A Scalable and Sustainable Approach to Open Access Publishing and Archiving for Humanities and Social Sciences: A White Paper

Rebecca Kennison,Lisa Norberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/24akw

2016-07-14

Abstract:White paper describing proposal for collective institutional funding of open access content in humanities and social sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Publish, Don’t Perish: Recommendations for Mitigating Impacts of the New Federal Open Access Policy

Alexander B. Belles,Karen E. Beatty,Claire H. Rodman,Charles J. Connolly

DOI: https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg220101

2023-03-06

Journal of Science Policy & Governance

Abstract:In August, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy issued a new policy requiring that all federally funded scholarly research be accessible to the public immediately upon publication. While this open access policy will ultimately benefit society by increasing the availability of data and research outputs, it could place a heavy burden on researchers due to the relatively high cost of open access alongside an academic culture that tends to favor publishing in high impact subscription journals. We examine the complexities of the traditional publishing landscape and offer recommendations for agencies, universities, and publishers to mitigate the impacts on researchers. Specifically, we recommend a short-term increase in funding to cover higher publishing costs, but contributions from all stakeholders are needed to facilitate a long-term solution.
The case for an inclusive scholarly communication infrastructure for social sciences and humanities

Maciej Maryl,Marta Błaszczyńska,Agnieszka Szulińska,Paweł Rams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.26545.1

2020-10-22

Abstract:This article presents a vision for a scholarly communication research infrastructure for social sciences and humanities (SSH). The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the pressing need to access research outputs without the traditional economic and temporal barriers. This article explores the current scholarly communication landscape, assessing the reasons for the slower uptake of open access in SSH research. The authors discuss such frontiers as commercial interests, sources of academic prestige and discipline-specific genres. This article defines and discusses the key areas in which a research infrastructure can play a vital role in making open scholarly communication a reality in SSH: (1) providing a federated and easy access to scattered SSH outputs; (2) supporting publication and dissemination of discipline-specific genres (e.g. monographs, critical editions); (3) providing help with evaluation and quality assurance practices in SSH; (4) enabling scholarly work in national languages, which is significant for local communities; (5) being governed by researchers and for researchers as a crucial factor for productive, useful and accessible services; (6) lastly, considering the needs of other stakeholders involved in scholarly communication, such as publishers, libraries, media, non-profit organisations, and companies. They conclude that a scholarly-driven, inclusive, dedicated infrastructure for the European Research Area is needed in order to advance open science in SSH and to address the issues tackled by SSH researchers at a structural and systemic level.
Proposal for a distributed, community-driven academic publishing system

Matteo Barbone,Mustafa Gündoğan,Dhiren M. Kara,Benjamin Pingault,Alejandro Rodriguez-Pardo Montblanch,Lucio Stefan,Anthony K. C. Tan

2023-04-24

Abstract:We propose an academic publishing system where research papers are stored in a network of data centres owned by university libraries and research institutions, and are interfaced with the academic community through a website. In our system, the editor is replaced by an initial adjusted community-wide evaluation, the standard peer-review is accompanied by a post-publication open-ended and community-wide review process, aiming at a more objective and longer-term evaluation, the publishing costs are reduced to the running costs of the servers, and access is fully open. Our proposal addresses the fundamental problems of the current system: it reduces publishing costs, allowing easier access by less well-funded institutions (especially from developing countries); it makes the editorial evaluation distributed and more transparent; it speeds up the peer review process by eliminating the need for multiple resubmissions; and it introduces a long-term, community-wide evaluation of papers, ensuring their continued relevance and accuracy; while maximising its main goals, i.e. ensuring the highest quality of peer review and giving the best referees, the most visibility and the most credit to the best papers. Our scheme is time-efficient, financially sustainable, ethically fair and represents a significant improvement over the current system.

Digital Libraries,Physics and Society
Equality, findability, sustainability: the challenges and rewards of open digital humanities data

Damon Strange,Megan Gooch,Alwyn Collinson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14794713.2023.2206286

2023-05-24

International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media

Abstract:The need to sustain data and outputs from research projects well beyond their initial grant-funded period is commonplace within academia, particularly so within the Humanities. We often find that these semi-active or warm data collections have value and require care beyond the life of the original hosting, system, or platform they were conceived upon. With the increasing demand to make data more open, and research funding bodies increasing requirements and time periods for which research data must remain available, institutions need to be ready to offer researchers the tools and platforms to comply. Compliance is one lens to view this particular challenge through, the other is that institutions should also be motivated by celebrating the research they develop, and the continued scholarly benefits and impact gained through being hosted and shared for as long as possible. This paper offers a practical insight into the methods being employed at the University of Oxford to support digital humanities scholars (and others) safeguard their digital legacy for future generations.

