Analysis and news

UK research universities already ‘open doors’ Adam Tickell outlines the open access achievements UK universities can be proud of, and the next steps needed to remain a global leader in research

The UK has an enviable track record in producing excellent research and scholarship. And, since the publication of the Finch Report in 2012, major advances have been made in open access, both in terms of the share of research products in open access journals and articles, and in the complicated – and often unglamorous – underpinning infrastructure. There’s still more to be done, of course, but we were already ahead of the bow wave that called for UK universities to be open – in all aspects – in the wake of Brexit.

Open access leaders Over half of research publications can be read for free online, and I expect this figure will rise, so that the government’s aspiration for all publicly funded research is freely available – if current funding is maintained. Such progress has come at additional financial cost and, while there has been some important experimentation, a transformation of the publication model – from subscriptions to charges for open access – has not materialised. Both the Wellcome Trust and UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) – the new, independent national funding agency – are currently


excellence now comes inextricably linked to research impact”

reviewing their approach to open access, which needs to consider value for money to both researchers and the public purse. In supporting open access, the UK’s

leadership has been welcomed with enthusiasm in other countries, and by major global philanthropic funders of research. This is testament to the UK’s influential position. However, elsewhere in Europe and in the United States, universities, libraries and funders are adopting more aggressive approaches towards publishers

24 Research Information August/September 2018

and learned societies. For example, half of Germany’s universities have refused to sign another deal with global researcher Elsevier until they can achieve a ‘read and publish’ deal at no significant additional cost, while Swedish institutions have also refused to sign a deal with the same company.

Progress at a price? While the main UK funders of research consider their positions, and in the context of the arguably larger challenges to universities in England – and the rest of the UK – from the Augur Review, Brexit and the sustainability of Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS), similar levels of assertiveness are unlikely in the short term. Nevertheless, further progress towards open access is possible with some relatively modest changes, including: • Continued support for the block grant from UKRI beyond 2020. (However, UKRI – with sector leaders – should consider the options available to ensure the block grant is able to be used in ways which deliver the maximum value for the public pound);

• Universities should sign up to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), or adopt internal policies that are aligned to the same ambitions;

• Jisc Collections, in collaboration with sector leaders, should consider the role of a range of licensing and copyright arrangements in delivering open access objectives, as part of a suite of levers available to leaders of a diverse range of institutions; and

• Jisc should continue to lead on selecting and promoting a range of unique identifiers – including ORCID ID – in collaboration with sector leaders and relevant partner organisations. Funders of research should consider mandating the use of an agreed range of unique identifiers as a condition of their grant.

Impact to envy To keep our status as a leading nation in research – and there’s a lot of government pressure for this to be the case – research excellence now comes inextricably linked

to research impact. Whatever your take on the Research Excellence Framework and its younger sibling, the Knowledge Exchange Framework, the research funding available to all universities will, in part, be determined by the impact we can demonstrate our research is having beyond university walls. Defined by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) in 2012 as ‘an effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia’ for UK research to flourish, open access must take on a new meaning, engaging the public in both the outcomes and the process by which we produce research in UK institutions. Far from creating a hurdle to international

collaboration, this public engagement in research offers us another opportunity to show that the doors are open – if nothing more, it advertises the UK as being a stronghold for open scholarship, and a place where students can assess the quality of research in their decisions about where to study. Remaining a global leader in research during the shift towards open science will require a multidisciplinary approach, with funders and politicians aligned to support universities and sector support agencies through some possibly murky waters ahead. We should take comfort, however, that when it comes to open access, we’re on the right track.

Adam Tickell is vice-chancellor of the University of Sussex

@researchinfo |

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40
Produced with Yudu -