Open Science News

Dear members/network,

European Commission is conducting a study exploring the role of copyright in facilitating access to digital collections of public interest institutions (PIIs), such as libraries, archives, museums, as well as educational establishments and research organisations specifically for distance education and research purposes.

The main objective of this study is to understand how copyright rules impact access to various content (books, journals, films, videos, visual works, music, databases, etc.) for education and research, especially in digital contexts.

The study is carried out at the request of European Commission by Visionary Analytics together with research partners Ecorys, KEA, and OK Consulting. Please find the support letter from the European Commission here.

A survey within the study is currently ongoing. The survey has two target groups potentially relevant to you or your network:

• Cultural heritage institutions (e.g. library, museum, archive), educational institutions (e.g. school, university), and research institutions (e.g. think-tank, research institute)
• Educators (school teachers, university lecturers), students (general, vocational, higher education), scientific researchers, or patrons of a library, museum or archive

This is a unique opportunity to share your experiences, which will directly inform policy-making and thus will be very valuable.

We encourage you to participate in the survey and disseminate it further to your network and community. If you have already received a link to the survey, please use the one you received to complete the survey if you are in the target group, or share it with your members if you are an association representing the target group. If you have not received a link, please use the below links:

• If you want to share your perspectives on behalf of a cultural heritage institution (e.g. library, museum, archive), educational institution (e.g. school, university), or research institution (e.g. think-tank, research institute), please use this link: survey
• If you want to share your perspectives as an individual – teacher, educator, lecturer, student, researcher, or patron of a library, museum or archive – please use this link: survey

We kindly ask to fill in the survey until the 15/07/2024.

If you need to pause survey and continue later, you should press “Save and continue” in the upper right corner and provide your email. The link to the survey will be sent to your email and after opening the you will be directed to the point where you paused the survey. Your progress is saved once you proceed to the next survey page.

If you have any questions regarding the survey or the study, please reach out to the study team via copyright@visionarysurveys.lt

Thank you!

Photo via NICK ARTSRUNI 

A Proposal from cOAlition S

Introduction

New scientific discoveries are built on the foundation of established results from previous research. For this chain of knowledge to function optimally, all research results must be openly accessible to the scientific community. As Marc Schiltz stated in “Why Plan S,” the global push towards full and immediate Open Access (OA) has become an unstoppable trend over the past five years. However, academic publishing practices have lagged behind, failing to keep pace with the rapid advancements in the way science is performed, disseminated, and utilized. This growing disconnect jeopardizes the goal of universal OA for research outputs.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the necessity for faster, more efficient publishing models. Traditional publishing systems were too slow to disseminate critical and urgently needed information about SARS-CoV2. In response, scholars worldwide have adopted new practices to improve the dissemination and peer review of research findings, such as sharing articles before peer review and participating in open peer review processes. Innovative models like “diamond” publishing, which provide scholar-led services free to authors and readers, have been championed by research institutions, particularly in Latin America. These developments demand that funders and other stakeholders, including university libraries, rethink how best to support the dissemination of research responsibly, equitably, and sustainably.

In this document, cOAlition S proposes a vision and set of principles for a future scholarly communication system. This system aims to align with the evolving needs of the research community, promote open science, and address the challenges of the current publishing models. A consultative process will be undertaken to gather input from the research community, with a revised proposal to be considered by cOAlition S funders in June 2024.

The Dominant Publishing Models Are Highly Inequitable

Most academic journals sustain their operations through subscriptions, article processing charges (APCs), or both, creating significant barriers for researchers. Subscription paywalls hinder access to relevant research findings, while APCs can prevent researchers from publishing their work. While acknowledging that publishing incurs costs, cOAlition S believes all researchers should be able to publish their work as Open Access without facing author charges.