English Else
Plan S the Present and Future of Open Access Publishing

Vladimir Trajkovski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26407/jrtdd2021.1.49

2022-05-28

Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities

Abstract:Introduction:This editorial is based on a concise introduction to the basics of open access, describing what it is and showing that it is easy, fast, inexpensive, legal, and a beneficial form of academic publishing. The Internet lets us share perfect copies of our workwith a worldwide audience at virtually no cost. Working in “open access”means: digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions. The purposeof this paper is to provide an overview about Plan S and its significance for open access publishing. Methods: An analysis of relevant literature, sources from the internet and published literature, personal experience and observations of the author. Findings: Formerly, scholars have written peer-reviewed journal articles for impact, not for money, and are free to consent to open access without losing revenue.Open access is beneficialforauthors and readers of research.PlanSis an initiative to drive wider adoption of open access publishing whichwas launched in 2018 by cOAlitionS, an inter-national consortium of organisations who fund or carry out research. The first and main objective was to require that, from 2021, publicly funded research must only be published in journals or on platforms on an open access basis without embargo. Conclusions: There are10 principles of PlanScovering the way in which all stakeholders should work together to-wards an optimal open access future, drive service standards, promote greater transparency around costs and charges, and more fairly assess the merits of research outputs.
The rent's too high: Self-archive for fair online publication costs

Robert T. Thibault,Amanda MacPherson,Stevan Harnad,Amir Raza

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1808.06130

2018-08-19

Abstract:The main contributors of scientific knowledge, researchers, generally aim to disseminate their findings far and wide. And yet, publishing companies have largely kept these findings behind a paywall. With digital publication technology markedly reducing cost, this enduring wall seems disproportionate and unjustified; moreover, it has sparked a topical exchange concerning how to modernize academic publishing. This discussion, however, seems to focus on how to compensate major publishers for providing open access through a "pay to publish" model, in turn transferring financial burdens from libraries to authors and their funders. Large publishing companies, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, PLoS, and Frontiers, continue to earn exorbitant revenues each year, hundreds of millions of dollars of which now come from processing charges for open-access articles. A less expensive and equally accessible alternative exists: widespread self-archiving of peer-reviewed articles. All we need is awareness of this alternative and the will to employ it

Digital Libraries
Institutional open access funds: now is the time

Charles D Eckman,Beth T Weil

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000375

2010-05-25

Abstract:To date, the Berkeley OA fund has ensured that 43 articles are free to be read immediately upon publication and 44 additional articles are now in the pipeline. The full scope of OA publishing during this period was significantly larger, at least by a factor of four. The OA fund allocation will continue to be carefully managed over the coming years. We are tracking our potential liability assuming the OA landscape grows with additional publishers and OA options. The amount predicted as necessary to maintain the fund based on the initial 18-month uptake data is US$45,000. This is less than 1% of the US$6.2 million the library invests in subscribing to closed-access digital journals. We are paying attention in particular to the attempts by the California Digital Library, which negotiates major journal publisher licenses on behalf of the UC campuses, to include terms within the licenses that enable UC authors to take advantage of publishers'hybrid OA options [16]. And it comes with far less of the myriad overhead costs associated with those closed-access subscriptions because that subscription price doesn't tell the full story of the actual cost of maintaining the subscription. Those subscriptions involve staff-intensive license negotiations. Institutions develop and maintain systems architectures in order to ensure that only authorized users have access and respond to challenges from publishers of the content when actual or potential breaches of the licenses are identified (publishers invest hugely in monitoring use of their content in order to ensure the license terms are not breached and are quite willing to contact the institutional subscriber when any untoward activity appears on their logs). They must, in certain instances, maintain the confidentiality of certain clauses in the licenses and increasingly respond to freedom of information, public records act requests related to the investments of public resources in those contracts. The need to experiment is particularly heightened during this economic crisis when investments in subscriptions are increasingly difficult to justify, particularly given the alternate forms of open access to content and decreasing ability for libraries to reliably distinguish OA and non-OA content within the journal. We believe that institutions (and the sub-institutional units that manage collection funds) should be open to exploring alternative funding models for scholarly communication. Institutions should highly value funding models that promote universal access to their research output. And during an economic crisis, these institutions should question the extensive financial and human resource investments required by the subscription model, a model that both excludes nonauthorized users and entails large-scale and complex licensing and legal obligations. The time is now for broad-scale adoption of institutional OA funds.
Scholarly Communication Practices in Humanities and Social Sciences: A Study of Researchers’ Attitudes and Awareness of Open Access

