54
5.5. But the overall picture seems reasonably clear: that on the most plausible assumptions, significant efficiency savings, and many wider social and economic benefits could be achieved if we were to move worldwide to an open access regime, complete with peer review and with effective search, navigation and other value-added services currently provided by publishers, libraries and others. The key policy questions are how to promote and organise such a move; and how such a regime might be organised so that it is sustained by flows of funding to support continued investment and innovation in high-quality services that provide a key underpinning to the success of the UK and other research communities.
5.6. In that context, Governments, funders and others have recently announced new measures to promote open access. The European Commission has thus announced that it will take further steps to promote open access in the Horizon 2020 programme,[1] moving from the pilot in Framework Programme 7 (which covered c20% of the research funded through that programme) to a position where the EU will require all the publications arising from projects funded under Horizon 2020 to be made available on open access terms. Similarly, the Spanish Government is considering how to implement a law on science, technology and innovation passed in 2011[2] which requires publicly-funded researchers to make the accepted manuscript of published articles available as soon as practicable, and in any case within twelve months. In the US, the proposed Research Works Act, which would have forbidden open access mandates for federally-funded research, was withdrawn in February 2012; and the proposed Federal Research Public Access Act, which would require federal research funding agencies to provide online access to research manuscripts stemming from their funding within six months of publication in a peer-reviewed journal, was reintroduced.[3] The National Science and Technology Council is currently considering how best to increase access to federally-funded scientific research.[4]
- ↑ Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions – Horizon 2020 - The Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, 30.11.2011
- ↑ http://www.congreso.es/public_oficiales/L9/CONG/BOCG/A/A_080-22.PDF
- ↑ On the RWA and its withdrawal, see the Chronicle of Higher Education, 27 February 2012 (http://chronicle.com/article/Legislation-to-Bar/130949/). On the FRPAA, see Science Insider, 10 February 2012 (http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/02/lawmakers-reintroduce-public-access.html )
- ↑ National Science and Technology Council, Interagency Public Access Co-ordination: a report to Congress on the coordination of policies related to the dissemination and long-term stewardship of the results of federally-funded scientific research, 2012, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/public_access-final.pdf. The report notes that the National Science Foundation (NSF) policies are different from the NIH. In response to a requirement in the American Competes Act of 2008, the NSF introduced a requirement for award-holders to provide a Project Outcomes Report (POR) written specifically for the general public. These are posted on the Research.gov website.
