Coronakrisen has shown how important it is that research results are openly available for all. Through the open publishing enables the community to the fullest get utilized to the value of the research, and the results can come faster in use.
In the Dagbladet editorial 3. august, it is pointed out that it is important to work for open access to research, but that this must be balanced with requirements for quality assurance and the scientists ' freedom to choose publiseringskanal.
We completely agree that the requirements for the quality assurance of the research must not deteriorate, and it is also the basis for all the work with open research. This must be accounted for when we now are well on your way to a situation where open access becomes normal.
international publishers divert quickly to a new reality. This shows that it is possible to combine open access with quality assurance of content through peer review. Quality assurance must be as solid, regardless of whether the articles are hidden behind betalingsmurer or can be viewed by all.the Norwegian research council's new plan is likely to inflict major damage Comment
Open research ensures at the same ways as before, but with other financial and betalingsmodeller and with a greater degree of transparency, also about kvalitetssikringsprosessen. In addition, there are several ways to make the articles freely available on, and this makes that scientists in reality have very many options when it comes to the choice of publiseringskanal.
international efforts to get up in the transition to open access, Plan S, shows that it is through coordinated international effort, is possible in a short time to get significant changes in a content management system that does not work satisfactorily.You pay, but can not access the Manager
the Current system gives less again government grants and inhibits kunnskapsutviklingen. As a result of the Plan's, have the publishers changed their strategies, and we are closer to the goal of full open access than ever.
at the same time offers Level S researchers more opportunities to make their articles openly available both through the use of open archives and, in that the publishers included overgangsavtaler for their journals. Such agreements make it possible to publish articles open in the journals which until further notice is subscription-based, but that will be completely open in the long term. In this way, scientists have today the possibilities to publish open in the far more titles than before the Plan S was launched.the World needs an open research Debate
Therefore, it is surprising and disappointing that the european research council (ERC) now seems to have pulled support for the Plan of S. ERC wish to continue the practice to publish in the so-called "hybridtidsskrifter" which means that you pay to make individual articles openly accessible in journals that are otherwise subscription-based.
the Plan's want to stop this practice because it leads to "double dipping" from the forlagenes page: They can first get paid to make articles openly available and then make money on that research institutions must pay for subscription to journals.I notice I am provoked Debate
the Plan P have in place a mechanism that ensures researchers have the rights to archive a version of the article open. Thus, the ERC's concern taken care of.
the Goal, also for the ERC, is full open access to forskningens results. It is difficult to see that we will reach this goal without forskningens institutions to collectively put pressure on the publishers.
It must be the end that some few international forlagskonsern earn enormous amounts to publish publicly funded research behind betalingsmurer. Plan S have shown that it is possible to achieve positive change. We need a system for scientific publication that serves the community that has paid for the research.do Not wait for the alarm Comment You can submit your article and opinion piece in Dagbladet here
Want to discuss?Visit Dagbladet debate!