This is the "oa.new" feed published by the OATP hub. It's a remix feed so that, over time, I can modify it without modifying the URL. For example, I  can filter out spam or make other modifications later on without changing the URL. https://tagteam.harvard.edu/hubs/oatp/republished_feeds/6 TagTeam social RSS aggregrator "In this presentation, we share the results of a comprehensive report commissioned by the Réseau québécois de recherche et de mutualisation pour les revues scientifiques (Réseau Circé), which aimed to assess the current state of peer review among scholarly journals, focusing, in particular, on open peer review practices. Our objective was to explore open peer review as a lever for transforming scholarly communication and research assessment." Wed, 29 Apr 2026 11:52:00 -0400 https://ressh2026.igsg.cnr.it/ConferenceProceedings.pdf oa.new oa.peer_review oa.open_peer_review oa.assessment oa.scholcomm "To support you in tracking, comparing, and understanding U.S. federal agencies public access requirements, SPARC has developed this Core Elements of Federal Public Access Policies Resource to distill and enable users to easily compare key elements of federal agency public access policies. These resources are a joint project of SPARC and HELIOS Open." Wed, 29 Apr 2026 11:50:00 -0400 https://sparcopen.org/our-work/public-access-resources/core-elements-of-federal-public-access-policies/ oa.new oa.sparc oa.usa oa.funders oa.policies oa.policies.funders oa.ostp oa.helios oa.funders "Key Points   Paywalls restrict AI access to approximately 50% of full-text scholarly articles, limiting training on high-quality data essential for scientific accuracy. Lack of full-text access for AI risks a self-reinforcing cycle of low-quality outputs that potentially erode the integrity of scholarly publishing. Paywalls fund vital publishing infrastructure and are legally protected, making paywall removal unsustainable. Emerging licencing partnerships together with RAG offer practical ways to grant AI secure access while sustaining publishers. Urgent action to bridge this gap is needed before AI-generated synthetic data dominates." Wed, 29 Apr 2026 11:49:00 -0400 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/leap.2059 oa.new oa.paywalls oa.ai Abstract:  This study presents the results of an exploratory audit of publisher-affiliation metadata for a selected sample of university-published journals in OpenAlex. A corpus of 60 UJs from 10 countries, chosen to represent low-visibility publishing environments, was examined. Journal records retrieved from OpenAlex in January 2025 and January 2026 were manually verified against Ulrichsweb, the journals' websites, and the ISSN Portal, in order to assess the journals' indexing status and the presence of publisher-related metadata. While OpenAlex indexes a significant proportion of the sampled journals, including titles not covered by major commercial indexing systems, coverage remains incomplete, even for active journals. Furthermore, structured publisher affiliation was rarely found within the sample. In January 2025, only 9% of indexed journals were linked to a publisher entity via OpenAlex's publisher-affiliation fields. By January 2026, publisher names appeared more frequently as unstructured text, while the proportion of journals linked to a publisher entity remained largely unchanged. These results indicate that university journals are often visible in OpenAlex as sources, but are insufficiently represented at the publisher level, limiting the interpretability of institutional publishing activity and obscuring the role of university publishing in the broader scholarly landscape. Wed, 29 Apr 2026 11:47:00 -0400 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/leap.2061 oa.new oa.openalex oa.publishers oa.universities oa.publishing oa.libpub "As we enter a time of increasing global volatility, with political tensions rising and new technologies transforming the information commons, the open science community is faced with a set of novel and pressing challenges that will need to be addressed if we are to remain relevant. This meeting will convene COAR’s international membership in order to discuss important issues and proactively chart a course for our community to navigate the current environment. Just some of the questions we will consider are: How can we advance our vision of an open and interoperable scholarly communications system in an increasingly fractured geopolitical climate? How can we take advantage of the opportunities presented by Artificial Intelligence while maintaining trust, transparency, and accountability? How can we balance global discoverability with local sovereignty of diverse and multilingual research outputs?" Wed, 29 Apr 2026 08:21:00 -0400 https://coar-repositories.org/news-updates/maintaining-openness-and-collaboration-in-times-of-uncertainty-coar-annual-meeting-2026/ oa.new oa.events oa.coar oa.repositories oa.green oa.ai oa.multilingualism oa.discoverability "One year after its launch, the EOSC EU Node is emerging as a key European gateway for Open Science, enabling researchers to access, share, and collaborate across borders. The European research landscape is undergoing a structural transformation. Open Science is no longer a policy aspiration, but an operational requirement: research outputs must be findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR) across institutional and national boundaries. Delivering this transformation requires more than just advocacy, it demands shared digital infrastructure that works in practice. The European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) EU Node represents a major milestone in this effort. Launched officially at the EOSC Symposium in Berlin in October 2024, the EOSC EU Node became the first operational node of the EOSC Federation. It provides an EU-level access point where researchers can discover and use scientific research outputs, computing resources, and collaborative environments in one place. Developed and operated by the European Commission through a procurement framework involving multiple European service providers, the EOSC EU Node is designed as both a functional research environment and a reference model for how a federated European research infrastructure can operate. For the first time, researchers across Europe can access a unified space where scientific research outputs, computing services and collaborative workspaces can be discovered and used through a single access point. Tens of millions of research outputs are discoverable in one place, alongside interactive services such as virtual machines, data storage, file synchronisation, notebook environments and collaborative workspaces, all available free at the point of use (subject to the virtual credits mechanism)." Wed, 29 Apr 2026 07:52:00 -0400 https://ercim-news.ercim.eu/en144/special/the-eosc-eu-node-an-evolving-gateway-to-open-science-in-europe oa.new oa.eosc oa.europe oa.eu-node oa.fair oa.infrastructure Today we published the 2026-2028 strategic plan for the Information & Openness focal area. This blogpost provides an overview of the plan, describing our vision and objectives for advancing the uptake of open research information in the coming years. Wed, 29 Apr 2026 05:52:00 -0400 https://www.leidenmadtrics.nl/articles/advancing-open-research-information-the-next-three-years-of-the-information-openness-focal-area oa.new oa.policy oa.strategies oa.data oa.metadata oa.impact oa.cris oa.universities oa.netherlands oa.europe Are our universities still fit for purpose? While academia struggles to meet expectations in times of rapid political and technological change, the “ivory tower” critique sadly still hits home. Also internally, universities are under immense strain: the publication model is cracking, the academic funding landscape has become a rat race that leads to more losers than winners, and systemic inequalities profoundly restrict access to higher education. Fixing Academia (VU University Press) is a timely and provocative collection of essays by ten young scholars. In a series of sharp, evidence-based, and constructive reflections on a selection of pressing themes, they diagnose some of the structural flaws in 21st-century Dutch universities. They also offer the tools for repair – tackling everything from the influence of Big Pharma on scientific integrity to the urgent need for better work-life balance for academic parents. Actionable