Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[SOAN] SPARC Open Access Newsletter, 1/2/10

Expand Messages
  • Sam Vaknin author of "Malignant Self-love
    The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #141 January 2, 2010 by Peter Suber Read this issue online http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/01-02-10.htm
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 3, 2010
      The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #141
      January 2, 2010
      by Peter Suber

      Read this issue online


      SOAN is published and sponsored by the Scholarly
      Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC).

      Additional support is provided by Data Conversion
      Laboratory (DCL), experts in converting research documents to XML.


      Open access in 2009

      2009 was Open Access Year in the Netherlands, but
      it might have been Open Access Year
      worldwide. The growth on every front was
      extraordinary. In this review of the highlights,
      I won't cover individual new OA journals,
      repositories, or databases; and like last year,
      the volume has forced me to omit most new
      developments in open education, public-sector
      information (PSI), and wikis. Last year I had a
      special section on OA to humanities research, but
      this year I cut that as well to make room for a
      section on the recession. As always, apologies
      to the many projects I had to omit.

      If you're in a hurry, jump to Section 10 for some highlights of the

      BTW, if you track these things, March 31 was OA
      Day in Copenhagen, and October 19-23 was OA Week worldwide.

      (1) Open access policies at funding agencies

      Five Canadian funding agencies adopted OA
      mandates in 2009, the most for any country. One
      was a private funder, the Michael Smith
      Foundation for Health Research. One was a
      public-private partnership: The Canadian Breast
      Cancer Research Alliance, which strengthened its
      existing OA policy from a request to a
      requirement. Three were public agencies: the
      Fonds de la recherche en santé du Québec, the
      Canadian Health Services Research Foundation ,
      and the Canadian Cancer Society. (The CCS
      mandate was adopted without fanfare when the
      Society absorbed the the National Cancer
      Institute of Canada and adopted the NCIC's OA mandate as its own).

      Two public agencies in the US adopted OA
      mandates: the Institute of Education Sciences
      (IES), within in the Department of Education, and
      the National Center for Atmospheric Research
      (NCAR), a federally funded lab sponsored by the National Science Foundation.

      The UK Engineering & Physical Sciences Research
      Council was the seventh of the seven Research
      Councils UK to adopt an OA mandate. New OA
      mandates were also adopted by the Chinese Academy
      of Sciences, Hungarian Scientific Research Fund,
      the Norwegian Research Council, Swedish Research
      Council, the Spanish principality of Asturias,
      and the International Crops Research Institute
      for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT). Lithuania
      adopted a new law requiring that publicly-funded
      research be "made public" online. That comes to
      15 new funder mandates in ten countries.

      We could easily add the Science Foundation
      Ireland to this list, since its OA mandate,
      adopted in 2008, took effect in 2009. Also in
      2009, Ukraine started to implement the national
      OA mandate it adopted in 2007. The Autonomous
      Community Government of Madrid extended its 2008
      mandate from selected research projects to all Madrid-funded research.

      OA mandates are known to be under consideration
      at the Irish Research Council for Humanities and
      Social Sciences, the UK Department for
      International Development (DFID), Denmark's
      Electronic Research Library (DEFF), Poland's
      Ministry of Science and Higher Education, the
      Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, the
      Yemen parliament, and the US Senate (more on latter below).

      There are already a few Europe-wide OA mandates,
      for example from the European Research Council
      (2007) and the European Commission's FP7 pilot
      project (2008). In 2009 the EC showed that it
      wants to continue in the same direction. In a
      report on e-science infrastructure, it promised
      "reinforce [its] catalytic investment under FP7
      in scientific data infrastructure, to support
      accessibility...policies." Later in the year it
      charged a session on OA at an EC-hosted
      conference (European Research Area Conference
      2009, Brussels, October 21-23, 2009) "to come up
      with recommendations for policies on Open Access
      that the Commission can take forward."

      The European Science Foundation (ESF) and the
      European Heads of Research Councils (EuroHORCs)
      plan to issue a joint OA mandate. The ESF
      represents 80 member organizations in 30 European
      countries and EuroHORCs represents all the major
      public funding agencies in 24 European
      countries. If endorsements of mandatory OA from
      ESF and EuroHORCs incline even half their members
      to adopt mandates, that would more than double
      the number of funder OA mandates in the world. Something to watch.

