Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Open Access – a funder’s perspective Robert Terry Senior Policy Adviser The Wellcome Trust.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Open Access – a funder’s perspective Robert Terry Senior Policy Adviser The Wellcome Trust."— Presentation transcript:

1 Open Access – a funder’s perspective Robert Terry Senior Policy Adviser The Wellcome Trust

2 The Wellcome Trust is an independent research-funding charity, established under the will of Sir Henry Wellcome in It is funded from a private endowment, which is managed for long-term stability and growth.

3

4

5 Supports more than 5,000 researchers at 400 locations in 42 different countries Funding major initiatives in public engagement with science and SciArt projects The UK’s leading supporter of research into the History of Medicine Planned expenditure in 2002/03 of c £500 million One of the world’s largest medical research charities

6 Wellcome Trust mission l To foster and promote research with the aim of improving human and animal health

7

8 Human genome project

9 The present Clinical and Experimental Immunology Journal of Immunology

10 The small print

11 The web has transformed access to research results

12 ……almost

13 Funded by the Wellcome Trust ……and this is why it matters

14 Why is open access important to the Trust? l Web developments have created a new publishing model - not fully realised whilst access mediated through subscriptions and bundle deals. l Consistent with genome sequence release/access position l Freely accessible dissemination of Trust-funded research is fundamental to our mission l We pay for the research but do not have easy access to the results

15 Where do Trust-funded researchers publish?

16 Background to the Trust’s statement Trust working party l literature review l review of other initiatives and activities l review of Government - OFT, Competition Commission l interviews with scientists, societies, research councils l SQW economic analysis

17 SQW Economic analysis of scientific research publishing scipubreport

18 Major concerns l “ excessive” profits: 35%+ margins l subscription charge increases: 200% in last ten years - pressure on library budgets, reduction in number of subscriptions l restrictive online access - the bundle deal l publisher retention of copyright

19 The economic cycle of scientific publishing Free Publishers Libraries Researchers Shareholder s & Societies Public funders & HEFCE £ Profit Free £ ££

20 Why don’t researchers know or care? Free Publishers Libraries Researchers Shareholder s & Societies Public funders & HEFCE £ Profit Free £ ££ Wellcome Trust mission?

21 Alternative model - open access l The copyright holder(s) must grant to the public a free, irrevocable, perpetual license to use, copy, distribute and make derivative works, in any medium for any purpose. l A digital copy must be deposited in an open public archival repository (for example US National Library of Medicine's PubMed Central). (Bethesda meeting)

22 What do authors like about current model? l Hierarchy of journal quality l They know which are ‘best’ journals l They don’t pay (page charges) l Added value: e.g. news and views, press releases l Consequences of publication in ‘best’ journals l Promotion l Grants l Prizes

23 Why are ‘best’ journals ‘best’? l Turn down most submissions l Provide added value (variable) l USA (‘international’) l marketing Where is quality control? l Referees (free) l Editorial board (honorarium) l Editorial staff (salaried)

24 Funder initiatives l Leadership - demonstrate engagement with issues, join with other research funders, raise awareness in research community l Fund - cost of publication (marginal to research costs) l Copyright - encourage (and eventually enforce) author retention (involve publishers and IPR lawyers) l Repository - establish open access repositories l Evaluation - recognise intrinsic value of content of paper rather than title of journal

25 Key to success l Author choice l New brands must emerge l The fundamental principles of selection of papers by open access journals are unaltered – i.e. peer review, editorial added value l The community must learn to value l New titles l The content of the publication

26 Conclusions l Access of results of publicly-funded research available to all l A number of parallel initiatives: Principles of open access Transition of old journals New journals Archives l Open access can ensure the same standards of scholarship in publication as current models l The content matters – what has been discovered? l One size may not fit all areas of scholarship l Funders have a key role to play

27 The future? l More of the same? - unlikely l Increased use of repositories - likely l More support from funders? - very likely e.g.Howard Hughes, Max Planck, CNRS, WHO.....NIH(?) l Tipping point? l UK Parliament S&T Committee Inquiry


Download ppt "Open Access – a funder’s perspective Robert Terry Senior Policy Adviser The Wellcome Trust."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google