Key Challenges in the Current Scholarly Communication Ecosystem

1. Delayed Sharing of Research Outputs: The pre-publication peer review model causes significant publication delays, sometimes taking longer than traditional print and postal distribution. In the digital age, a 12-month delay in releasing new knowledge is as detrimental as the previously common 12-month open access publication embargo.
2. Underutilized Peer Review Potential: Peer review, while essential for quality control, is often confidential, hiding the efforts and insights of reviewers. Repetitive and confidential reviewing processes waste earlier peer review reports’ insights and undermine the quality control and accountability of authors, reviewers, and editors.
3. Editorial Gatekeeping and Career Incentives: The rejection-resubmission cycle, coupled with career incentives linked to editorial gatekeeping, burdens scientists, particularly early career researchers. This cycle threatens the well-being and persistence of the next generation of scientists in academic research.

Why Scholarly Communication Needs to Change

The problems with the current scholarly communication ecosystem can be distilled into four key challenges. cOAlition S proposes a scholar-led communication ecosystem to address these issues. This ecosystem empowers scholars to share their research outputs and participate in new quality control mechanisms, ensuring rapid and transparent dissemination of high-quality scientific knowledge.

Scope

This document focuses on scholarly communications related to research articles and associated content elements, such as peer review reports, author responses, and editorial decisions. While other research outputs like monographs are important, they are beyond the current scope. Open Science, as defined by the UNESCO Recommendation, covers all disciplines.

Vision

cOAlition S envisions a community-based scholarly communication system that empowers scholars to share their research outputs and participate in quality control mechanisms and evaluation standards. This approach ensures the rapid and transparent dissemination of high-quality scientific knowledge.

Principles

The following principles support this vision:

1. Authors Control Dissemination: Authors, not third-party suppliers, should decide when and where to publish their work, including pre- and post-peer review versions and associated peer review reports.
2. Immediate and Open Sharing: Researchers should share their outputs openly, allowing others to adapt, reuse, and build upon these results at no cost to themselves.
3. Community-Based Quality Control: Academic communities should set and monitor quality standards through open quality control processes, publishing peer review reports to enable transparency and trust.
4. Inclusive Research Assessment: All scholarly contributions should be considered in research assessment, with their value determined by relevant research communities.
5. Support for Scholar-Led Publishing: Stakeholders, including funders and institutions, should support the development and adoption of community-based publishing, respecting disciplinary differences and epistemic traditions.

Opportunities to Engage

A scholar-led communication system is not a new concept but builds on existing good practices. Researchers, service providers, funders, and institutions must work together to put scholarship at the center of scholarly communication. Researchers will need to take an active role in disseminating their outputs and contributing to open peer review. Service providers must tailor their services to support scholarly contributions. Funders and institutions should incentivize and reward practices aligned with these principles and provide financial support for infrastructure and services.

Mission

cOAlition S aims to facilitate the transition to an open, scholar-led communication ecosystem in partnership with the research community, through funding requirements and research assessment processes.

Conclusion

The Plan S initiative has enabled unprecedented levels of Open Access research. However, current models, such as Read and Publish agreements and APCs, remain inequitable. Pre-publication peer review delays sharing, and inaccessible peer review reports hinder responsible research assessment. The proposed scholar-led communication ecosystem addresses these issues, building on existing good practices and aligning with recent conclusions from the Council of the European Union and UNESCO.

Consultation

The consultation process, running from November 2023 to April 2024, aims to refine the proposal based on input from the research community. Details on how to contribute can be found at: cOAlition S Consultation.

Example of a Scholar-Led Ecosystem: Publish, Review, Curate (PRC) Model

The PRC model distinguishes three core functions of scholarly communication: publication, peer review, and curation. This model ensures the full and immediate sharing of scholarly outputs, with authors deciding when to publish unreviewed publications, exposing their work for formal review, and having curation editors select peer-reviewed papers for publication.

By proposing a transition to a scholar-led communication system, cOAlition S seeks to create a more equitable, efficient, and transparent scholarly communication ecosystem, fostering the rapid dissemination of high-quality scientific knowledge.