yet visionary, this book hopes to stimulate conversations on how to “fix” academia and help universities strengthen their bonds with society. Wed, 29 Apr 2026 00:16:00 -0400 https://fixingacademia.wordpress.com/chapter-9/ oa.new oa.netherlands oa.europe oa.publishers oa.profits oa.business_models From DeepL's English: Dutch universities are too dependent on a handful of commercial publishers. Achieving greater ‘digital sovereignty’ is easier said than done. But there are some inspiring initiatives to be found. Wed, 29 Apr 2026 00:11:00 -0400 https://www.groene.nl/artikel/de-universiteit-als-melkkoe oa.new oa.netherlands oa.europe oa.publishers oa.profits oa.fees oa.monopoly oa.dutch Abstract:  This item is the fourth in a series exploring how university leaders across Europe are connecting open science and open education. Based on interviews conducted by SPARC Europe, the series aims to inspire more leaders to connect the opens and support institutions in addressing complex challenges through an integrated open knowledge framework. This item explores how institutions are turning their vision of openness into concrete strategies to embed it across research and education. It highlights how universities are bringing together open science and open education, aligning governance, incentives and infrastructure, and strengthening collaboration both within institutions and with wider society. It also shows a broader shift from fragmented initiatives to more coordinated, system-wide approaches, where leadership, community engagement and flexible implementation pathways are key to building more connected, participatory and sustainable open knowledge systems. Tue, 28 Apr 2026 12:00:00 -0400 https://zenodo.org/records/19737561 oa.new oa.universities oa.strategies oa.europe oa.open_science oa.education oa.sparc_europe oa.implementation Abstract:  Preprints are essential for the timely and open dissemination of research. arXiv, the most widely used preprint service, takes the idea of open science one step further by not only publishing the actual preprints but also LaTeX sources and other files used to create them. As known from other contexts, such as GitHub repositories, and anecdotally exemplified for arXiv, making source code publicly available risks disclosing otherwise "hidden" information. Consequently, the public availability of paper sources raises the question of how much sensitive content is (unintentionally) disclosed through them. In this paper, we systematically answer this question for all 2.7M arXiv submissions with available source files across three dimensions of source file-induced information disclosure: (1) inclusion of unnecessary files, (2) metadata embedded in files, and (3) irrelevant content in files such as source code comments. Our analysis reveals that nearly every arXiv submission contains some form of "hidden" information. Notable findings range from links to editable web documents for internal coordination over API and private keys to complete Git histories. While different tools promise to remove such information from source files, we show that they fail to reliably achieve the intended cleaning functionality. To mitigate this situation, we provide ALC-NG to comprehensively remove files, metadata, and comments that are not needed to compile a LaTeX paper. Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:58:00 -0400 https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.20927v1 oa.new oa.arxiv oa.preprints oa.latex oa.code oa.metadata oa.versions Abstract:  Introduction: As open access and APCs reshape scholarly publishing, and with the University of Kentucky Libraries opting out of large transformative agreements (TA), this study explores how affiliated corresponding authors navigate APCs in relation to their personal, disciplinary, and institutional values. Literature Review: The literature shows that faculty have mixed feelings about open access (OA) publishing, shaped by things like discipline, age, and concerns about quality and cost; but many are motivated by increased visibility and funder requirements, using a range of methods to cover APCs, from grants and institutional support to personal funds, with big differences across disciplines. Methods: This study investigated how University of Kentucky-affiliated corresponding authors manage Article Processing Charges (APCs) and their perspectives on OA publishing through surveys and eight semistructured interviews with 383 unique authors identified from Scopus data for 2023–2024 OA publications. Findings: Using Scopus to identify 383 University of Kentucky-affiliated corresponding authors of 2023– 2024 OA publications, this study explored how they manage APCs and view OA publishing through a survey and eight follow-up semistructured interviews. Discussion: The discussion highlights key aspects of APC-driven OA, including authors’ experiences with paying for APCs, journals flipping to Gold OA, and difficulty with peer review, while also showing that the University of Kentucky is already spending significant funds on APCs. Conclusion: This study reveals corresponding authors’ conflicting views on transformative agreements, valued for easing APC burdens but seen as exploitative, while exposing funding inequities at the University of Kentucky and underscoring the need for a more coordinated OA strategy. Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:57:00 -0400 https://www.iastatedigitalpress.com/jlsc/article/id/20329/ oa.new oa.fees oa.authors oa.case oa.offsets oa.attitudes oa.dei oa.economics_of Abstract:  Open Access (OA) has gained increasing importance across disciplines worldwide. The present study examines the research impact of Indian Library and Information Science (LIS) open access publications by analyzing the relationship between citation counts and Altmetric attention. Data were collected from the Scopus database, focusing on core LIS publications authored in India, resulting in a dataset of 122 open access articles. Citation data were retrieved from Scopus, while Altmetric Attention Scores were obtained from Dimensions.ai. Descriptive analyses of publication growth and OA routes were conducted using MS Excel and Tableau, and correlation analysis was performed using SPSS. This exploratory, context-specific study reveals a weak but statistically significant positive correlation between citations and Altmetric Attention Scores (r = 0.184, p = .042), suggesting that academic and societal impact metrics capture partially distinct dimensions of research influence within Indian LIS scholarship. The findings indicate that while citations reflect long-term scholarly recognition, Altmetrics capture broader online and social engagement. The study further highlights that core areas such as bibliometrics and digital libraries remain foundational, while emerging themes including artificial intelligence, sustainability, and traditional knowledge reflect the evolving academic and societal relevance of LIS research in India.   Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:44:00 -0400 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0361526X.2026.2647221 oa.new oa.impact oa.citations oa.altmetrics oa.metrics oa.lis oa.india oa.south Program for the online conference. "Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 28th Apr 2026, 07:41:32pm UTC." Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:42:00 -0400 https://www.conftool.net/or2026/index.php?page=browseSessions&presentations=show oa.new oa.events oa.repositories oa.green "The Open Science Community Maastricht and the Open Science Community Parkstad warmly invite researchers, educators, students, and anyone curious about Open Science to sign up for the Open Science Festival Limburg 2026. The festival takes place on 11 and 12 June 2026 and will bring our community together across two locations with activities in Heerlen (11 June) and Maastricht (12 June). Over two inspiring days, we’ll explore the theme of interdisciplinarity. Participants can look forward to workshops, keynote presentations, interactive sessions, and opportunities to connect with colleagues from both within and beyond the Open Science Community. Whether you’re looking to gain new insights, share your experiences, or simply connect with others who are passionate about Open Science, there will be plenty of opportunities to engage and exchange ideas. Register now for the Open Science Festival Limburg!" Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:42:00 -0400 https://www.openscience-maastricht.nl/events/open-science-festival-2026/ oa.new oa.events oa.open_science oa.germany "UKRI is entering the next phase of policy implementation (2026-30). The policy isn’t changing; we are changing how we support its delivery. We will continue our flexible, multi-route approach to immediate OA. Researchers will still be able to meet the policy requirement through journals, repositories (#GreenOA), and innovative models such as #DiamondOA. There is no single route that works for every discipline or institution, and that flexibility remains central. We are maintaining our investment in OA, including dedicated funding to research organisations which they can use flexibly to support publication and implementation costs, alongside direct support for shared infrastructure and services that benefit the wider system – such as Europe PMC.    Working with Jisc and the research sector, transitional agreements have played an important role in increasing OA and managing costs. Building on the progress made, we are now setting out a clear direction for the next stage of the transition. Funding will continue to support transitional agreements, but from 2028/29 UKRI funding will focus on fully OA publishing and will no longer be available for hybrid OA." Tue, 28 Apr 2026 06:13:00 -0400 https://www.linkedin.com/posts/uk-research-innovation_next-phase-of-open-access-at-ukri-activity-7454463005188210688-2nBk oa.new oa.ukri oa.uk oa.funders oa.policies oa.policies.funders oa.funding oa.fees oa.hybrid oa.offsets oa.implementation oa.green oa.funders oa.no-fee "SPARC is pleased to welcome April Clyburne-Sherin as a Senior Manager, Programs & Engagement. In this newly created position, she will play a central role in translating SPARC’s strategic direction into effective, responsive programs for members and the broader community. Clyburne-Sherin has been an open research consultant since 2017, working with a variety of clients including SPARC, CUNY, Code for Science and Society, Code Ocean, and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. At SPARC, she has helped develop member resources, support International Open Access Week, and organize a new community-building model for OpenCon." Tue, 28 Apr 2026 05:53:00 -0400 https://sparcopen.org/news/2026/april-clyburne-sherin-joins-sparc-team-as-the-senior-manager-programs-engagement/ oa.new oa.sparc oa.people "The Global Research Initiative on Open Science (GRIOS), hosted by the European Science Foundation (ESF), is pleased to announce the launch of its first open call for proposals to conduct in-depth evidence synthesis on key Open Science topics. Open Science holds great promise for making research more inclusive, transparent, and impactful. Yet while many funders, research organisations, and national and international authorities have adopted Open Science policies, implementing effective strategies remains challenging. Policymakers need a solid evidence base to guide their decisions — and that evidence is often lacking. GRIOS was established to address this gap. Its objectives are to synthesise existing knowledge on Open Science worldwide, formulate evidence-based policy recommendations, and propose a research agenda to fill current knowledge gaps. This call will fund evidence synthesis on two priority topics identified by GRIOS funders and its Academic Advisory Board: Incentives and research assessment — Which incentive schemes and assessment reforms increase the uptake of Open Science practices? Research data sharing — What factors influence the effectiveness of research data sharing policies?" Tue, 28 Apr 2026 05:47:00 -0400 https://www.grios.org/grios-launches-open-call-for-evidence-synthesis-on-open-science/ oa.new oa.grios oa.consultations oa.open_science oa.cft oa.incentives oa.assessment oa.data Diamond open access refers to publishing models in which neither reading nor publishing fees are charged. Diamond open access also places the question of the autonomy of science in the spotlight: the aspiration and the goal that publishing and the publication outlets are in the hands of the scientific community. This Helmholtz Open Science Online Seminar Putting Publishing Back Into the Hands of the Scientific Community – Diamond Open Access at Helmholtz and Beyond explores how science-led, open access journal publishing is practiced at Helmholtz and beyond: What does it take to publish a diamond open access journal? What are existing and emerging services and infrastructures on an institutional, national and international level? This event showcases concrete examples and current developments: the experience of an editor for a community-driven journal who is a Helmholtz researcher and scientific executive director, a scholar-led journal published at KIT, Germany's national service point for diamond open access (SeDOA) and the expansion of Open Research Europe as a European publishing platform soon to be hosted at CERN. [...]   Tue, 28 Apr 2026 01:07:00 -0400 https://os.helmholtz.de/en/events/online-seminars/72-online-seminar/ oa.new oa.events oa.publishing oa.no-fee oa.germany oa.helmholtz oa.academic_led Abstract:  Bronze OA is an under-researched facet of open access (OA) surrounded by many uncertainties regarding its causes and their individual significance. This study aims to reduce these uncertainties by providing an overview over the state of Bronze OA within Web of Science, and by investigating relationships between research fields, publishers, and their rates of Bronze OA. We analyze 3,943,511 Bronze OA publications registered in Web of Science since 2000, applying statistical analyses and heat maps. Our results show high occurrences of Bronze OA in biologic and medical fields, while arts & humanities, engineering sciences, physics, and chemistry comprise the lower end of the spectrum. Regarding publishers, large university presses and the BMJ Group stand out as heavy users of Bronze OA. Continuations of this study will semi-manually investigate article pages of Bronze OA publications to provide empirical evidence for the significance of different speculated reasons for the Bronze OA label.   Mon, 27 Apr 2026 09:56:00 -0400 https://metaror.org/article/the-state-of-bronze-open-access-in-web-of-science/ oa.new oa.bronze oa.copyright oa.licensing oa.wos oa.disciplines Abstract:  The evolving landscape of scholarly research communication continually necessitates innovative approaches to responsible research assessment and decision-making. At the forefront of this evolution, research librarians are uniquely positioned to empower Open Science initiatives by leveraging the OpenAIRE Graph. This presentation delves into the critical contributions of research librarians in shaping the OpenAIRE Graph as a pivotal resource for monitoring research impact beyond traditional bibliometric indicators. By adopting the OpenAIRE Graph, research libraries can champion the principles of openness and transparency, thereby providing Research Performing and Funding Organisations (RPOs and RFOs) with non-commercial, robust analytical tools. The OpenAIRE Graph, comprising over 242 million research products—of which 81 million are open access—serves as a comprehensive database enriched by contributions from the research community. This resource facilitates the identification of metadata schemas, reporting missing information, linking persistent identifiers, and guiding researchers towards trusted resources. The presentation will guide participants through the OpenAIRE ecosystem, highlighting how various services—such as OpenAIRE Provide, OpenCitations, OpenAPC, and OpenAIRE MONITOR—integrate with the Graph to offer extensive insights into research outputs and Open Science activities. These services enable dynamic data visualizations, monitor research impact, and support open access tracking at institutional and national levels. In conclusion, this presentation underscores the significance of research librarians in advancing Open Science policies through the OpenAIRE Graph. By illustrating the collaborative efforts of the community in curating and sustaining open tools, the presentation highlights the strategic role of libraries in navigating and nurturing the future of data services, fostering a culture of transparency and community-driven innovation. Mon, 27 Apr 2026 09:31:00 -0400 https://www.croris.hr/crosbi/publikacija/prilog-skup/939187 oa.new oa.open_science oa.assessment oa.openaire oa.libraries "We’re happy to share reports from three more projects strengthening the quality and sustainability of no-fee open access (OA) journals in Africa.  