July 2024

Mohammad Anas Wahaj | 13 jul 2024

cOAlition S, launched on 04 September 2018 by a group of national research funding organisations, with the support of the European Commission and the European Research Council (ERC), is an initiative to make full and immediate Open Access to research publications a reality. On its website (coalition-s.org), cOAlition S signals the commitment to implement the necessary measures to fulfil its main principle - 'With effect from 2021, all scholarly publications on the results from research funded by public or private grants provided by national, regional and international research councils and funding bodies, must be published in Open Access Journals, on Open Access Platforms, or made immediately available through Open Access Repositories without embargo.' cOAlition S is build around Plan S that is a set of principles that ensure open and immediate access to funded research publications. It was born from the cooperation between the Heads of the participating Research Funding Organisations, Marc Schiltz, the President of Science Europe, and Robert-Jan Smits, previously the Open Access Envoy of the European Commission. It also drew on significant input from the Scientific Council of the ERC. cOAlition S presented a proposal 'Towards Responsible Publishing (TRP)', that includes a vision for a community-based scholarly communication system fit for open science in the 21st century, where scholars can rapidly and transparently share the full range of their research outputs and participate in new quality control mechanisms and evaluation standard. According to the proposal, the main challenges that a future scholarly communication system should address include that - The dominant publishing models are highly inequitable; The sharing of research outputs is needlessly delayed; The full potential of peer review is not realised; The coupling of editorial gatekeeping with academic career incentives is damaging science. To address these challenges, cOAlition S proposed a set of five guiding principles - (1) Authors are responsible for the dissemination of their findings, (2) All scholarly outputs are shared immediately and openly. (3) Quality control processes are community-based and open, to ensure trustworthiness of research findings. (4) All scholarly outputs are eligible for consideration in research assessment. (5) Stakeholders commit to support the sustainability and diversity of the scholarled publishing ecosystem. The report, 'Towards Responsible Publishing': Findings from a global stakeholder consultation, presents the findings of a global multi-stakeholder consultation conducted between November 2023 and May 2024 by Research Consulting Limited (UK) and Leiden University's Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) (Netherlands) on behalf of cOAlition S. Johan Rooryck, Executive Director of cOAlition S and Bodo Stern, Chief of Strategic Initiatives, Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Chair of the TRP Steering Group at cOAlition S, in the foreword of the report write, 'Research funders have the responsibility to make sure that their funding is used in ways that improve the scholarly publishing landscape for the benefit of the research community and society. The 'Towards Responsible Publishing' proposal is therefore a logical next step for cOAlition S funders to help make the publishing system fit for the 21st century. It builds on Plan S and goes further in proposing a way to disseminate research that is not only more open, but also more trusted, equitable, efficient, and sustainable...This report presents the findings of that consultation: it shows an insightful picture of researchers' attitudes towards innovative research practices, such as open access publishing, preprint posting, open peer review and the incentives needed to embrace these behaviours.' For the report, authors collected 11145 responses from researchers via a global survey, reached 440 respondents through an initial feedback survey, engaged 72 participants via focus groups, and attracted a total of 10 organisational feedback letters from low- and middle-income countries that were underrepresented in the data. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE REPORT - When deciding how to reach their target audiences, researchers continue to rely on the current journals ecosystem; When deciding what to read, researchers once again prioritise the reputation of a journal; The consultation revealed support among researchers for some of the practices encouraged in the TRP proposal, such as preprint posting and the open sharing of peer review reports; Across the most represented disciplines in our data (medical and health sciences, life sciences, social sciences, engineering and arts and humanities), views regarding preprint posting are broadly aligned; Views are slightly more positive for respondents who have posted a preprint in the last three years; The highest resistance to the publication of open peer review reports was in the field of Law (39%), followed by Arts and Humanities (36%). In this context, consultation participants highlighted that existing recognition and reward mechanisms are inadequate for incentivising adoption of these practices, which will highly affect their uptake by researchers; The consultation found that, on balance, researchers would support the integration of practices like preprint posting (48% would support the practice vs 27% who would be opposed) and open peer review (47% would support the practice vs 29% who would be opposed) into journal publication workflows; Lack of clear implementation guidance emerged as a significant concern during the consultation; The need for a gradual, collaborative implementation approach involving pilots and engagement with existing initiatives was emphasised; Without broader engagement, cOAlition S' efforts risk being viewed by low- and middle-income countries as an imposition by wealthier nations; Shifting more publication responsibilities to individual authors could disproportionately overburden under-resourced researchers with limited institutional support services; Consultation participants highlighted the perceived importance of peer review and dedicated editorial roles in scholarly communication; Consultation participants saw a significant increase in preprint posting as potentially risking the proliferation of poor-quality, unvetted research outputs that may flood the public domain unchecked; The problem of subpar research making it through the peer review and publication process, while undesirable, already exists to some extent in the current system; The complexity of the proposed system may make it challenging for nonexperts like journalists, policymakers and the public to navigate the research landscape effectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Based on the findings from this global multi-stakeholder consultation, we conclude that there is support for some of the principles and practices encouraged in the TRP proposal. This highlights opportunities for cOAlition S to make progress in their desired direction of travel, building on select parts of the proposal; cOAlition S is well-placed to pursue the preprint posting and open licensing activities in the near term; In the medium-term, cOAlition S could focus on encouraging and promoting open peer review across the publishing landscape, including both preprints and journal articles; Realising the full vision of the TRP proposal will require longer-term efforts and cooperation with other stakeholders to update recognition and reward mechanisms at a global scale and ransition funding and infrastructures to support a globally inclusive, scholar-led publishing ecosystem. Read on...

Zenodo: 'Towards Responsible Publishing': Findings from a global stakeholder consultation
Authors: Andrea Chiarelli, Ellie Cox, Rob Johnson, Ludo Waltman, Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner, André Brasil, Andrea Reyes Elizondo, Stephen Pinfield

---

the3h | glomc00 | ilmeps | mawdesigns | anasmark | ilmeds | read | contact