Original Article By Dr. Heidi Seibold

The academic publishing system is undeniably flawed, a sentiment shared by many in the scholarly community. However, aspiring academics striving for a successful career while adhering to the principles of openness can still navigate this landscape effectively. Here’s a pragmatic approach to achieving this balance.

Understanding the Challenge

It’s natural to fear that not publishing in established journals could hinder your career progression. The pressure to publish in recognized journals is immense, as these are often deemed valuable by peers and employers. Nevertheless, embracing Open Science doesn’t have to be daunting. Start with manageable steps and gradually incorporate more open practices into your workflow.

Options for Open Access Publishing

Publish a Preprint

One of the simplest ways to begin your Open Science journey is by publishing a preprint. Most journals permit preprint submissions. Uploading your paper to a preprint server such as arXiv or OSF preprints before or alongside journal submission ensures early dissemination of your work. Resources like ASAPbio’s searchable list of preprint servers can help you find the right platform for your field.

To verify if your target journal allows preprints, use tools like Sherpa Romeo. For example, if you aim to publish in Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Sherpa Romeo confirms that preprints are permitted. Here’s the workflow:

1. Identify your target journal.
2. Check preprint policies on Sherpa Romeo.
3. Prepare your paper for submission.
4. Upload to a preprint server and submit to the journal.

Publish in an Established Open Access Journal

Many reputable open access journals exist across various fields. Publishing in these journals ensures that your work is freely accessible. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a useful resource to find such journals by field.

Be mindful of article processing charges (APCs), which can be steep, sometimes exceeding 4000 Euros. However, many institutions and funders offer support for APCs. Consult your library—they often have information on available funding.

For instance, journals like the Journal of Statistical Software are free for both authors and readers, providing an excellent publishing option without financial burden.

Utilize Institutional Open Access Agreements

Increasingly, institutions and regions are forming agreements with publishers, allowing researchers to publish and access works without additional cost. While some Open Access advocates critique these agreements, they can be beneficial for individual researchers. Examples include the German DEAL and agreements at TU Munich.

Consult your library to discover such agreements and understand how they can support your open access publishing efforts.

What to Avoid: Hybrid Journals

Hybrid journals charge fees to make individual articles open access while the rest of the journal remains closed. Paying these fees is generally discouraged as it funnels more money into an already expensive system. Instead, if you choose to publish in a hybrid journal, opt to publish a preprint without paying the open access fee.

Recognizing Predatory Journals

A common misconception is that open access journals are often predatory, prioritizing profit over scientific integrity. However, most open access journals maintain high standards. Utilize tools like the Think. Check. Submit. checklist to identify reputable journals and dispel the myth that all open access journals are predatory.

Embracing Openness in Your Academic Journey

Balancing a commitment to Open Science with the demands of an academic career is achievable through strategic choices. By starting with preprints, considering established open access journals, and leveraging institutional agreements, researchers can maintain openness without compromising their career aspirations. Remember, the belief that all open access journals are predatory is a myth—responsible selection and due diligence are key to successful and ethical publishing.

For a deeper dive into alternatives like Peer Community In (PCI), which uses preprints to bypass traditional publishing systems, explore my previous posts on the topic.

Embrace openness and take these pragmatic steps to advance your career while staying true to your values.

Dr. Heidi Seibold is an advocate for Open Science, sharing insights and strategies for researchers navigating the evolving landscape of academic publishing.

Original article can be found here.

The UNESCO Multisectoral Regional Office in Rabat organises a regional symposium titled Democratisingg Science: Implementation Pathways of the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science in the Arab Region.” This significant event will take place on November 28 and 29, 2024, at Mohammed V University in Rabat.

The symposium is being organised in partnership with the World Federation of Scientific Workers (WFSW), the Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO), and UNESCO field offices in the Arab region. It aims to foster dialogue and collaboration among decision-makers, scientists, and researchers from across the region.

Participants will explore strategies and pathways for implementing the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science, with a focus on enhancing accessibility, inclusivity, and innovation within the scientific community. The symposium will feature a range of discussions, workshops, and keynote presentations designed to promote the democratisation of science.