      Similarly, a group of high-profile public and
      private funders sponsored a study that
      recommended green libre OA mandates for medical
      research. The co-sponsors, convened by US
      Institute of Medicine, included the Gates
      Foundation, Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Merck
      Company Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, and
      three cabinet-level departments in the US. This
      doesn't mean that the sponsoring organizations
      will adopt mandates of their own, but it means
      that they have heard the argument and have some investment in it.

      A diverse group of funding agencies launched OA
      repositories in 2009, some in response to
      existing OA mandates and some as likely
      harbingers of mandates to come. After much
      anticipation, PubMed Central Canada launched as a
      joint project of the Canada Institute for
      Scientific and Technical Information (NRC-CISTI),
      the Canadian Institutes of Health Research
      (CIHR), and the US National Library of Medicine
      (NLM). The NLM also launched Rapid Research
      Notes (RRN), an OA repository to speed up the
      dissemination of new results. The Christie NHS
      Foundation Trust launched an IR, the first OA
      repository within the UK National Health
      Service. The UK Department for International
      Development (DFID) launched an institutional
      repository, R4D (Research for Development), as
      did France's Office National de l'Eau et des
      Milieux Aquatiques (ONEMA) and Singapore's Agency
      for Science, Technology and Research
      (A*STAR). The Indian Academy of Sciences plans
      to launch an institutional repository and a adopt a policy to fill it.

      If studying the feasibility of an institutional
      repository is a sign that a funding agency is
      contemplating an OA policy, then we should expect
      policies from the Italian National Research
      Council (Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche) and
      the US National Science Foundation (NSF). In
      2009 the NSF gave the Johns Hopkins Libraries a
      $300,000 grant to study the idea of an OA
      repository for NSF-funded research. In addition,
      the NSF Advisory Committee on Cyberinfrastructure
      adopted the statement that OA for "data,
      publications, and software" is a "critical
      component" of the NSF vision of advanced
      cyberinfrastructure, a statement which Lee Van
      Orsdel and Kathleen Born interpret as a
      recommendation for an OA mandate. The NSF tilted
      a litle further toward OA when the National
      Center for Atmospheric Research became the first
      of the NSF's Federally Funded Research and
      Development Centers to adopt an OA mandate. Why
      this matters: the NSF is the second-largest
      public funder of non-classified research in the
      US, after the NIH, and the publishing lobby
      routinely cites its lack of a mandate as model
      for the NIH and other federal agencies to follow.

      In 2009 we saw notable calls to mandate OA for
      publicly-funded research from the Charter for
      Innovation, Creativity and Access to Knowledge;
      the Declaration Concept Web Alliance; the latest
      drafts of the Paris Accord Round II; the latest
      revision of the Internet Rights Charter; the
      Japan Association of National University
      Libraries; the European Commission's Expert Group
      of 13 academics; the UK Free Our Books and
      Research Papers project; the Dutch science
      minister, Ronald Plasterk; and the the
      Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk
      Onderzoek (NWO), the largest Dutch public funding
      agency. The NWO not only announced a general
      endorsement of OA, but pledged 5 million Euros to support it.

      Three French associations -- the Consortium
      Universitaire des Publications Numériques
      (COUPERIN), Association des directeurs et des
      personnels de direction des bibliothèques
      universitaires et de la documentation (ADBU), and
      Association du réseau des établissements
      utilisateurs de l'ABES (AURA)-- issued a joint
      call for mandating green OA to publicly-funded
      research, encouraging gold OA, and starting talks
      between the government and French publishers on
      their OA policies. Jesse Brown, Stephane
      Couture, Michael Geist, and Jonathan Vianou
      called for OA to publicly-funded research in Canada.

      The Academic Library Manifesto (from the Research
      Libraries Group), Kigali Declaration (from 27
      African governments and four intergovernmental
      organizations), Manchester Manifesto (from
      members of Manchester's Institute for Science,
      Ethics and Innovation), Singapore Declaration
      (from medical journal editors), and an update of
      the of the 44-year-old Declaration of Helsinki
      all called for wider and more equitable access to research.

