted with Publishing in a journal that makes the article open access (“Gold”)

4. Repositories Listed in OpenDOAR Institutional repositories Subject based (i.e. Europe PubMedCentral) Governmental repository Free for user to deposit, as centrally funded (AND publish as well)

5. Open Access Journals Listed in DOAJ Fully OA journals Hybrid OA journals Most likely payment of a fee - £1,000 - £2,000 and up (and deposit as well?)

6. From concept to institutional responsibility Researcher-activists Growth of OA publishers Library-activists Library services Early publisher-adopters Funder adoption Financial crisis and government’s recognition Finch, government policy and RCUK HEFCE and REF

7. Institutional responses Repository Mediated deposit service OA publication funds Institutional OA support service Gold fee finance systems Institutional policies Funder grant compliance systems REF planning Integrated institutional support

8. Policy Background Research Funding Governmental Publisher Institutional HEFCE

9. Research Funding RCUK –all Councils –various embargoes –Gold as target, Green allowed –initial compliance target of 45%, rising in following years –compliance will affect future grants Wellcome Trust –compliance will affect future grants

10. Governmental Following Finch Committee Report Funded research to be made open access Maximum 12 month embargo Implication for so-called “unfunded” in-house research

11. Publisher’s policies Some publishers have restrictive policies Overall picture fragmentary and fragmenting Complex: some, e.g. Elsevier, Wiley, have policies that change if the institution or funder has a policy! –Consider place of publisher in process - as service? Push for take-up of hybrid option, for a fee –concerns of double-dipping, on national scale –speculation on fee-levels in future Signs of moves into asking for rights in data

12. Institutional policies Open Access policies as guidance Open Access support services Specific direction for Gold or Green Position on other funders’ grant outputs Position on so-called “unfunded” research Position on repository use as institutional archive Position on possible use of repository for REF

13. HEFCE Consultation for REF2020... incentive for institutions and researchers alike...

14. Pity the researcher...

15. Researcher Funder Public Funder Institution Publisher Researchers view from the past... Funding

16. Researcher Funder Public Funder Institution Publisher with OA Option Open Access Publisher Central/subject Repository Institutional Repository ? ? Researchers view... with publication Mandate Funding Mandate Institutional Database

17. Researcher Funder Public Funder Institution Publisher with OA Option Open Access Publisher Central/subject Repository Institutional Repository ? ? Researchers view... with data as well Mandate Funding Mandate Institutional Database Mandate # Central/subject Repository Institutional Repository Institutional Database Publisher with Data Option

18. Researcher Funder Public Funder Institution Publisher Researchers view from the past... Funding

19. Researcher Funder Public Funder Institution Publisher with OA Option Open Access Publisher Central/subject Repository Institutional Repository ? ? Researchers view today Mandate Funding Mandate Institutional Database Mandate # Central/subject Repository Institutional Repository Institutional Database Publisher with Data Option

20. Tying this together #1 Researchers need to know what to do - clear, concise, contextualised for the institutional situation Research support offices need to be on top of open access as an idea, as a process, as a work-flow within the institution, on top of grant requirements and the developing policy environment Institutions need to accept the repository and OA services as essential infrastructure

21. Tying this together #2 Clear responsibility accompanies RCUK grant –Who picks up this responsibility? Who checks compliance? –Publication follows end of grant - what workflow? If HEFCE proposal goes through, clear institutional need for: –policy - needs advocacy, top-level support, funding and process and compliance workflows –repository deposit - needs full service integration –support service - needs expertise and acceptance

22. Institutional Systems Administration systems for: –OA information and support –Compliance checking - and sanctions? Financial systems for: –disbursing block grants to researchers –dealing with top-sliced pre-payment arrangements –OA fee payments to multiple publishers –information as to which grants produce which outputs IT systems for: –repository –data archiving?

23. Support OpenDOAR - lists OA repositories DOAJ - lists OA journals RoMEO - summarises Publisher policies JULIET - summarises Funder policies FACT - direct advice for RCUK + Wellcome authors OAK - payment intermediary for OA fees OpenAIRE - OA collaboration in Europe ARMA - and each other!

24. Questions? Bill Hubbard Director, Centre for Research Communications bill.hubbard@nottingham.ac.uk