Interested individuals are invited to register for either online or in-person participation through the following link: Event Registration. The detailed agenda and programme of work will be made available in due course via the provided registration link.

This symposium represents a unique opportunity to contribute to the advancement of open science in the Arab region, ensuring that scientific knowledge and innovation are accessible to all.

Friday 28th of June, 12.00-13.00 pm CET on Zoom

The prevalence of mental health symptoms within the academic community has become a growing concern. Both early career researchers and senior academics face significant challenges, with notable incidences of depression, anxiety, and burnout. This trend raises alarms for both the research community and policymakers, highlighting the urgent need for effective strategies to address mental health issues within academia.

One potential solution lies in fostering support through the academic community itself. By leveraging the power of peer networks and mentorship, academics can find valuable support systems to navigate the mental health challenges associated with their demanding careers.

To explore this approach, the fourth webinar in a series on mental health will be held on June 28, from 12:00 to 13:00 CET. This webinar will feature a panel of three distinguished members of the Young Academy of Europe (YAE) who will delve into the critical role of mentorship in academia. Both mentors and mentees can benefit from these relationships, as they provide a platform to voice and work through mental health issues.

The panelists for this event include Mar Rus-Calafell, Bhismadev Chakrabarti, and Scott Bremer, who will share their diverse experiences with mentoring. The discussion will be moderated by Viktorija Vaštakaitė-Kairienė, the YAE Activities Chair. Attendees are encouraged to contribute their questions and experiences to enrich the conversation.

This mental health webinar series will conclude with a workshop focused on scientific leadership, with a particular emphasis on mental health. This workshop will take place at the YAE Annual General Meeting (AGM) in Strasbourg on August 26th and 27th. Interested individuals are encouraged to register and participate in this culminating event.

Through initiatives like these, the academic community can come together to address mental health challenges, creating a supportive environment that fosters well-being and resilience.

Register here.

Photo via Alivio

In 2020, Dutch universities, university medical centres, research institutes, and research funders initiated the Recognition & Rewards programme. This initiative seeks to create a balanced approach to recognizing and rewarding academic work, ensuring that diverse talents and contributions across research, teaching, impact, leadership, and patient care are valued. The programme aims to address the one-sided focus on quantitative individual research performance, which has often led to the neglect of other critical academic activities.

Key Developments and Objectives

To promote this broader perspective, the Universities of the Netherlands (UNL), the Netherlands Federation of University Medical Centres (NFU), the Network of Ideologically-based Universities (NLU), the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW), the Dutch Research Council (NWO), and ZonMw collaborated on a position paper titled Room for Everyone’s Talent: Towards a New Balance in the Recognition and Reward of Academics. This paper laid out ambitious goals for a significant shift in how academic achievements are recognized and rewarded, emphasizing the need for a profound cultural change.

To monitor the progress towards these goals, the ‘Recognition & Rewards Plan 2022–2026’ introduced a culture barometer. This tool aims to:

1. Assess the extent to which academics recognize, experience, and share the ambitions of the Recognition & Rewards programme within their institutions.
2. Provide insights into the progress of the envisaged cultural change throughout the programme’s duration.

First Culture Barometer Survey

The first culture barometer was conducted in early 2024 by Berenschot, with a follow-up planned for 2026. The survey was meticulously prepared with input from project leaders, HR directors, and questionnaire experts. It was administered in both Dutch and English to ensure accessibility for all academic staff across 26 participating institutions.

Survey Participation and Response

The survey targeted all academic staff, totaling 65,142 individuals. The response rate varied by institution, ranging from 4% to 52%, with an overall response rate of 12.1%. This participation level provided sufficient data to analyze variations across different job categories and subject areas, though it highlighted some disparities in representation, such as the underrepresentation of PhD candidates and younger academics.