Bhuva Narayan,Edward J. Luca,Belinda Tiffen,Ashley England,Mal Booth,Henry Boateng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/opis-2018-0013

2018-12-01

Open Information Science

Abstract:Abstract This paper examines issues relating to the perceptions and adoption of open access (OA) and institutional repositories. Using a survey research design, we collected data from academics and other researchers in the humanities, arts and social sciences (HASS) at a university in Australia. We looked at factors influencing choice of publishers and journal outlets, as well as the use of social media and nontraditional channels for scholarly communication. We used an online questionnaire to collect data and used descriptive statistics to analyse the data. Our findings suggest that researchers are highly influenced by traditional measures of quality, such as journal impact factor, and are less concerned with making their work more findable and promoting it through social media. This highlights a disconnect between researchers’ desired outcomes and the efforts that they put in toward the same. Our findings also suggest that institutional policies have the potential to increase OA awareness and adoption. This study contributes to the growing literature on scholarly communication by offering evidence from the HASS field, where limited studies have been conducted. Based on the findings, we recommend that academic librarians engage with faculty through outreach and workshops to change perceptions of OA and the institutional repository.
Towards a more sustainable academic publishing system

Mohsen Kayal,Jane Ballard,Ehsan Kayal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24908/iee.2021.14.3.f

2021-01-18

Abstract:Communicating new scientific discoveries is key to human progress. Yet, this endeavor is hindered by monetary restrictions for publishing one's findings and accessing other scientists' reports. This process is further exacerbated by a large portion of publishing media owned by private, for-profit companies that do not reinject academic publishing benefits into the scientific community, in contrast with journals from scientific societies. As the academic world is not exempt from economic crises, new alternatives are necessary to support a fair publishing system for society. After summarizing the general issues of academic publishing today, we present several solutions at the levels of the individual scientist, the scientific community, and the publisher towards more sustainable scientific publishing. By providing a voice to the many scientists who are fundamental protagonists, yet often powerless witnesses, of the academic publishing system, and a roadmap for implementing solutions, this initiative can spark increased awareness and promote shifts towards impactful practices.

General Economics
Comprehensive Approach to Open Access Publishing: Platforms and Tools

Armen Yuri Gasparyan,Marlen Yessirkepov,Alexander A. Voronov,Anna M. Koroleva,George D. Kitas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e184

2019-01-01

Journal of Korean Medical Science

Abstract:The Open Access Initiative is gaining momentum due to the worldwide availability of advanced digital tools, online publishing platforms, and systems for tracking academic contributions. Several declarations and initiatives, including Plan S, have already laid a foundation for moving away from subscription to full and immediate open-access publishing. The global initiatives imply targeting journals satisfying the upgraded quality and visibility criteria. To meet these criteria, a comprehensive approach to Open Access is recommended. This article overviews the essential components of the comprehensive approach, increasing transparency, adherence to ethical standards, and diversification of evaluation metrics. With the increasing volume of quality open-access journals, their indexing with free databases and search engines is becoming increasingly important. The Directory of Open Access Journals and PubMed Central currently free searches of open-access sources. These services, however, cannot fully satisfy the increasing demands of the users, and attempts are underway to upgrade the indexing and archiving of open-access sources in China, Japan, Korea, Russia, and elsewhere. The wide use of identifiers is essential for transparency of scholarly communications. Peer reviewers are now offered credits from Publons. These credits are transferrable to their Open Researcher and Contributor iDs. Various social media channels are increasingly used by scholars to comment on articles. All these comments are tracked by related metric systems, such as Altmetrics. Combined with traditional citation evaluations, the alternative metrics can help timely identify and promote publications influencing education, research, and practice.

