Yesterday, UKRI finally published their Open Access Review Consultation document: https://www.ukri.org/files/funding/oa/open-access-review-consultation/
Amongst other issues, the review contains important proposals on open access policy for books. I have been following this policy area for the University Library over the last 18 months. Here is my summary of yesterday's announcement:
UKRI are still to decide on some issues including: definitions, exceptions (there are quite a few listed), author copyright.
This policy will also inform future REF open access policy.
Less concrete, but still worth thinking about:
Amongst other issues, the review contains important proposals on open access policy for books. I have been following this policy area for the University Library over the last 18 months. Here is my summary of yesterday's announcement:
Proposals
- Monographs, book chapters and edited collections that acknowledge UKRI funding to be made OA.
- The version of record, or author manuscript, should be made available via an online platform...
- ... using a maximum 12 month embargo and CC BY or CC BY-ND licence.
- This policy would apply to works published on, or after, 1 January 2024.
UKRI are still to decide on some issues including: definitions, exceptions (there are quite a few listed), author copyright.
This policy will also inform future REF open access policy.
In my view, this should be seen as UKRI backing a mixed-economy approach. Several forms of open access book publishing would be compliant:
- Using processing charges or subventions to make the ebook/pdf open access
- Using a freemium model (i.e. selling print copies to cover the costs of open)
- Self-archiving in a repository e.g. via Leicester Figshare
- Often over-looked, but worth noting: self-publishing would be acceptable.
In theory, these models are open to both the new open access publishers and established presses.
Unlike the journal market, this policy would not be dependent on transformative agreements between libraries and publishers.
Implications for libraries
- Can expect increased use of institutional repositories
- Can expect more enquiries about the exceptions (“does this apply to me?”)
Less concrete, but still worth thinking about:
- following the COPIM project, will UKRI and Jisc encourage greater sector collaboration on publishing infrastructure?
- In several evidence-gathering meetings where third-party licensing was discussed (one of the exceptions still be clarified) there was strong criticism of how GLAM organisations licence their content to authors and publishers. Might we see more official guidance in the future?