Findings and Interpretation

The survey results offer valuable insights into the current state of the Recognition & Rewards programme. Key findings include:

• Familiarity with the Programme: Respondents who were already familiar with the programme were more likely to complete the questionnaire.
• Perceived Recognition and Rewards: Respondents who completed the survey generally felt less recognized and rewarded in their work.
• Demographic Representation: The gender distribution in responses was balanced. However, younger academics and PhD candidates were underrepresented, while professors and associate professors were overrepresented.
• Subject Area Representation: Academics in Healthcare were the largest group but were underrepresented in responses, while Natural and Life Sciences, and Behavioural and Social Sciences had slightly higher representation.

Challenges and Biases

The survey faced potential selection biases. Institutions that heavily promoted the survey and sent reminders saw higher response rates. Additionally, respondents who felt less recognized and rewarded were more likely to participate, which might skew perceptions of the programme’s effectiveness.

Conclusion and Future Directions

This report provides a snapshot of the Recognition & Rewards programme’s current state, based on the opinions of academic staff. While it highlights significant areas for improvement and adjustment, it also underscores the importance of continued monitoring and adaptation. The follow-up survey in 2026 will further illuminate the programme’s impact and guide future efforts to create a more inclusive and balanced academic recognition and rewards system.

More information and insights: RECOGNITION & REWARDS

June 27, 2024, 12:00 PM CEST

The Science for Africa Foundation (SFA) has officially launched Open Research Africa (ORA), a pioneering peer-reviewed publishing platform aimed at facilitating transparent and rapid communication of diverse research outputs. This innovative platform is powered by F1000, a leading open science publisher, and embodies the joint mission of both organizations: to disseminate high-quality research from Africa to the global community, fostering rapid sharing, discovery, and reuse of African research for the benefit of all.

Enhancing Scientific Discoveries Through Open Access

In the contemporary academic landscape, there is a growing trend among publishers and funding agencies to encourage researchers to openly share the data underpinning their findings. Research shows that openly available datasets can lead to further research and greater impact, as other researchers can reuse this data, thereby advancing scientific knowledge and breaking new ground. This open sharing benefits not only the authors but also the wider scientific community and the public.

Key Aspects of Open Research Africa

The launch event highlighted several critical elements of the ORA publishing model and its potential benefits for the research community. The session included:

• Introduction to the ORA Publishing Model: An overview of how ORA operates, emphasizing its commitment to open access and rapid dissemination of research.
• Variety of Research Outputs: ORA offers a wide array of research outputs, accommodating various types of scholarly work beyond traditional articles.
• Benefits of Open Data Sharing: Understanding the significance of openly sharing data, which can lead to increased visibility, collaboration, and impact of research.
• Eligibility, Policies, and Guidelines: Detailed information on the policies and guidelines governing open data sharing, ensuring researchers understand the requirements and benefits.

Key Figures in the Initiative

Two prominent figures are driving the ORA initiative forward:

• Diksha Awasthi: As a Business Liaison Manager, Open Research, at the Taylor and Francis Group, Diksha focuses on nurturing partnerships and providing author support and capacity-building training within India, South Asia, and Africa.
• Elizabeth Marincola: Serving as Senior Advisor for Communications and Advocacy at the Science for Africa Foundation, Elizabeth is responsible for overseeing ORA. Her role involves collaboration with F1000 to ensure the platform meets its goals of enhancing the visibility and impact of African research.

Conclusion

The launch of Open Research Africa marks a significant step towards making African research more accessible and impactful on a global scale. By promoting open access and data sharing, SFA and F1000 are enabling a new era of scientific collaboration and discovery. Researchers and stakeholders in the academic community are encouraged to engage with ORA, leveraging its resources to advance their work and contribute to the global pool of knowledge.

More info and registration

22 October, Maastricht — Registration for the highly anticipated National Open Science Festival is officially open! Since its inaugural edition in 2021, the festival has been a significant event fostering creativity and innovation within the Open Science community. This year’s festival promises to be a vibrant gathering filled with engaging sessions and ample opportunities for attendees to reconnect with old colleagues and forge new professional relationships.