medicine, general & internal
Subscribe to Open: Modeling an open access transformation

Allison Langham-Putrow,Sunshine J. Carter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.81.1.18

2020-01-06

Abstract:The introduction of Plan S, an initiative for open access launched by a group of primarily European national funding agencies and two foundations in late 2018, prompted discussion about how publishers will transition to full open access. Many current open access models involve article processing charge (APC) payments. Here we describe an alternative model, Subscribe to Open (S2O).
Open by default: a proposed copyright license and waiver agreement for open access research and data in peer-reviewed journals

Iain Hrynaszkiewicz,Matthew J Cockerill

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-5-494

2012-09-07

BMC Research Notes

Abstract:Copyright and licensing of scientific data, internationally, are complex and present legal barriers to data sharing, integration and reuse, and therefore restrict the most efficient transfer and discovery of scientific knowledge. Much data are included within scientific journal articles, their published tables, additional files (supplementary material) and reference lists. However, these data are usually published under licenses which are not appropriate for data. Creative Commons CC0 is an appropriate and increasingly accepted method for dedicating data to the public domain, to enable data reuse with the minimum of restrictions. BioMed Central is committed to working towards implementation of open data-compliant licensing in its publications. Here we detail a protocol for implementing a combined Creative Commons Attribution license (for copyrightable material) and Creative Commons CC0 waiver (for data) agreement for content published in peer-reviewed open access journals. We explain the differences between legal requirements for attribution in copyright, and cultural requirements in scholarship for giving individuals credit for their work through citation. We argue that publishing data in scientific journals under CC0 will have numerous benefits for individuals and society, and yet will have minimal implications for authors and minimal impact on current publishing and research workflows. We provide practical examples and definitions of data types, such as XML and tabular data, and specific secondary use cases for published data, including text mining, reproducible research, and open bibliography. We believe this proposed change to the current copyright and licensing structure in science publishing will help clarify what users – people and machines – of the published literature can do, legally, with journal articles and make research using the published literature more efficient. We further believe this model could be adopted across multiple publishers, and invite comment on this article from all stakeholders in scientific research.
Landscapes of Research: Perceptions of Open Access (OA) Publishing in the Arts and Humanities

Julia Gross,John Charles Ryan,John Ryan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications3020065

2015-04-17

Publications

Abstract:It is widely known now that scholarly communication is in crisis, resting on an academic publishing model that is unsustainable. One response to this crisis has been the emergence of Open Access (OA) publishing, bringing scholarly literature out from behind a paywall and making it freely available to anyone online. Many research and academic libraries are facilitating the change to OA by establishing institutional repositories, supporting OA policies, and hosting OA journals. In addition, research funding bodies, such as the Australian Research Council (ARC), are mandating that all published grant research outputs be made available in OA, unless legal and contractual obligations prevent this. Despite these broader changes, not all scholars are aware of the new publishing environment. In particular, the rate of adoption of OA models in the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) has historically been lower than Science, Technology and Medicine (STM) disciplines. Nevertheless, some local and international OA exemplars exist in HSS. At Edith Cowan University in Perth, Western Australia, the faculty-administered environmental humanities journal, Landscapes, was migrated to the institutional open access repository in 2013. Subsequently, researchers in the Faculty of Education and Arts were surveyed regarding their knowledge, understandings, and perceptions of OA publishing. The survey was also designed to elicit the barriers to OA publishing perceived or experienced by HSS researchers. This article will present the findings of our small faculty-based OA survey, with particular attention to HSS academics (and within this subject group, particular attention to the arts and humanities), their perceptions of OA, and the impediments they encounter. We argue that OA publishing will continue to transform scholarship within the arts and humanities, especially through the role of institutional repositories. The “library-as-publisher” role offers the potential to transform academic and university-specific publishing activities. However, the ongoing training of university researchers and personnel is required to bring into balance their understandings of OA publisher and the demands of the broader Australian and international research environment.
The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review

Jonathan P. Tennant,François Waldner,Damien C. Jacques,Paola Masuzzo,Lauren B. Collister,Chris. H. J. Hartgerink

