# Presentation: 244573

## Opening Access to Publicly Funded Research

- Reasserting the Primacy of Dissemination and Access in the Scholarly Communication System
- DOE STIP, Chicago, April 26, 2006
- Mary M. Case
- University of Illinois at Chicago

## The Dream

- Potential of the Internet to transform work, accelerate discovery, and save lives
- Freeing the literature from the bonds of print and pdf “opens up myriad new possibilities for navigating, integrating, “mining,” annotating, and mapping connections. . .” *PLoS Biology,1:1,p.001*
- Free online access to the scientific literature for all scientists, health care providers, teachers, students, patients, and the public

## Barriers to the Dream

- Decentralized databases
- Proprietary software & inflexible formats
- Limited in scope - citations and abstracts only in many cases
- Limited linking - reference linking useful, but not sufficient
- Privately owned

## Defining the Dream

- A centralized archive of life sciences literature with standardized formats and extensive linking
- Would include both peer-reviewed and “screened” pre-prints
- Authors would submit their works directly to the central server as soon as possible
- Copyright would be retained by the authors
- Users could download and reproduce
- Proposed by Harold Varmus, then Director of NIH, May 1999

## A Rude Awakening

- Immediate, vehement, negative
- Primarily from publishers
- Proposal was revised
- PubMed Central launched in Feb. 2000
- Only peer-reviewed content
- Publishers submit and determine when
- Copyright remains with publisher or author
- Publishers still reluctant to participate

## The Key Question

- This is our and our colleagues work often done with the support of public funds--
- Why can’t we use it in news ways facilitated by the technology to advance science?

## The Nightmare of Reality

- Author/Reader

- Copyright

- Publisher

- Research
- Findings

**The Market Economy**

## Global Publishing Industry

- Includes Primary & Secondary STM publishing.
- Aggregators represent an additional $1.6 billion (Total: $9.5 billion.)
*Source:* Outsell Inc., "Industry Trends, Size and Players in the Scientific, Technical & Medical (STM) Market (Aug. 2000).

- $12.4 billion industry

*Source: *Outsell “I-Market,” Sept. 2005.

- STM Market 2004

## Elsevier Science

## Commercial Effects on Pricing

- High prices for commercial publications
- Significant price disparity between not-for-profit and commercial publishers
- High annual inflation rates for both commercial and not-for-profit publishers
- High prices exacerbated by mergers, even those of a relatively modest size
- Decreased access to publications as libraries are forced to cancel

## Slide 12

## Sticker Shock:  $12,495

- http://www.englib.cornell.edu/displays/stickershock/default.html

**OR**

## Electronic Publishing:The Dream Denied

- E-products are often priced as add-on to print
- Libraries do not own digital content
- Licenses can be restrictive
- Publishers are bundling content
- Access limited to those in institutions that can afford it
- Researchers cannot easily manipulate text & data across proprietary systems

## Reclaiming the Dream

- The Imperative for Public Access
- NIH and PubMed Central
- Growing Interest
- Role for STIP

##  Impetus for Change

**COMMUNICATION SYSTEM**

-  Impetus for Change

- BOTTOM UP:
**Market Forces**

- TOP DOWN:
**Societal Benefits**

## “Public Access”

**	****What is “Public Access”?**
- 	Free online access to full-text, peer-reviewed journal articles arising from taxpayer-funded research.
- 	Also known as **Taxpayer Access.**

##  Open (Digital) Archives

- Institutional or agency digital repositories
- Subject repositories
- Exist alongside traditional publishing

-  Open (Digital) Archives

##  Scientific Imperative

**Scientists want research papers freely available**
- Aug. 30, 2004 – Twenty-five Nobel Prize-winning scientists today are calling for the government to make all taxpayer-funded research papers freely available.

**A Foundation for Discovery**
**If *****sharing***** of knowledge is the foundation of scientific advancement, then faster and wider sharing will fuel its progress.**

##  Financial Imperative

**Credit Suisse First Boston:**
- “[W]e would expect governments (and taxpayers) to examine the fact that they are essentially funding the same purchase three times: governments and taxpayers fund most academic research, pay the salaries of the academics who undertake the peer review process and fund the libraries that buy the output, without receiving a penny in exchange from the publishers for producing and reviewing the content....
-   “We do not see this as sustainable in the long term, given pressure on university and government budgets.”
- 	–*Sector Review: Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishing*, April 6, 2004

## Public Imperative

**Public** Imperative

**www.taxpayeraccess.org**

##  ATA Principles

- American **taxpayers are entitled to open access** on the Internet to the peer-reviewed scientific articles on research funded by the U.S. Government.
- Widespread access to the information contained in these articles is an essential, **inseparable component of our nation’s investment in science**.
- This and other **scientific information should be shared** in cost-effective ways that take advantage of the Internet, stimulate further discovery and innovation, and advance the translation of this knowledge into public benefits.
- Enhanced access to and expanded sharing of information **will lead to usage** by millions of scientists, professionals, and individuals, and will deliver an accelerated return on the taxpayers' investment.