Festival Highlights

Set against the academic backdrop of Maastricht University, the festival on 22 October is a must-attend event for anyone passionate about Open Science. It will feature a diverse range of sessions designed to inspire and inform, providing a platform for participants to share knowledge, collaborate on new ideas, and celebrate the progress and potential of Open Science.

Open Science Barcamp: A Pre-Festival Event

Adding to the excitement, a satellite event, the Open Science Barcamp, will take place on 21 October, the day before the main festival. Held at the same location, this Barcamp follows an open ‘unconference’ format, inviting both newcomers and seasoned experts in Open Science to join. Organized by the grassroots network Open Science Communities (OSC-NL), this event is an excellent opportunity for participants to (re)connect, share insights, and expand their professional networks in an informal setting.

Final Program and Registration Details

The final program for the festival will be available in August and will be published on the event’s official website. Registrants will be notified once the program is released, allowing them to subscribe to their preferred sessions. This ensures that all attendees can tailor their festival experience to their interests and make the most of the event.

Join Us in Maastricht

We warmly invite you to submit your participation and visit the festival at Maastricht University. Whether you are a veteran of the Open Science community or new to the field, this festival offers a unique opportunity to engage with like-minded individuals and contribute to the growing momentum of Open Science.

Don’t miss out on this inspiring event—register now and be part of the future of Open Science!

Find more information here.

Photo via NIST

The debates surrounding open access (OA) policies often appear to be repetitive and cyclical. However, upon closer examination, these discussions are slowly progressing towards a conclusive end. Despite the circuitous route, OA policies are steadily advancing towards full implementation. The journey has been far from straightforward due to the myriad technical, commercial, and cultural challenges that needed to be addressed and overcome.

The Current State of OA Policy Implementation

The timeline for the full realization of OA policies remains uncertain. There are still several hurdles to clear before reaching the final goal. Recently, representatives from Oxford University have raised concerns about linking OA to the Research Excellence Framework (REF), particularly with the proposed extension to include long-form publications such as monographs and book chapters. While their concerns highlight some legitimate issues regarding implementation, their overall arguments lack persuasiveness.

Patrick Grant, Oxford’s Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, Tanita Casci, Director of the Research Strategy & Policy Unit, and Stephen Conway, Executive Director of Research Services, argue that the proposed policy is both “unaffordable and excessively bureaucratic.” They estimate that the OA compliance costs for the new requirements could reach £20 million over a REF cycle for Oxford University alone, excluding the costs of engaging with the complex policy. They further suggest that the expanded OA requirements could hinder institutions from submitting their best outputs for the 2029 assessment exercise.

The Broader Implications of OA Policies

However, the Oxford representatives’ argument overlooks a fundamental aspect: why would scholars not want their best work to reach the widest possible audience? Ensuring that research has the maximum impact within and beyond academia is crucial. They also claim that the policy promotes a compliance culture, detracting from opportunities to foster open research practices. While this is a potential risk, it is disheartening that senior figures at a leading university do not recognize the responsibilities and opportunities that come with a more inclusive OA policy.

One of the most disheartening points raised by Grant and colleagues is the question of why the REF should have an OA policy at all. This echoes objections from a decade ago when OA for the REF was first proposed, disregarding the fact that the REF allocates public funds. Denying public access to the outputs of publicly funded research lacks accountability and transparency.

The Benefits of Open Access

The significant public benefits of the REF OA mandate, first implemented in 2016, should not be overlooked. This mandate dramatically increased the accessibility of UK research, showcasing the numerous advantages of OA. Open access allows research to reach a broader audience, especially those without university journal subscriptions or library access. It aids in detecting fraudulent research practices, ensures global participation in research, and supports people with disabilities who find it challenging to access physical academic libraries. By removing barriers to access, we create a fairer and more equitable society.