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.8460.3

2016-09-21

F1000Research

Abstract:Ongoing debates surrounding Open Access to the scholarly literature are multifaceted and complicated by disparate and often polarised viewpoints from engaged stakeholders. At the current stage, Open Access has become such a global issue that it is critical for all involved in scholarly publishing, including policymakers, publishers, research funders, governments, learned societies, librarians, and academic communities, to be well-informed on the history, benefits, and pitfalls of Open Access. In spite of this, there is a general lack of consensus regarding the potential pros and cons of Open Access at multiple levels. This review aims to be a resource for current knowledge on the impacts of Open Access by synthesizing important research in three major areas: academic, economic and societal. While there is clearly much scope for additional research, several key trends are identified, including a broad citation advantage for researchers who publish openly, as well as additional benefits to the non-academic dissemination of their work. The economic impact of Open Access is less well-understood, although it is clear that access to the research literature is key for innovative enterprises, and a range of governmental and non-governmental services. Furthermore, Open Access has the potential to save both publishers and research funders considerable amounts of financial resources, and can provide some economic benefits to traditionally subscription-based journals. The societal impact of Open Access is strong, in particular for advancing citizen science initiatives, and leveling the playing field for researchers in developing countries. Open Access supersedes all potential alternative modes of access to the scholarly literature through enabling unrestricted re-use, and long-term stability independent of financial constraints of traditional publishers that impede knowledge sharing. However, Open Access has the potential to become unsustainable for research communities if high-cost options are allowed to continue to prevail in a widely unregulated scholarly publishing market. Open Access remains only one of the multiple challenges that the scholarly publishing system is currently facing. Yet, it provides one foundation for increasing engagement with researchers regarding ethical standards of publishing and the broader implications of 'Open Research'.
Journal Open Access and Plan S: Solving Problems or Shifting Burdens?

E. Derat,D. Allen,H. Urdal,Shina Caroline Lynn Kamerlin,B. Bruin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/DECH.12635

2021-01-29

Development and Change

Abstract:This academic thought piece provides an overview of the history of, and current trends in, publishing practices in the scientiﬁc ﬁelds known to the authors (chemical sciences, social sciences and humanities), as well as a discussion of how open access mandates such as Plan S from cOAlition S will affect these practices. It begins by summarizing the evolution of sci-entiﬁc publishing, in particular how it was shaped by the learned societies, and highlights how important quality assurance and scientiﬁc management mechanisms are being challenged by the recent introduction of ever more stringent open access mandates. The authors then discuss the various reactions of the researcher community to the introduction of Plan S, and elucidate a number of concerns: that it will push researchers towards a pay-to-publish system which will inevitably create new divisions between those who can afford to get their research published and those who cannot; that it will disrupt collaboration between researchers on the different sides of cOAlition S funding; and that it will have an impact on academic freedom of research and publishing. The authors analyse the dissemination of, and responses to, an open letter distributed and signed in reaction to the introduction of Plan S, before concluding with some thoughts on the potential for evolution of open access in scientiﬁc publishing.

Chemistry,Political Science
The Changing Landscape of Open Access Publishing: Can Open Access Publishing Make the Scholarly World More Equitable and Productive?

Richard G. Dudley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2345

2021-02-21

Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication

Abstract:Almost 50% of scholarly articles are now open access in some form. This greatly benefits scholars at most institutions and is especially helpful to independent scholars and those without access to libraries. It also furthers the long-standing idea of knowledge as a public good. The changing dynamics of open access (OA) threaten this positive development by solidifying the pay-to-publish OA model which further marginalizes peripheral scholars and incentivizes the development of sub-standard and predatory journals. Causal loop diagrams (CLDs) are used to illustrate these interactions.
Are Transformative Agreements Worth It? An Analysis of Open Access Publication Data at the University of Kentucky

Ben Rawlins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.68n1.8211

2024-01-01

Abstract:Open access publishing is continuing to grow as funders such as cOAlition S, National Institutes of Health, and the White House implement mandates and requirements that publicly funded research be made immediately available for public consumption. Publishers have adopted open access as a business model through transformative agreements that combine subscription and publishing fees. However, it is unclear whether these agreements are beneficial for libraries. This article discusses a project by the University of Kentucky Libraries to gather and analyze open access publication data to aid in the evaluation of transformative agreement proposals. This article also discusses how the University of Kentucky compares to peer institutions in the Southeastern Conference and other benchmark institutions regarding open access publishing output. Additionally, this article discusses downsides of transformative agreements and highlights promising alternatives.