Together, the three projects strengthen a total of seven journals – five in Ghana and two in South Africa. The projects were among 17 in nine countries that were awarded grants in 2024 through the three-year project, ‘Collaboration for Sustainable Open Access Publishing in Africa', funded by Wellcome. The grants specifically target no-fee OA (also known as Diamond OA) journals and journal platforms. Diamond OA means that the journals do not charge any fees for publishing or reading articles.... ENHANCING JOURNAL MANAGEMENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF GHANA... THE AFRICAN JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION...   JOURNAL OF STUDENT AFFAIRS IN AFRICA..."   Mon, 27 Apr 2026 05:46:00 -0400 https://eifl.net/news/three-more-projects-advancing-no-fee-oa-journals-africa oa.new oa.no-fee oa.journals oa.africa oa.eifl oa.ghana oa.south_africa oa.south "Governments enable corporations to treat personal data as raw material for commercial extraction. But if sensitive open data has economic value, we should recognize the economic rights of the people from whom it is collected.... In March 2025, the European Union published the European Health Data Space (EHDS) regulation, creating a legal framework that will make the electronic health records of roughly 450 million residents available for secondary use by March 2029, including commercial product development, pharmaceutical research, and AI training (Regulation (EU) 2025/327, 2025). The system defaults to inclusion: citizens must opt out, and, currently, the opt-out is all-or-nothing, making no distinction between academic research and commercial pharmaceutical development. Seventeen leading scholars have warned that the framework risks enabling corporations to extract value from population health data without equitable benefit-sharing, producing a system where citizens bear both the data burden and the cost of products developed from it (Marelli et al., 2023). That is, the EHDS does not merely regulate existing sensitive open data. Rather, it creates a new category where governments convert private health records into commercially accessible information through legislative mandate. This is the commodification of sensitive open data in real time." Sun, 26 Apr 2026 10:28:00 -0400 https://katinamagazine.org/content/article/open-knowledge/2026/the-commodification-of-sensitive-open-data oa.new oa.data oa.privacy oa.economics_of oa.fair oa.care Abstract:  Current incentives for researchers place a strong emphasis on journal publications, with the number and perceived prestige of journal articles contributing to researchers' competitiveness for jobs, promotions, and funding. Meanwhile, business models and the reputation of journals depend on selecting these research articles for exclusive publication. While journal peer review helps to validate and improve research reporting, researcher and journal incentives that tie journal peer review to editorial selection of articles can also work against the timely and authentic communication of research findings.  To realign incentives in scientific publishing with what matters most — advancing trustworthy, impactful scientific knowledge — we propose a framework that prioritizes researcher-shared outputs over journal-shared outputs. Researchers would be evaluated based on what they choose to share, for example as preprints, not what journals select. Journals and related service providers would be compensated for two distinct services, which should be functionally and financially separated: (1) author-facing appraisal, which reviews and improves researcher-shared outputs, and (2) reader-facing curation, which highlights these outputs for journal audiences. These service boundaries are transitional by design, expected to shift as transparent peer review practices and AI tools mature. By anchoring researcher evaluation in researcher-shared outputs and journal business models in service execution instead of exclusivity, this framework fosters more inclusive, transparent, and efficient assessment of scientific work, while ensuring that journals are appropriately compensated for the value that they add.  Sun, 26 Apr 2026 10:04:00 -0400 https://zenodo.org/records/19600714 oa.new oa.incentives oa.medicine oa.biology oa.biomedicine oa.peer_review oa.speed oa.assessment oa.preprints oa.ai oa.business_models oa.journals oa.versions Abstract:  Introduction Open sharing of research methods and software code is fundamental to open science principles and reproducible research practices and has long been the norm in some scientific disciplines. Increasingly, scientific publishers are introducing policies to encourage or mandate sharing of research protocols and analytical code. Code sharing is especially important when research data cannot be shared, as is often the case in research using population data. However, the prevalence of protocol and code sharing in population data science research has been underexplored. Objectives To assess open science practice usage by authors in real world evidence (RWE) research published in the International Journal of Population Data Science (IJPDS). Method We reviewed RWE research articles publishing estimates of associations in the IJPDS from January 2019 to October 2024. We determined the proportion of published articles reporting (i) a link to a study protocol, (ii) a link to a pre-registered study protocol, (iii) a statement about the availability of the data, (iv) a link to the analytical code, and (iv) reference to a reporting checklist or guideline. Results None of the 41 eligible articles met all five open science domains. One article included a link to the study protocol and none cited a pre-registered protocol. Fourteen (34%) articles included a statement about data availability. No articles included a link to the analytical code, although one included it in supplementary material and two indicated availability on request. Five (12%) articles referred to using a reporting checklist. There was no clear evidence of increasing adoption of open science practices over time. Conclusions Researcher alignment with international best practice for open science was poor among RWE articles published in IJPDS. Potential solutions to encourage an open science culture include increasing awareness through training and education, building Communities of Practice, providing incentives and implementing open science publication policies. Sun, 26 Apr 2026 05:38:00 -0400 https://ijpds.org/article/view/2960 oa.new oa.open_science oa.practices oa.empirical oa.code oa.data oa.recommendations oa.training Abstract:  Background Open Access (OA) agreements were introduced to remove financial barriers to scientific dissemination and promote equity in knowledge access. As Article Processing Charges (APCs) have shifted from individual researchers to institutions, access to OA publishing has become an institutional asset, unevenly distributed across institutions, countries, and career stages. Purpose This article introduces and defines value extraction in OA — the use of access to APC coverage as leverage to obtain authorship or corresponding authorship without proportional intellectual contribution — and examines it as a structurally enabled integrity risk distinct from previously described forms of authorship abuse. Approach We conduct a conceptual and normative analysis of the mechanisms by which OA agreements interact with metric-driven academic evaluation systems and existing research integrity frameworks, identifying governance gaps and distributional inequities produced by these interactions. Findings Value extraction in OA is enabled by the convergence of three factors: centralized APC control within institutions, performance metrics that privilege publication counts and corresponding authorship, and integrity frameworks that treat publishing infrastructure as an ethically neutral background condition. Researchers at less-resourced institutions, early-career researchers, and scholars in the Global South face heightened vulnerability. Existing authorship guidelines fail to address mechanisms in which infrastructural access — rather than hierarchy or prestige — functions as leverage for academic credit. Conclusions Safeguards are needed at