      The draft Medical R&D Treaty from 2005, which
      includes an OA mandate, was removed from the
      World Health Organization (WHO) global strategy
      in 2009, with the approval of the pharmaceutical
      industry and Obama administration. However, the
      draft treaty was taken up by the WHO Expert
      Working Group on R&D Financing, and is still
      alive. (Disclosure: I helped draft the OA
      provision of the treaty.) While the OA mandate
      in the treaty is unaffected by the move, the
      World Health Assembly (WHA) adopted a watered
      down version of the same recommendation
      ("strongly encouraging" rather than requiring
      green OA) for its own global strategy. James
      Love directly recommended an OA mandate to the World Trade Organization

      Lars Fischer launched a petition asking Germany's
      Bundestag to mandate OA for publicly-funded
      research. The petition was endorsed by the
      Coalition for Action on Copyright for Education
      and Research, the German Initiative for Networked
      Information (DINI), the German Library
      Association, Wikimedia Germany, and the Working
      Committee of the Parliament and Government
      Libraries. It gathered 23,631 signatures before
      the two-month sign-on period ended last
      month. It needed 50,000 to guarantee that the
      Bundestag Petition Committee would open a public
      discussion, but the committee may still elect to
      do so. Earlier in the year the German government
      agreed to re-evaluate an OA proposal by Gerd
      Hansen it first considered in 2006. The proposal
      would give authors a statutory right to
      self-archive their journal articles six months
      after publication, regardless of the terms in any
      copyright transfer agreement they might have signed.

      Dinesh Abrol called for the open licensing of
      publicly-funded research in India, and India's
      Council of Scientific & Industrial Research
      recommended that each of its 40+ laboratories adopt OA mandates.

      In the US, the OA mandate at the NIH was made
      permanent by a bill passed by both houses of
      Congress signed by President Obama. After all
      the new OA mandates around the world in 2009, we
      end the year in one respect exactly as we ended
      in 2008: the NIH is still the only funder of
      medical research with an OA policy allowing an
      embargo longer than six months. Every other one
      caps the permissible embargo at six months.

      James Leach, the new chairman of the US National
      Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), publicly
      supported OA for publicly-funded research. Four
      years ago his agency adopted a novel form of
      funder OA policy. Instead of encouraging or
      requiring OA for the research it funded, it
      favored funding applications which promised
      OA. As far as I can tell, no other funders
      followed its lead until 2009. JISC was the first
      to do so when it partnered with the NEH to
      sponsor a series of Transatlantic Digitization
      Collaboration Grants. The Polish Ministry of
      Culture and National Heritage was the second. A
      third is in the offing: the Cancer Prevention
      and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) will
      "likely favor open access" when evaluating grant
      applications. The Universidad Carlos III de
      Madrid adopted a university-variant of the NEH
      approach. When research groups request
      university funds to improve their web sites, the
      institution will give preference to those that
      promise to provide OA to their research through the institutional

      Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) re-introduced the Fair
      Copyright in Research Works Act, a bill to
      overturn the NIH policy and prevent all federal
      agencies from adopting similar policies. But the
      2009 bill is not gathering much attention or
      support. Pushing in the opposite direction, new
      bills in the House and Senate would mandate libre
      OA for federally-funded "educational materials"
      that could be used in textbooks.

      Of proposed mandates, the largest by far was the
      re-introduction of the Federal Research Public
      Access Act (FRPAA) in the US Senate. First
      introduced in 2006, the bill would mandate OA at
      all the major US federal funding
      agencies. During the year, the new FRPAA was
      endorsed by 85 presidents and provosts of US
      universities, 41 Nobel laureates, seven major US
      library associations, six major US student
      organizations, Autism Speaks, Electronic Frontier
      Foundation, Essential Action, IP Justice,
      IssueLab, the Genetic Alliance, Knowledge Ecology
      International, OXFAM America, Public Knowledge,
      and Universities Allied for Essential
      Medicines. It even received support from
      business-oriented groups such as NetCoalition
      --whose members include Amazon, Bloomberg,
      Google, and Yahoo-- and the Committee for
      Economic Development --whose major sponsors
      include General Electric, IBM, Merrill Lynch, Pfizer, and Toyota North

      But potentially larger even than FRPAA was
      President Obama's call for public comments on
      ways to extend OA policies across the federal
      government. The White House Office of Science
      and Technology Policy (OSTP) is collecting
      comments, so far overwhelmingly in favor of a
      government-wide green OA mandate with a short
      embargo period. At the end of the comment period
      (January 21, 2010), the OSTP will formulate a
      policy which the President could implement by
      executive order. The OSTP consultation was
      preceded by a consultation from the US Office of
      Management and Budget (OMB) on how to improve OMB
      Circular A-130, the major US regulation on public
      access to federal government information and research.

