The Open Scholarship Initiative
Working together in partnership with UNESCO to improve the future of open

Category

OSI2017 Stakeholder Reports
Introduction During the open discussion on Thursday morning there was consensus among the delegates that the formal governance structure proposed was premature. This eliminated the need for the summit group, at least for the time being. Several of those who had been elected (or volunteered) in our stakeholder sessions met on Thursday morning anyway as...
Read More
Introduction The 2017 Scholarly Societies and Society Publishers Stakeholder group discussed the various approaches to publishing that was represented around the table. Representatives in this group came from science disciplines and represented all sizes of organizations and publishing arrangements (i.e. small and large independent publishers, and those that partner with for-profit publishers under various arrangements).
Read More
Introduction The stakeholder group agrees that: Infrastructures, standards etc. are crucial for making open possible The drivers for infrastructures, standards, identifiers and other bits and pieces of infrastructure in scholarly communication have (and still are) originated from the North/West New bits and pieces of infrastructures need to be developed. For example, bits and pieces to...
Read More
Introduction Across the library community— internationally and amongst institutions of all sizes and orientations (serving the public, research universities and nonuniversity research institutions)—there is a strong commitment to supporting open access. Library leaders are knowledgeable about openness and committed to responding to the concerns of their institutions and user base on this issue.
Read More
Introduction This stakeholder group reflects a diverse constituency including: university presses; repository managers; scholarly communication librarians; researchers; copyright attorneys; funders; and more. Indeed, we believe we embody a microcosm of stakeholders across the scholarly publishing terrain. As professionals with shared interests in supporting a sustainable scholarly publishing lifecycle we share a perspective of OA that...
Read More
Introduction Although many of the participants in our working group occupy positions in their home institutions’ libraries, they were joined by active researcher colleagues as well as a colleague in a general counsel’s office. It may not surprise anyone to hear that while we found common cause in the exploration of the ways in which...
Read More
Introduction At the OSI 2017 meeting in Washington DC 13 attendees were publishers. At a minimum, this demonstrates that publishers heavily engage with the services they provide to research communities and consider the discussions about open science to be important. Nevertheless it is important to understand that different publishers have different opinions, policies and strategies...
Read More
Introduction The Open Knowledge Stakeholder group was heterogeneous, with representation from nonprofit societies, academia, new OA journals, and service providers in most aspects of the scholarly communications lifecycle spectrum. There were many varied activities reported, as well as an array of opinions and comments; however, some main conclusions emerged. The ideal scenario for “open” is...
Read More
Introduction The OSI journal editor stakeholder group was diverse in terms of geography and specialty field, with various backgrounds as either editors or in roles working closely with editors. Based on interests that aligned with the majority of the group at OSI2017, we decided to focus primarily on issues facing editors in the Global South....
Read More