institutional, publisher, and systemic levels, including procedural firewalls between APC decisions and authorship documentation, publisher-level monitoring of authorship patterns, and reform of evaluation frameworks to decouple infrastructural access from academic credit. Future research should investigate the prevalence of value extraction using bibliometric and network-based screening approaches. Sun, 26 Apr 2026 05:36:00 -0400 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08989621.2026.2661668 oa.new oa.offsets oa.misconduct oa.risks oa.economics_of oa.fees oa.assessment oa.integrity oa.authors oa.metrics oa.ecr oa.south oa.recommendations Abstract:  Purpose: This study maps the intellectual and thematic evolution of research on digital publishing and open access (OA) in Library and Information Science (LIS) between 2020 and 2025, identifying major trends, influential contributors, and emerging frontiers. Methods: A bibliometric and science-mapping analysis was conducted on 1849 publications indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection. Performance indicators captured productivity and citation patterns, while science mapping examined co-authorship, co-citation, and keyword co-occurrence networks. Results: Publications show steady growth, peaking in 2024, with the United States, China, and the United Kingdom as leading contributors. A core–periphery authorship structure is anchored by prolific scholars such as Abrizah A, Xu J, Jamali HR, and Nicholas D. Highly cited works in JASIST, Journal of Academic Librarianship, and Library Hi Tech form the intellectual backbone of the field. Thematic mapping reveals continuity in topics such as academic libraries and scholarly communication, alongside newer themes including artificial intelligence, equity, and open science. COVID-19 temporarily reshaped research dynamics (2020–2022), highlighting the community’s responsiveness to global disruptions. Implications: The study deepens understanding of LIS research dynamics within Web of Science–indexed venues and offers guidance for libraries, policymakers, and publishers. It highlights the need to foster context-sensitive OA models, support more equitable participation in APC-driven environments, and integrate technological innovation into scholarly communication infrastructures. Sun, 26 Apr 2026 05:33:00 -0400 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/01655515261442148 oa.new oa.lis oa.dei oa.business_models oa.fees oa.scholcomm oa.infrastructure "U.S. President Donald Trump yesterday fired all 24 members of the National Science Board (NSB), the body that oversees the National Science Foundation (NSF). Many science advocates see it as the latest step by his administration to erode—some would say destroy—the independence of the 76-year-old research agency." Sun, 26 Apr 2026 05:26:00 -0400 https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-fires-nsf-s-oversight-board oa.new oa.usa oa.trump47 oa.negative oa.nsf oa.usa.nsf "In Spain, a signatory to the San Francisco Declaration7 and the commitment to open science with the Hong Kong Principles,8 for free access to researchers’ publications, both the Law on Science, Technology and Innovation,9 the Organic Law of the University System,10 and the criteria of the National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA) for the evaluation of university professors and researchers in general 11 make a firm commitment to free and open science, declaring that scientific knowledge will be considered a public good with open access. To this end, they oblige teaching and research staff to deposit a copy of the final version of the work accepted for publication (“pre-print”) and the associated data in open access institutional or thematic repositories, which must follow the FAIR principles (data that is Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable), at the same time as the publication date, without prejudice to their deposit in other repositories. The Organic Law of the University System (LOSU) even provides for additional funding depending on the fulfilment of strategic objectives, including these open science and citizen science programmes.10 Institutional repositories are indexed in “RECOLECTA”12 (Open Science Collector), which brings together all Spanish digital infrastructures in which open access research results are published or deposited. ANECA attaches particular importance to publication in open access journals and platforms that do not charge authors or readers any fees (“diamond open access” model), as well as platforms for the publication of research results such as Open Research Europe or others promoted by different funding agencies." Sun, 26 Apr 2026 05:16:00 -0400 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1888441525000657 oa.new oa.spain oa.policies oa.gold oa.fees oa.no-fee oa.green oa.fair oa.repositories Abstract:  The field needs your data. Despite rapid progress in reproductive proteomics, a major barrier to scientific advancement remains the limited availability and transparency of proteomic datasets. Although more than 2000 sperm proteomics studies are indexed on PubMed, fewer than 414 datasets have been deposited in ProteomeXchange, leaving the majority of published findings effectively inaccessible for reanalysis. This Viewpoint highlights the urgent need for improved data stewardship, standardised quality control and open access to raw mass spectrometry files across reproductive biology. In this article, I outline how transparent false discovery rate control, true biological replication and clearly defined quantitative thresholds are essential for generating robust and interpretable proteomic outputs. I further discuss how interactive data platforms, such as ShinyApps, can substantially improve the accessibility and usability of these complex reproductive proteomic datasets. Using recent examples, I demonstrate how public data reanalysis can uncover species-conserved pathways, improve proteome coverage, validate biological functions and enable new discoveries and insights far beyond the aims of the original studies. Finally, I present a practical roadmap for authors, reviewers and journals to ensure that reproductive proteomics embraces the FAIR data principles, and moves towards a culture where sharing raw data, comprehensive metadata and interactive applications becomes standard practice. To support implementation, a concise checklist is provided to summarise key criteria for data availability, quality control and metadata reporting. Improving data accessibility and quality will not only strengthen individual studies, but will accelerate discovery and create a more robust, connected and future-proof foundation for reproductive biology.     Sun, 26 Apr 2026 05:06:00 -0400 https://connectsci.au/rd/article/38/7/RD26034/272101/Your-field-needs-your-data-Raising-the-standard-of oa.new oa.data oa.medicine oa.obstacles oa.quality oa.recommendations oa.metadata oa.biology Abstract:  Crucial aspects of reproducible, replicable and reusable science include the responsiveness of study authors for clarifications and the availability of research data and analysis results. Getting in contact with authors and obtaining information or results is, however, not always straight-forward. Here we report and discuss the issues and obstacles we faced when contacting authors of scientific papers with such requests. Our investigation rests on the results of a retrospective quantitative analysis of research data requests sent to authors of neuroimaging studies for a series of meta-analyses. Overall, only 52% of the requests received a reply, and only 29% contributed data or information that was relevant for the respective meta-analysis. Obtaining a response was less likely if (i) the request was sent to the contact e-mail address provided in the publication, (ii) behavioral data was requested, (iii) reminders had to be sent, or (iv) there was no personal acquaintance with the contacted author. As expected, obtaining unpublished data or information from older publications was significantly more difficult than for more recent ones. We discuss possible reasons for the observed low response rates and limited sharing of information and conclude our account by providing suggestions to improve open-science practices and by pointing to a need for change in the academic system to foster better research data management for transparency and efficient reuse of results.   