      John Houghton and colleagues bolstered the case
      for national OA mandates by showing that the
      benefits of OA far outweighed the costs, using
      data from Denmark, the Netherlands, and the UK
      (complementing their 2006 study of
      Australia). In the UK, for example, gold OA
      could save the higher education sector £80
      million/year, green OA could save £115
      million/year, and the two together could yield an
      additional £172 million/year in financial returns
      to UK businesses from easier access to
      research. OA in the Netherlands could save the
      Netherlands ?133 million/year.

      Ten US and Canadian university presses called for
      OA to publicly-funded research. Their statement
      --organized by 2009 SPARC Innovator Mike Rossner,
      Executive Director of Rockefeller University
      Press-- was the first in support of OA from a
      group of mostly-TA publishers and the first from
      a group of mostly-book publishers. CENDI, the
      group of science and technology information
      managers for US federal agencies, continues to
      recommend OA to federally funded research and
      look for ways to make to happen. Some agencies
      are so determined to recover their research
      output that they are buying copies of published articles from the journals.

      New national working groups or web sites to
      organize OA activity were launched in Cuba,
      Denmark, Hong Kong, the Netherlands, and Romania,

      (2) Open access policies at universities

      In October, 26 of Finland's Universities of
      Applied Sciences adopted a joint OA
      mandate. That is by far the largest number of
      institutions adopting a common OA policy in the
      history of OA. The joint mandate is a sign of
      serious commitment by the 26 rectors and the
      Finnish Ministry of Education, which governs the
      26 institutions. It's also a dramatic reminder
      to other national ministries and private
      consortia that joint mandates make a giant step
      toward OA and without having to reinvent the wheel at individual

      Outside Finland the number of university OA
      mandates in 2009 also came to 26: Abertay Dundee
      University, Boston University, the Université
      catholique de Louvain, Copenhagen Business
      School, Dublin Institute of Technology, the
      University of Edinburgh, two schools within
      Harvard University (the Graduate School of
      Education and the John F. Kennedy School of
      Government), University of Liege, Madurai Kamaraj
      University, University of Kansas, University of
      Leicester, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
      Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, University
      of Pretoria, Roehampton University, Universidad
      del Rosario, two schools within the Russian
      Academy of Sciences (the Vologda
      Scientific-Coordination Center of the Central
      Economics and Mathematics Institute and the
      Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics),
      University of Salamanca, University of Salford,
      University of St. Gallen, Ternopil State Ivan
      Puluj Technical University, University College
      London, Victoria University, and the University of Westminster.

      The 26 non-Finnish mandates were spread among 13
      countries: Australia (1), Belgium (2), Colombia
      (1), Denmark (1), India (1), Ireland (1), Russia
      (2), Scotland (2), South Africa (1), Spain (2),
      Switzerland (1), Ukraine (1), UK (5), and US (5).

      I'm counting Colombia's Universidad del Rosario
      and Switzerland's University of St. Gallen here
      although their policies were adopted in 2008 and
      not publicized until 2009. I'm also counting the
      University of Liege, whose mandate was
      experimental in 2008 and moved out of its
      experimental phase in 2009. I'm *not* counting
      one adopted mandate at a university not ready to
      to make a public announcement. Nor am I counting
      new mandates limited to theses and dissertations,
      of which there were at least five in 2009: the
      University of Central Florida, University of
      Chicago, Kansas State University, the University
      of Montreal Faculty of Medicine and Faculty of
      Management, and Stanford University.

      Adding the Finnish and non-Finnish mandates
      together, we have 52. In addition to these, we
      saw eight departmental mandates: two units at
      the Brigham Young University (Library Faculty and
      Department of Instructional Psychology and
      Technology), the University of Calgary division
      of Library and Cultural Resources, the Coventry
      University Department of Media and Communication,
      the library faculty at the University of Northern
      Colorado, the library faculty at Oregon State
      University, and two units at the University of
      Oregon (Library Faculty and Department of Romance
      Languages). For the second year in a row,
      library faculties lead all other faculties in
      adopting departmental or "patchwork" OA mandates.

      That comes to an even 60 university OA mandates
      adopted in 2009, compared to 13 in 2008. The 13
      in 2008 outnumbered the mandates from all
      previous years combined. The new mandates in
      2009 outnumber those in 2008 by more than a
      factor of four, and more than double the number
      from all previous years combined.

