According to the Scholarly Kitchen Chefs, one of the things to have the biggest impact on scholarly publishing in 2015 is the publication of data and objects (like multimedia, application code). While we have seen the launch of ‘data journals’ from the like of Elsevier and Nature in the past 12 months, we have also seen the pressure from funders for institutions to be better managing the digital products of research carried within their walls. Funders are increasingly requiring grantees to deposit their raw research data in appropriate public archives or stores in order to facilitate the validation of results and further work by other researchers. According to the JISC and RLUK funded Sherpa Juliet site, globally there are now 34 funders who require data archiving and 16 who encourage it. So are we on course for a collision between publishers and institutions over who has control over the digital products of research? Previous attempts by institutions to retake control of printed scholarly output through institutional repositories have been beneficial, but have not stemmed the profit margins or reach of the big publishers. This is mainly due to the culture of academia, where for 350 years papers have been the currency and for the last 50, impact factor has been the value. The recent influx of digital-based data and other outputs is, however, creating a culture shift. This session will explore how the web enabled world of multiple digital outputs is playing out and predict what could happen in the next 12-60 months. Either way, it’ll be an interesting journey!

1. The Digital Academia
Power Struggle
@markhahnel
@figshare

3. The Promise of Institutional Repositories
“If all scholars’ preprints were universally available to all scholars by
anonymous ftp (and gopher, and World-wide web, and the search/retrieval
wonders of the future), NO scholar would ever consent to WITHDRAW that
preprint from the public eye after the refereed version was accepted for
paper "PUBLICation." Instead, everyone would, quite naturally, substitute the
refereed, published reprint for the unrefereed preprint. Paper publishers will
then either restructure themselves (with the cooperation of the scholarly
community) so as to arrange for the minimal true costs and a fair return on
electronic-only page costs (which I estimate to be less than 25% of paper-
page costs, contrary to the 75% figure that appears in most current
publishers' estimates) to be paid out of advance subsidies (from authors' page
charges, learned society dues, university publication budgets and/or
governmental publication subsidies) or they will have to watch as the peer
community spawns a brand new generation of electronic-only publishers who
will.”

4. 4

5. The Promise of Institutional Repositories
5
Universal Green makes all articles OA, thereby
making subscriptions unsustainable, forcing
publishers to cut needless costs and downsize to
managing peer review alone. No more demand for
a print edition. No more demand for an online
edition. All access-provision and archiving offloaded
onto the global network of institutional OA
repositories.
- Stevan Harnard - 2013

8. Lawson, Stuart; Meghreblian, Ben; Brook, Michelle (2014): Journal
subscription costs - FOIs to UK universities. figshare.
http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1186832
Retrieved 21:45, Oct 27, 2015 (GMT)
UK universities
5 years (2010 – 2014)
10 Publishers
£431,246,323
$875,718,046.35

9. http://shiny.retr0.me/journal_costs/?year=2014&inst=19,22,38,42,59,64,80,95,136
http://bit.ly/UKpublishing

10. Larivière V, Haustein S, Mongeon P (2015) The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in
the Digital Era. PLoS ONE 10(6): e0127502. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127502

13. “According to the Chefs, we’re looking at a year of mergers and
acquisitions, the continuing growth of open access both in number of
opportunities and in scale, the publication of data and objects (like
multimedia, application code, etc.), and more start-ups.”

14. FUNDER
MANDATES

15. 15
“The Obama Administration is committed to the proposition that citizens
deserve easy access to the results of scientific research their tax dollars have paid
for. That’s why, in a policy memorandum released today, OSTP Director John
Holdren has directed Federal agencies with more than $100M in R&D
expenditures to develop plans to make the published results of federally funded
research freely available to the public within one year of publication and
requiring researchers to better account for and manage the digital data
resulting from federally funded scientific research.”
February 22nd 2013

16. 16
“On the Open Access and Open Data fronts, the plan released
today reiterates U.S.'s firm commitment to opening access to
articles resulting from publicly-funded research, citing the
language from the 2013 OSTP Directive on this subject.
Additionally, the plan calls for robust attention ensuring that
data — including code, applications and technologies —
generated from publicly-funded research be made openly
accessible as well. This is a strong nod to an eventual full U.S.
Open Science Agenda.”

17. “But taxpayers who are paying for
that research will want to see
something back. Directly – through
open access to results and data.
And indirectly – through making
science work better for all of us.
That’s why we will require open
access to all publications stemming
from EU-funded research. That’s
why we will progressively open
access to the research data, too.
And why we’re asking national
funding bodies to do the same.”
Neelie Kroes.
Vice President for the Eurpoean
Commission

19. Valen, Dan; Blanchat, Kelly (2015): Overview of OSTP Responses. figshar
http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1367165
Retrieved 16:10, Aug 14, 2015 (GMT)

20. • Government
• Funders
• Societies
• Publishers
• Institutions
• Academics
Who are the stakeholders and what is their
motivation?

21. Josh Sommer – Chordoma Foundation

24. 24
All research data collected with the use of SSHRC funds must be
preserved and made available for use by others within a reasonable
period of time. SSHRC considers "a reasonable period" to be within two years of the
completion of the research project for which the data was collected.”
“SSHRC is committed to the principle that the various forms of research data
collected with public funds belong in the public domain. Accordingly, SSHRC
has adopted a policy to facilitate making data that has been
collected with the help of SSHRC funds available to other
researchers. Costs associated with preparing research data for deposit are
considered eligible expenses in SSHRC research grant programs. Research data
includes quantitative social, political and economic data sets; qualitative information
in digital format; experimental research data; still and moving image and sound data
bases; and other digital objects used for analytical purposes.

25. “CIHR-funded researchers are also required to deposit bioinformatics, atomic,
and molecular coordinate data into the appropriate public database
immediately upon publication of research results. They must also retain original
data sets for a minimum of five years (or longer if other policies apply).”

26. 1. Recommended open access to scholarly papers of
publicly funded research
2. Recommended open access to all digital outputs of
publicly funded research
3. Mandated open access to scholarly papers of publicly
funded research
4. Mandated open access to all digital outputs of publicly
funded research
5. Enforced, mandated open access to scholarly papers of
publicly funded research
6. Enforced, mandated open access to all digital outputs of
publicly funded research
The Open Academic Tidal Wave

27. 27

28. Research Data Management – Research Data Dissemination
An interface that sits on top of institutional defined storage

34. 34

35. APIs are essential

37. Josh Sommer – Chordoma Foundation

40. Open access is essential

41. Persistent identifiers are essential

42. 42
Persistent identifiers are essential

43. 43
Advocacy

47. Josh Sommer – Chordoma Foundation

48. Thank you for your time
Mark Hahnel
Function: CEO
tel: +447709362420
email: mark@figshare.com
@markhahnel
@figshare