Sun, 26 Apr 2026 04:58:00 -0400 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763426001508 oa.new oa.data oa.negative oa.compliance oa.recommendations oa.open_science Abstract:  The current scientific ecosystem is characterized by a systemic crisis driven by the Publish or Perish culture and an exponential growth in publication volumes that outpaces the number of active researchers. Here, we highlight the limitations of traditional bibliometric indicators, such as the Impact Factor and H-index, which have become targets for manipulation and enable inflationary business models, including the proliferation of special issues. To address these distortions, we explore the transformative potential of Open Science and the adoption of FAIR data principles to move from a model based on blind trust to one rooted in verifiability. Furthermore, we examine innovative evaluation frameworks, such as the independent peer review model, and the integration of artificial intelligence through Technology Assisted Research Assessment (TARA), emphasizing that human judgment must remain central to ensuring research integrity. Ultimately, the transition from quantitative metrics to qualitative assessment is an ethical duty necessary to safeguard the credibility of oncological research and the quality of patient care. Sun, 26 Apr 2026 04:49:00 -0400 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03008916261441119 oa.new oa.quality oa.assessment oa.open_science oa.trust oa.ai oa.metrics oa.medicine "As a researcher, I grew up in a very competitive field. I didn't feel like passing this on to a new generation" Turning the Tide: Stories of Open Science features seven people with different roles in academia. They talk about their journey to working more openly, and their personal turning points and motivation. This film aims to empower others to also start their journey, which might be feeling like going against the tide. But maybe you are riding a new wave, together with more and more of your peers? Feel free to share! A big thank you to all who shared their story: Iris Smal, Sander Bosch, Ana Martinovici, Thamyres Choji, Yunhai Yi-Twisk, Lukas Struck and Chris Hartgerink This short film was created during the Open Science Retreat in Schoorl, the Netherlands, March 2026. It was amazing to be able to create this in just three days! The team: Arthur Thives Mello, Jazelle Maira Carillo,Nami Sunami, Mathijs van Woerkum, Melanie Imming and Zafer Ozturk The Open Science Retreat was organised by the Open Science Communities NL, the Digital Research Academy and Imming Impact. We thank Open Science NL and Zon MW for funding this event! This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 license: Turning the Tide Team Sat, 25 Apr 2026 09:32:00 -0400 https://video.edu.nl/w/2xfukHs4FUbM7U71MttgQ3 oa.new oa.netherlands oa.europe oa.attitudes oa.universities oa.open_science oa.anecdotes oa.video From DeepL's English: Documentation and data collected as part of the project ‘From baseline measurement to embedding: Recognising & Valuing Open Science within Dutch religious universities’. The aim of the project is to produce policy advice and an implementation plan for incorporating Open Science (OS) into recruitment and development policy, whilst allowing scope for individual interpretation within the separate institutions. The project includes, amongst other things, an assessment of the current situation within these institutions and of proven practical examples. (16 April 2026). Sat, 25 Apr 2026 09:25:00 -0400 https://dataverse.nl/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.34894/84EJGH oa.new oa.netherlands oa.europe oa.open_science oa.universities oa.religion oa.attitudes oa.surveys oa.dutch From DeepL's English: Presentation of the findings of the project ‘From baseline assessment to embedding: Recognising & Valuing Open Science within the Dutch philosophical universities’ at the second Open Science afternoon organised by the Dutch philosophical universities (NLU) in Utrecht on 16 April 2026. The aim of the project was to develop policy advice and an implementation plan for incorporating Open Science (OS) into the recruitment and development policies of the four institutions. The presentation includes an assessment of the current situation within these institutions and a recommendation of five best practices. The project was funded by NWO, as part of the research programme ‘Recognising and Valuing Open Science’, file number 500.070.2410 and Grant ID https://doi.org/10.61686/RKZCN04980. Sat, 25 Apr 2026 09:22:00 -0400 https://zenodo.org/records/19705858 oa.new oa.netherlands oa.europe oa.universities oa.policy oa.open_science oa.presentations oa.religion oa.dutch Abstract:   Background This study examines the practical implementation of the Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment within the National Research Council of Italy by analysing the 2023 competitive procedures for the career progression of researchers and technologists. As the institution formally adopted the reform to shift towards a more responsible and qualitative evaluation framework, this research investigates the extent to which these high-level commitments were applied within the calls by the individual evaluation committees. Methods A systematic qualitative and quantitative analysis was conducted on 4,090 evaluation criteria established by 90 independent evaluation committees. The criteria were examined to assess their alignment with the four core commitments of the Agreement and the inclusion of Open Science principles. Results Results indicate a significant gap between institutional policy and actual practice: most committees do not fully recognise the diversity of research contributions, often undervaluing or excluding non-traditional outputs, such as teaching and evaluation activities, or public and policy engagement. Quantitative and mechanical metrics continue to be widely used in researcher evaluations, with journal-based indicators often used to assess research quality. Regarding Open Science practices, they appeared only sporadically in the assessed criteria. Conclusions These findings suggest that traditional evaluation practices persist at the committee level, despite formal institutional reform. The study highlights that high-level policy adoption alone is insufficient without robust guidance to operationalise reform principles during the assessment process. This research provides insights into the challenges of transitioning from policy to practice in research assessment within a large, multidisciplinary Research Performing Organisation. Fri, 24 Apr 2026 07:25:00 -0400 https://open-research-europe.ec.europa.eu/articles/6-127 oa.new oa.assessment oa.open_science oa.italy oa.metrics "'Open' practices (open access, open infrastructure, open science, and related initiatives) are increasingly central to how universities advance their core missions in research, teaching, and public service. While libraries are often leaders in the “open” space, cross-campus collaboration is essential to support openness as a shared institutional asset and a foundation for sustainable, impactful scholarship. This webinar will provide an overview of why “open” matters beyond the library, with perspectives from research administrators and librarians at three public universities. We’ll hear how universities are supporting institutional priorities, such as research integrity, scholarly impact, policy compliance, and trust, through partnerships on “open” initiatives." Fri, 24 Apr 2026 07:19:00 -0400 https://lyrasis.aviaryplatform.com/collections/3594/collection_resources/168864 oa.new oa.events oa.video oa.presentations oa.universities oa.lyrasis Abstract:  Evidence-based solutions are needed to help improve reproducibility in research. This Consensus View presents a consensus-based list of core reproducibility items for research that has been developed by a multidisciplinary group interested in research, open science, and reproducibility. The set of minimum requirements presented here outlines core expectations regarding planning, methods, data collection, management and analysis, and dissemination. This tool aims to improve the reproducibility of methods and results throughout all phases of the research process and, more generally, to promote a broader cultural shift toward transparent, reliable research.   