The proposed expansion of the REF mandate to include long-form humanities work (such as books) will extend these benefits. Despite suggestions for equitable funding, resistance to this requirement persists. It is paradoxical that humanities scholars, who often lament the lack of public funding for their disciplines, resist efforts to make their research accessible to the public that provides this funding. This resistance is particularly concerning when humanities departments face existential threats. If outputs from disciplines like English, history, and classics remain invisible to the wider world, they risk being dismissed as irrelevant. The REF OA policy supports these disciplines, embodying a “transparent and participative” social contract between academics and society as envisioned by Gibbons in 1999.

Addressing Bureaucracy and Cost Concerns

Researchers are justified in resisting unnecessary bureaucracy, and Research England should consider reasonable suggestions for streamlining the process. The numerous exemptions and caveats in the policy indicate a willingness to address these concerns.

However, it is also fair to question what proactive measures institutions like Oxford have taken to prepare for a policy trailed back in 2016. Oxford’s estimate of £20 million in costs should be viewed in the context of the approximately £1.2 billion it is likely to receive over a seven-year REF cycle. Is it unreasonable to expect that a mere 1.7% of this funding be allocated to ensure public access to the research results? Furthermore, to contain costs, institutions could implement robust and responsible research assessment exercises, freeing scholars from the demands of ‘prestige publishing’ and the associated price hikes. Investing in scholar-led publishing operations, such as the Open Library of the Humanities or university-led open access presses, is another viable solution.

Moving Forward

The technical, commercial, and cultural arguments surrounding the REF and OA will continue to evolve. It is crucial to engage in these discussions with a comprehensive understanding of all the issues at stake. By doing so, we can work towards a more inclusive and accessible future for academic research.

Original article By Stephen Curry, Dorothy Bishop and Martin Paul Eve via HEPI.

Photo via samakarov

The call for proposals for Open Science Infrastructure is now open, marking a significant milestone for Open Science NL with a substantial budget of 12.5 million euros. This initiative is designed to fund the improvement or development of digital infrastructures that support open science, making it the organization’s largest funding programme to date.

“We are happy to launch this ambitious call. It is a broad programme that can meet many different needs of the community,” says Open Science NL director Hans de Jonge. He emphasizes the inclusive and expansive nature of the programme, which aims to address diverse requirements within the research community. A notable aspect of this call is its emphasis on collaborative improvement of existing solutions. “This not only helps make the current infrastructures more connected and sustainable but also creates an opportunity for people to collaborate, exchange ideas, and share expertise. This leads to improved solutions that we hope will significantly advance the open science movement in the Netherlands and benefit the entire community,” de Jonge adds.

Goals and Focus Areas

The programme aims to support the research community in the Netherlands by addressing various needs in the field of digital infrastructure. It encompasses the full breadth of the open science agenda, allowing for both generic applications that are not specific to any particular domain or scientific discipline, as well as applications targeting the needs of specific research domains.

Applications can focus on specific research outputs, such as:

• Open access publications
• Research software
• Data
• Hardware
• Creative products
• Replication studies

Additionally, proposals related to specific open science practices are welcome, including:

• Citizen science
• Societal engagement
• Reproducibility
• Pre-registration
• Open peer review

Project Types and Funding Details

Interested parties can submit applications for two types of projects:

1. Small Projects: These involve improving or expanding existing infrastructure or serving as a pilot for new infrastructure. Applicants can request up to €250,000 for projects that can last up to two years.
2. Large Projects: These aim to significantly improve or expand existing infrastructure and require collaboration between at least two applicants from different institutions. For these projects, applicants can request between €250,000 and €1,500,000, with a maximum project duration of four years.

Q&A and Matching Events

To facilitate understanding of the call, answer questions, and connect potential co-applicants, Open Science NL is organizing two online meetings on the 11th and 16th of July, 2024. These sessions will be conducted in English. Participants can also request a recording of the informational part of the meetings via the registration pages.

This call for proposals represents a significant opportunity for the research community in the Netherlands to enhance the infrastructure supporting open science, fostering collaboration and innovation across various fields and disciplines.

More info at Open Science NL