## Mission Imperative

**STIP:**
- Create, collect, and share scientific and technical information through a robust, collaborative, and innovative Program
- Ensure that U.S. citizens are realizing a maximum return on investment
- Ensure that the STI is accessible for contributing to the advancement of science and technology

## NIH Public Access

**July-August 2004** – NIH Director Zerhouni conducts multiple public meetings with publishers, scientists, and patient groups
**Sept. 2004** – NIH proposal for free public access to NIH-funded research published in *Federal Register* for public comment

**Feb. 2000** – PubMed Central launched
**July 2003** – U.S. House Appropriations Committee asks NIH to report on state of access to NIH-funded research in light of high price of journals
**July 2004** – U.S. House Appropriations Committee urges NIH to require public access to NIH-funded research through deposit in the NIH's PubMed Central

## NIH Public Access

**Feb. 2005** – Current voluntary policy announced.
**May 2005** – Current voluntary policy implemented.
**Nov. 2005** – NIH Public Access Working Group recommends *mandatory* policy, maximum *6-month* embargo
**Jan 2006** – NIH report to Congress confirms low rate of voluntary deposit (~4%)
**Feb. 2006** – Board of Regents of NIH’s National Library of Medicine endorses working group recommendation
**Current** – NIH and Congress contemplating whether and how policy should be adjusted

**Government Health Researchers Pressed to Share Data at No Charge**
- March 10, 2006 – Political momentum is growing for a change in federal policy that would require government-funded health researchers to make the results of their work freely available on the Internet. Advocates say taxpayers should not have to pay... hundreds of dollars for..

## NIH Objectives

**Archive** – Create a stable archive of peer-reviewed research publications resulting from NIH-funded research to ensure the permanent preservation
**Advance science** – Secure a searchable compendium of these publications that NIH can use to manage better its research portfolio and that NIH awardees can mine.
**Access **– Make peer-reviewed results of NIH-funded research more readily accessible to the public, health care providers, educators, and scientists.

## NIH Policy Provisions

- Pertains to peer-reviewed **manuscripts** of journal articles that result from research supported, in whole or in part, with NIH direct costs
**Published version** of article may be substituted at publisher’s discretion
- “NIH-funded investigators are **requested** to submit an electronic version of the author's final manuscript upon acceptance for publication”
- “Posting for public accessibility through PMC is requested and strongly encouraged as soon as possible (and within **twelve months** of the publisher's official date of final publication)”

##  U.S. Legal Basis

- 	“The Federal awarding agency(ies) reserve a royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use the work for Federal purposes, and to authorize others to do so.”
- 		– 2 CFR 215.36

## Growing Interest

**American Center for Cures Act of 2005 (S.2104)**
**Sec. 499H-1. Public Access Requirement For Research**
- Introduced by Senators Lieberman & Cochran
- Deposit required
- Public access within 6 months
- Applies to investigators funded by NIH, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
**US Government-wide public access bill**
- under development, expected soon

## International Interest

- Wellcome Trust (UK)
- Grant recipients
- Deposit in PMC or UK PMC within 6 months of publication
- Requirement
- Effective Oct. 1, 2005
- Research Councils UK
- Draft policy on open access, June 2005
- Would require deposit
- Still being discussed

## International Interest

- EU
- Report issued in April 2006
- Recommendation A1: Guarantee public access to publicly-funded research results shortly after publication
- German Research Foundation (DFG)
- OA policy adopted in January 2006
- Expects research funded by DFG to be made available digitally and via open access

## ATA Proposal to DOE

- Create a stable, interoperable digital archive of authors’ final manuscripts of all articles resulting from DOE-funded research that are accepted for publication in peer-reviewed journals
- Ensure long-term preservation of these vital findings
- Make these resources available for free on the Internet asap, but not later than 6 months after publication
- Provide search & retrieval capacity and links to article in both the DOE archive and the journal

## ATA Proposal to DOE

- Help manage & understand research portfolios, monitor productivity, and set priorities
- Provide the public with regular reporting on author compliance
- Consider non-compliance as a factor in evaluating further grant applications
- Applies to work in support of DOE’s civilian energy and science missions
*Dec. 2005 letter from Heather Joseph, ATA and SPARC, to Dr. Raymond Orbach*

## DOE Engagement

- Paul Ginsparg, Los Alamos
- Physics Pre-print Archive
- MacArthur Genius Award
- Michael Eisen, Lawrence Berkeley
- Co-founder of Public Library of Science
- Herbert Van de Sompel, Los Alamos
- Initiator of the Open Archives Initiative & Open URL
- 1st SPARC Innovator Award

## The Dream

**“... ****The ability to speed the results of better research into useful and productive applications, whether in a hospital, a courtroom, or anywhere, will have enormous consequences for the lives of people.”**
- AAAS IP Report, 2002
**Today’s researchers are fighting for it....**
**Tomorrow’s will demand it**

## Contact SPARC

***The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition***
- 21 Dupont Circle
- Washington DC 20036
- 202 296 2296
- sparc@arl.org
**www.arl.org/sparc**