information science & library science
Open Access Movement: A Probable Solution of Present Crisis in Scholarly Communications

Subhajit Panda

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/67ctu

2021-01-21

Abstract:The spirit and philosophy of Open Access are in sync with FAIFE owing to its visible role in sharing intellectual freedom for building information democracy. But with the exponential increase of cost of scholarly research publication and capture of a huge portion of publication industry by for-profit publishers create a void between the research and researcher, information and seeker, educator and learner, query and the solutions. This paper illustrates the hidden cause of this crisis in scholarly communication and gives a brief understanding of total open access movement, from past initiative to future plans. Additionally, this paper thoroughly pointed out the tools and platforms which can be used by educators and researchers to promote this open access movement with great success. The paper reflects the value of open access movement in the way to eliminate the communication gap in terms of scholarly research work.
Sustainability: Scholarly Repository as an Enterprise

Oya Y. Rieger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1510.00322

2015-10-01

Digital Libraries

Abstract:The expanding need for an open information sharing infrastructure to promote scholarly communication led to the pioneering establishment of arXiv.org, now maintained by the Cornell University Library. To be sustainable, the repository requires careful, long term planning for services, management and funding. The library is developing a sustainability model for arXiv.org, based on voluntary contributions and the ongoing participation and support of 200 libraries and research laboratories around the world. The sustainability initiative is based on a membership model and builds on arXiv's technical, service, financial and policy infrastructure. Five principles for sustainability drive development, starting with deep integration into the scholarly community. Also key are a clearly defined mandate and governance structure, a stable yet innovative technology platform, systematic creation of content policies and strong business planning strategies. Repositories like arXiv must consider usability and life cycle alongside values and trends in scholarly communication. To endure, they must also support and enhance their service by securing and managing resources and demonstrating responsible stewardship.
Open access through Subscribe to Open: a society publisher’s implementation

Sara Bosshart,Rod Cookson,Philipp Hess

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.567

2022-01-01

Insights the UKSG journal

Abstract:As pressures mount from global funding mandates and initiatives like Plan S, publishers are seeking sustainable solutions to transition their subscription portfolios to open access. For self-publishing societies with niche portfolios and low publication volumes, traditional transition options such as article processing charge models or transformative agreements are limited or out of reach and often involve significant financial risk. In this article, we focus on one society publisher's implementation of Subscribe to Open (S2O): an emerging open access model that moves away from article-level charges, instead leveraging existing subscription revenues and infrastructure to achieve seamless and sustainable open access. We outline the advantages of this model for society publishers, the parameters to consider when implementing the model, the initial community response to a successful implementation and some early data highlighting the effect of the S2O model on our journals. Published on 2022-03-16 14:14:32

A Scalable and Sustainable Approach to Open Access Publishing and Archiving for Humanities and Social Sciences: A White Paper

Publish, Don’t Perish: Recommendations for Mitigating Impacts of the New Federal Open Access Policy

The case for an inclusive scholarly communication infrastructure for social sciences and humanities

Proposal for a distributed, community-driven academic publishing system

Equality, findability, sustainability: the challenges and rewards of open digital humanities data

Plan S the Present and Future of Open Access Publishing

The rent's too high: Self-archive for fair online publication costs

Institutional open access funds: now is the time

Scholarly Communication Practices in Humanities and Social Sciences: A Study of Researchers’ Attitudes and Awareness of Open Access

Towards a more sustainable academic publishing system

Comprehensive Approach to Open Access Publishing: Platforms and Tools

Subscribe to Open: Modeling an open access transformation

Open by default: a proposed copyright license and waiver agreement for open access research and data in peer-reviewed journals

Landscapes of Research: Perceptions of Open Access (OA) Publishing in the Arts and Humanities

The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review

Journal Open Access and Plan S: Solving Problems or Shifting Burdens?

The Changing Landscape of Open Access Publishing: Can Open Access Publishing Make the Scholarly World More Equitable and Productive?

Are Transformative Agreements Worth It? An Analysis of Open Access Publication Data at the University of Kentucky

Open Access Movement: A Probable Solution of Present Crisis in Scholarly Communications

Sustainability: Scholarly Repository as an Enterprise

Open access through Subscribe to Open: a society publisher’s implementation