Fri, 24 Apr 2026 06:24:00 -0400 https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3003726 oa.new oa.reproducibility oa.open_science oa.data oa.reuse oa.recommendations oa.best_practices "Join experts from around the globe for a dialogue about the need to ensure equitable access to public domain heritage in the digital environment as a means to address global challenges. This event aims to stimulate a conversation on how open access to heritage contributes to six key themes: education for all, climate science, social inclusion, ethical AI, sustainable development, and cultural and linguistic diversity." Fri, 24 Apr 2026 05:54:00 -0400 https://openheritagestatement.org/dialogue oa.new oa.events oa.ch oa.climate oa.dei oa.ai oa.development "Open Government data is a cornerstone of transparency, productivity, accountability, and evidence-based policymaking in the United States (US) and abroad. Open Government data enables researchers, journalists, policymakers, and the public to monitor government performance, accelerate discovery, evaluate programs, and safeguard democratic institutions. These data represent an important, non-excludable and non-rivalrous, public good. Yet over the past decade, open government data has faced growing threats, including program disruption from funding shortfalls, political interference, and an erosion of trust government.In the last year alone political interference led to the manipulation, suppression, or outright removal of federal data assets on topics ranging from climate change, to economics, to LGBTQ+ issues, to public health. This interference threatens to undermine public trust in federal data by limiting the ability of civil society to hold government accountable, eroding the trust businesses hold in federal statistical data, and revoking access to one-of-a-kind data resources to researchers for innovation and discovery.This report provides an analysis of the integrity of public access to federal open government data assets during the disruptions to the federal data ecosystem during 2025 and early 2026. Here, data integrity is defined as the “maintenance of, and the assurance of, data accuracy and consistency over its entire life-cycle”, of which public access to open government data assets is assumed to be essential. The report clarifies the scale and mechanisms of data disruptions, discusses specific threats to data integrity, highlights exemplar cases of data disruption from federal agencies, and delivers a transparent methodology for reproducing auditing routines used in this assessment. The evidence used in this report was derived from multiple sources, including news reports, academic literature, materials from civic society and government oversight organizations, interviews with experts, archives, and government sources." Fri, 24 Apr 2026 05:18:00 -0400 https://zenodo.org/records/19556076 oa.new oa.usa oa.data oa.preservation oa.censorship oa.takedowns oa.risks oa.funding oa.trump47 oa.negative "What does “prestige” really mean in scholarly book publishing, and who gets to define it? How does the value placed on the “prestige” of a press impact new publishers, many of which are forming in order to publish open access work? For many researchers, authors, libraries, and funders, prestige is still closely tied to long‑established academic presses. These presses often carry decades, sometimes centuries, of reputation. Yet alongside them exists a growing group of born open access (OA) book publishers. These presses were founded with openness at their core, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed, carefully edited and produced books that are fully open access from the outset rather than transitioning from closed models later on. However, they lack the prestigious reputations of their more established counterparts. How do they balance their newness and fresh perspectives with the challenge of building a reputation in academic publishing? Our new Born Open blog series shines a spotlight on these presses, their work, and their role in reshaping how we think about quality, impact, and prestige in scholarly book publishing." Thu, 23 Apr 2026 10:28:00 -0400 https://openaccessbooksnetwork.hcommons.org/2026/04/23/introducing-our-new-blog-series-born-open-rethinking-prestige-in-scholarly-book-publishing/ oa.new oa.books oa.prestige "Interested in learning about one of the most exciting innovations in scholarly publishing in decades? One that is built on a foundation of repositories? COAR members and partners are invited to a webinar that will showcase the Publish, Review, Curate model of scholarly publishing." Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:47:00 -0400 https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/pRazB9ydQsqkwkkKZceKZQ oa.new oa.events oa.coar oa.prc oa.open_peer_review oa.repositories oa.green Abstract:  As part of an effort to seek sustainable support models for Open Access (OA) publishing, the University of Maryland, Baltimore (UMB), Health Sciences and Human Services Library’s (HSHSL’s) Scholarly Communications Committee developed an interactive dashboard to visualize university-wide OA publishing trends. Using publication data exported from Scopus and visualized in Microsoft Power BI, the dashboard displays five years of publishing trends by OA model, publisher, journal, school, and citation count. The dashboard is fully interactive, allowing users to filter results based on school, OA model, and year.  The design of the dashboard was iterative, with planning discussions taking place in Summer 2024, data model development and initial data collection in Fall 2024, refining of the visualization and data model in early Spring 2025, and the publication of the final dashboard to our website in April 2025. The dashboard continues to be refined and improved based on feedback from stakeholders, and the project team plans to incorporate data on publishing costs in Spring 2026.  The project was designed for sustainability and adaptability, with a documented workflow that will be easy for future committees to implement. This innovative, replicable approach supports informed decision-making around OA publishing and provides a model that can be adopted by other academic health sciences libraries. Thu, 23 Apr 2026 07:26:00 -0400 https://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/2340 oa.new oa.tools oa.interactivity oa.visualizations oa.publishing oa.trends oa.universities oa.monitoring oa.medicine oa.libraries oa.u.maryland Abstract:  Background: Preprints—scientific manuscripts shared publicly prior to formal peer review—are gaining momentum across academic disciplines. However, their adoption in clinical and biomedical sciences remains limited, particularly in countries where traditional publishing norms prevail. Editorial ambiguity and a lack of national policy further complicate their use. Objective:This study aimed to assess the awareness, experiences, and attitudes of medical academics at Marmara University School of Medicine toward preprints and to explore the editorial landscape through both journal editor feedback and a review of journal-level preprint policies. Methods:A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 103 medical faculty members. The questionnaire included demographic questions, Likert scale items, and multiple-choice items assessing knowledge, familiarity, and attitudes toward preprints, as well as open-ended items to explore concerns. A “preprint test score” (0‐4) was developed to quantify objective knowledge. Subgroup analyses were conducted by age (<40 vs ≥40 y) and academic discipline (basic vs clinical sciences). Additionally, all responses to open-ended questions from journal editors and 118 biomedical journals were manually reviewed for their stated stance on preprints and article processing charges (APCs). A convergent mixed methods design was used, combining a structured survey, thematic analysis of open-ended responses and editorial feedback, and a document-based review of biomedical journal policies. Results:Only 42.9% (n=34) of participants reported familiarity with the concept of preprints, and 13% (n=10) had previously published on a preprint server. Misconceptions about ethics, peer review, and compatibility with journal policies were common. Subgroup analysis revealed that older participants scored higher on the “preprint test” (mean 2.20, SD 1.31 vs mean 1.97, SD 1.60) and had more experience with preprint publishing (1/40, 2.5% of younger participants; 7/29, 24.1% of older