COMPLIANCE WITH FUNDERS* MANDATES * FACT

Report
COMPLIANCE WITH FUNDERS’
MANDATES – FACT
Peter Millington, Jane Smith,
Azhar Hussain & Bill Hubbard
SHERPA Services, Centre for Research Communications,
University of Nottingham, UK
Research funders in the UK
• Government funded research
– Research Councils UK (RCUK) - over £2.8 billion p.a.
• Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC)
• Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
(BBSRC)
• Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
• Economic and Social Research Council
• Medical Research Council
• Natural Environment Research Council
• Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)
• Research charities
– Wellcome Trust – over £600 million p.a.
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Recent developments
• Finch Report, June 2012
– Working group chaired by Dame Janet Finch
– Expanding access to published research findings
– Recommendations:
• Gold OA, suitably funded
• Minimal restrictions on re-use
• Continuing political debate
– Houses of Commons and Lords
• Select Committees on open access
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
New common open access policy
• RCUK and the Wellcome Trust
– Effective from 1st April 2013
• Choice of two routes:
– Publish with open access (gold)
– Self-archive in an open access repository (green)
• Open access publications
– CC-BY licence required
• Self-archiving:
– Accepted version or better
– Embargoes of 6 or 12 months tolerated
– Non-commercial re-use allowed
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Mandate variations
• Open access publication
– MRC & Wellcome – publisher deposit in Europe PMC
• Tolerated embargoes
– 6 months, except…
– 12 months for AHRC & ESRC
• Archiving in…
– Any appropriate open access repository, except…
– MRC & Wellcome Trust - Europe PMC
– ESRC – ESRC Research Catalogue
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Funding open access publication
• Block grants to universities’ open access funds
– Primarily to cover article processing charges
– Other activities relevant to the mandate
• Grants rising to cover 75% of articles by year 5
– Rest Green
• Amounts vary according to funding totals
– RCUK: £6k to £1.15m in year 1
– e.g. Nottingham - £536k + other funding
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Transitional arrangements for RCUK
• OA funds increasing over 5 years
• APC grants might run out in early years
• Double embargo tolerated (except for MRC)
– If there is a compliant Gold option
– and APC funds are not available
• This caused some confusion, so…
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Publishers’ Association’s flow chart
Is Gold option
Available?
No
Yes
Green OA after
6 or 12 months
Are APC funds
Available?
Yes
Immediate
Gold OA
No
Green OA after
12 or 24 months
Revised transitional arrangements
• Still confused?
• Further clarification sought
• Double embargo tolerated (except for MRC)
– If there is a compliant Gold option
– and APC funds are not available
• Some publishers now have max embargoes
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
SHERPA/FACT
Guidance for authors
Complexity of funders’ policies
• Requirement for Gold and/or Green OA
– Preference if both allowed
• Gold open access
– Min. CC licence required
– Must Gold OA automatically archive in PMC?
• Green open access
–
–
–
–
Min. (earliest) article version required
Min. CC licence required
Max. tolerated embargo
Are specific repositories required?
• Are funds available for APCs?
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Complexity of publishers’ policies
• Gold open access
– Is the journal an open access or hybrid journal?
– What CC licence is it published under?
– What are the fees (if any)?
• Green
–
–
–
–
Does the author retain copyright?
Can the Accepted and/or Publisher’s version/PDF be archived?
Is there an embargo? Does it comply with the funder’s policy?
Are there special arrangements
• For the specific funder? For funders generally?
– Is the journal a full member of Europe PMC?
• Are all the publisher’s policies clearly defined?
• Are the publisher’s policies known at all?
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
“Pity the researcher”
• Funders’ mandates versus publishers’ policies.
– So many combinations and permutations!
• Information professionals can struggle
• How can the poor academic cope?
• Authors need a simple guide to compliance
– Interpreting RoMEO data, not just displaying it
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Compliance screen layout
Overall compliance
Gold compliance
How/Why
Green
Funder’s recommendation
Information
& Advice
Links for further information, feedback, etc
Decision trails
Non-compliant journal
Cautionary advice
Europe PMC Member
for MRC and the Wellcome Trust
No special action required!
Development issues
•
•
•
•
•
Parsing data from RoMEO - more standardisation
Data new to RoMEO – e.g. Gold CC licences
Greater journal level granularity
RCUK’s transitional extended embargoes
Highly complex algorithms
– Each decision yields Yes, No, Maybe or Unknown
– Hundreds of combinations and permutations
• Generic design for additional funders
• API – alpha version
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Potential compliance
Example statistics from SHERPA/FACT
Potential Wellcome Trust compliance
Overall Compliance – 6,046 articles
1%
7% 1%
Gold Compliance
Green Compliance
0%
1%
30%
37%
52%
1%
91%
69%
10%
WT potential compliance timeline
Dec.2006
5%
May 2009
5%
2%
8%
3%
July 2013
1%
7% 1%
20%
70%
87%
91%
Potential NERC Compliance
Overall Compliance - 1,103 articles
1% 4% 0%
Gold Compliance
15%
Green Compliance
0%
17%
1%
1%
11%
95%
71%
84%
Response of interested parties
The response of publishers
• Generally positive
– But also “We’re losing business”
• Discussions with funders and universities
– Sometimes negotiating special arrangements
• Face to face dialogue with SHERPA Services
– How to ensure compliance – e.g. Emerald, Elsevier, Sage, etc.
• Notification of updated policies and errors for RoMEO
• Open access policy adjustments
– Introducing gold options where necessary
– CC licences & Embargo periods
• Maximising profit
– Encouraging or forcing use of the Gold option
– Elsevier & Emerald’s ‘interesting’ embargoes & RCUK’s transition
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
The Response of Universities
• Research managers
– Like the extra crock of gold
• Repository administrators
– Good uptake of SHERPA/FACT
– Interested in accuracy – lots of feedback
– Wish to customise FACT for local contexts
• Asserting academic freedom to choose
– Where to publish
– Gold OA, Green OA or neither
• Gold versus Green preferences
– Funders and many publishers prefer Gold
– Some universities prefer Green…
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
Battle of the flow charts
Is Green option
Available?
No
Yes
Green OA after
12 or 24 months
Is Gold option
Available?
No
Yes
Are APC funds
Available?
Yes
Immediate
Gold OA
Green OA after
6 or 12 months
No
Green OA after
12 or 24 months
How will open access funds
be utilised?
Ratio of compliant OA routes (NERC)
11%
25%
64%
Gold only
Gold or Green
Green only
Maximising profit for publishers
11%
89%
Pay for Gold
Archive for free
What some universities want
25%
75%
Pay for Gold
Archive for free
What funders are aiming for
11%
25%
14%
50%
Gold only
Choose Gold
Choose Green
Green only
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/
• Technical development
– Peter Millington– [email protected]
• RoMEO & FACT data
– Jane H.Smith
– [email protected]
• Project management
– Azhar Hussain – [email protected]
• Director, Centre for Research Communications
– Bill Hubbard
– [email protected]
• Thanks to:
– Mark Thorley, RCUK
– Robert Kiley, Wellcome Trust
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/fact/

similar documents