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

Abstract / OSI2017 Workgroup Question A new issue for OSI2017, this workgroup will focus on the unique challenges faced by the global south, the global diversity of scholarly communication, and the different issues, challenges and opportunities in both underserved regions of the world and underserved segments (like small colleges and small research firms). This group...Read More

Abstract / OSI2017 Workgroup Question What standards, norms, best practices, exit strategies, and incentive systems does the world of scholarly communications need? What is the future ideal? What will it take (including studies or pilots) to develop a better understanding of how the scholarly communication system works now? This workgroup will also necessarily touch on...Read More

Abstract / OSI2017 Workgroup Question What are the impacts of Sci-Hub and other rogue solutions on open access and what is the future of this approach, which may be gaining new mainstream support (noting for instance Wellcome’s recent funding of ResearchGate). What new resources should the scholarly community develop (and how) that would be useful...Read More

Abstract / OSI2017 Workgroup Question The remit of the Open Scholarship Initiative  2017 Promotion & Tenure Reform workgroup clearly connected researchers’ personal publishing choices to the oft-traditionalist system of promotion and tenure in the United States, wherein researchers feel compelled to publish in toll access journals or monographs if they wish to achieve tenure, win...Read More

Abstract / OSI2017 Workgroup Question Building on the peer review workgroup’s proposals from OSI2016, this workgroup will develop a broader and clearer description of peer review that considers the different needs for different stages of review, as well as discuss possibly emerging issues such as the need to promote uniform interpretation and enforcement of peer...Read More