participants). Further, younger academics expressed less openness toward future use (n=7, 17.5% in the younger group; n=8, 27.6% in the older group). Clinical faculty were generally more hesitant than basic science faculty, although both groups raised concerns about the academic recognition of preprints. Editorial responses reflected a mix of cautious endorsement and skepticism. Among the 118 biomedical journals reviewed, most lacked clear preprint policies, while a small number either explicitly prohibited or permitted them. Conclusions:There is limited awareness and cautious engagement with preprints among medical academics and editors in Türkiye. Generational and discipline-based differences further influence knowledge and attitudes. The lack of clear editorial guidance from biomedical journals may reinforce academic uncertainty. Tailored educational initiatives, transparent journal policies, and institutional support will be essential to foster a more open and inclusive scientific publishing environment. Thu, 23 Apr 2026 05:56:00 -0400 https://xmed.jmir.org/2026/1/e78139 oa.new oa.preprints oa.medicine oa.unfamiliarity oa.attitudes oa.surveys oa.versions "The Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) has announced a major milestone in the development of open access (OA) publishing across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, with the publication of its 100,000th open access article through a consortium agreement. CAUL first established OA agreements with two small publishers in 2020 and has since expanded significantly. Its portfolio now includes 26 publishers, spanning small society presses through to some of the world’s largest academic publishing platforms." Wed, 22 Apr 2026 12:00:00 -0400 https://www.researchinformation.info/news/caul-marks-100000-open-access-articles-across-australasia/ oa.new oa.caul oa.australia oa.offsets oa.fees oa.economics_of oa.growth oa.australasia Abstract   Introduction: Institutional repositories (IRs) support the Open Access (OA) transformation and are a key cornerstone for publishing and accessing scholarly information. Currently, they undergo changes and are required to transition to a modern information infrastructure. This study surveys the challenges of this transition for IRs in Germany from the perspective of library and information science. Methods: For this study, we conducted 15 expert interviews with repository managers from the German IR community who are employed at academic libraries. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The sample of interviewees was compiled using a standardized list and the method of purposeful sampling.  Results: We identified five core challenges: Preprints in IRs as means of rapid scholarly communication, the possibilities of effective information management through IRs and current research information systems (CRIS), self-archiving in IRs and the green OA route, the importance of collaborating text and data repositories for Open Science, and the challenges associated with monitoring publication output and costs through IRs. Discussion: We discussed the five core challenges regarding recent developments within the library and repository community, such as the Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information, a recent policy-based attempt to harmonize secondary publication rights in Europe, or community projects aimed at providing transparency to publication costs in higher education. Conclusion: IRs’ core mission is to publish, reference, and monitor scholarly output. In doing so, they face challenges that require concerted action by the scholarly and library community in four areas: Providing responsible policies, ensuring demand-based standardization, implementing interoperable IR technology, and establishing resilient workflows.   Keywords: Open Access, repositories, Germany, challenges, innovation How to Cite: Wrzesinski, M., Pampel, H., Rothfritz, L. & Khamis, C.O. (2026). Challenges and Chances for Innovation for the Institutional Repository Landscape in Germany: Results from an Interview Study. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 14(1), eP19047. https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.19047 Wed, 22 Apr 2026 10:25:00 -0400 https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.19047 oa.new oa.repositories oa.germany "PKP is now going a step further to help address the integrity and transparency challenges faced by the entire industry – from journals in the long tail to those published by big commercial publishers – with the introduction of the Publication Facts Label (PFL). Modeled on the widely-used Nutrition Facts label, its goal is to quickly and easily share facts about a research article with whoever is reading it, whether that’s another researcher, a journalist, a policy-maker, a member of the public, or anyone else. The label appears as a dropdown on the article landing page and, rather than providing a value judgement on the content of the article, instead it delivers facts about the article’s adherence to well-established scholarly publishing standards. This includes things like the number of reviewers, the time to publication, whether there are any conflicts of interest or datasets connected with the article, and more (see Figure 1). All the data in the label is pulled directly from the publishing system, which helps to guarantee its validity, and raises the bar on preventing hacking." Wed, 22 Apr 2026 09:51:00 -0400 https://blog.doaj.org/2026/04/22/introducing-the-publication-facts-label-another-tool-in-your-research-integrity-toolkit/ oa.new oa.doaj oa.pk oa.tools oa.ojs oa.integrity "A Dutch foundation that campaigns to prevent smoking among young people is of the view that filter cigarettes offered to consumers in the Netherlands do not comply with the maximum emission levels for tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide. Those levels are established in an EU directive which refers to measurement methods laid down in international standards (ISO). The standards have not been published in the Official Journal of the European Union. In its judgment, the Court of Justice confirms that the foundation must be able to verify whether cigarettes comply with the emission levels, in the light of the measurement methods prescribed by the ISO standards referred to in the directive. Such access must be free, that is to say, it must be general, effective, without charge and non-discriminatory." Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:59:00 -0400 https://curia.europa.eu/site/upload/docs/application/pdf/2026-04/cp260060en.pdf oa.new oa.litigation oa.netherlands oa.law Thanks to a generous gift of materials from the Wolf Law Library at the William & Mary Law School, and the Internet Archive’s mission to digitize and provide universal access to knowledge, we are pleased to share more than 125,000 U.S. Supreme Court records and briefs. These materials which span nearly two centuries of American law are now freely accessible online.  Tue, 21 Apr 2026 14:46:00 -0400 https://blog.archive.org/2026/04/20/u-s-supreme-court-records-and-briefs-the-arguments-that-shaped-america-now-freely-available/ oa.new oa.internet_archive oa.usa oa.law oa.preservation "De Gruyter Brill confirms that all 124 journals in its Subscribe to Open program, DG2O, publish open access in 2026. Following the annual evaluation, every participating title met its renewal threshold, marking the sixth consecutive year in which the entire program has opened successfully. The result means that over 4,000 research articles will be freely available to readers worldwide this year, at no cost to authors. With 124 De Gruyter journals now publishing open access, DG2O is the largest Subscribe to Open program of any individual publisher in the world. The program spans journals across the humanities, social sciences, and sciences, and includes titles from many subject areas where traditional author-fee-based open access models have long been difficult to implement. 2026 marks a significant milestone for the program. Following the addition of 66 new titles in January, more than half of De Gruyter's journal portfolio now publishes open access." Tue, 21 Apr 2026 11:55:00 -0400 https://www.degruyterbrill.com/publishing/about-us/news-insights/press-releases/124-de-gruyter-brill-journals-publishing-open-access-in-2026-via-subscribe-to-open oa.new oa.de_gruyter_brill oa.journals oa.conversions oa.subscribe_to_open