      A staggering 13 of the new mandates in 2009 were
      adopted by unanimous faculty votes. We may be
      starting to forget how surprising they are. It
      was astonishing when the Harvard Faculty of Arts
      and Sciences broke the ice with a unanimous vote
      in February 2008, and then when three more
      unanimous votes followed in the same year. (Open
      challenge: Name any another substantive policy
      topic on which even one faculty vote, let alone
      13 in one year, have been unanimous.) But in
      2009 the number of unanimous votes grew more than
      threefold. Not counting the Finnish mandates
      --for which one procedural act created many
      policies-- half the mandates adopted in 2009
      mandates were adopted by unanimous faculty
      votes. If you're looking for reasons to tip the
      scales, you could count the vote at the Harvard
      Graduate School of Education, for which there
      were a few abstentions but no dissenting
      votes. You could also count two unanimous
      faculty votes for non-mandatory policies (below).

      In 2009, as in every year since the first
      university OA mandate in 2003, more universities
      adopted strong policies or mandates than weaker
      policies requesting or encouraging OA without
      requiring it. In 2009, non-mandatory OA policies
      were adopted at the University of Bergen,
      Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, University of
      Geneva, University of Guelph School of
      Environmental Sciences, the library faculty at
      the Gustavus Adolphus College, Venezuela's
      Universidad de Oriente, University of Tampere,
      Trinity University, Utrecht University, and the
      University of Washington. The University of
      Ottawa adopted a green OA policy but has not yet
      released the details; it may or may not be a
      mandate. Two of the non-mandates --at Gustavus
      Adolphus and Universidad de Oriente-- were
      adopted by unanimous faculty votes, which I did
      not count in the tally of unanimous votes for mandates.

      Taking the mandatory and non-mandatory policies
      together, two include the rule that only articles
      on deposit in the IR will be used for the
      purposes of promotion and other internal
      evaluations (Liege, Oregon library faculty) and
      three provide some degree of libre OA (Liege,
      Northern Colorado library faculty, Oregon library
      faculty). While the 26 Finnish mandates don't
      require libre OA, their repository automatically
      offers depositing authors the chance to attach a CC license to their work.

      In 2009 we saw the first mandates from primarily
      undergraduate, liberal arts institutions
      (Gustavus Adolphus, Oberlin, Trinity), and the
      first from primarily undergraduate applied
      science institutions (the Finnish 26). The
      mandate at the Université catholique de Louvain,
      and the Finnish mandates, were the first to
      require deposit in consortial repositories. The
      US saw its first university-wide mandates (Boston
      University, Kansas University, and MIT) and its
      first mandate from a public university (Kansas).

      Two initiatives new in 2009 will work
      systematically to increase the number of green OA
      mandates at universities: the SPARC Campus Open
      Access Policies project and Enabling Open
      Scholarship (EOS). They came too late in the
      year to explain the explosive growth of
      university policies in 2009, but should certainly
      accelerate that growth in years to come.

      The SPARC project tracks 53 institutions now
      considering policies, most of them not yet ready
      to be named in public. But there is public
      knowledge of policy deliberations, or internal
      activity to start deliberations, at the
      University of Cardiff, Concordia University, Duke
      University, University of Florida, Harvard
      Medical School, the University of Pennsylvania,
      University of São Paulo, Texas A&M University,
      the University of Virginia, the University
      Wisconsin Milwaukee, and Yale University.

      EOS was launched by a group of European
      university rectors and OA leaders. Rectors were
      active on other fronts as well. Italy's
      university rectors (Conferenza dei Rettori delle
      Università Italiane, or CRUI) began developing
      national guidelines for providing OA to Italian
      ETDs. Ten rectors added their names to the 2008
      Belgorod Declaration, calling for university OA
      policies Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. A group
      of 26 Ukrainian rectors published the Olvia
      Declaration, calling on Ukrainian universities to
      launch repositories and adopt OA policies to fill
      them. According to my sources, the 26 Finnish
      mandates should be credited to the 26 rectors
      even more than to the Ministry of Education. If
      presidents and provosts are the US equivalent of
      rectors, this is the place to note that 85
      presidents and provosts of US institutions
      endorsed FRPAA and called for an OA mandate to
      publicly-funded research in the US.

      In addition to EOS and the SPARC projects, JISC
      helped spread OA policies by assembling an
      InfoKit on repositories, mandates, and advocacy
      literature. (It also released a separate toolkit
      for recruiting staff for repository
      projects.) Portugal's RCAAP (Repositório
      Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portuga) created
      an OA policy kit to help universities formulate
      and implement OA policies. The Association of
      College and Research Libraries updated its
      Scholarly Communication Toolkit. Alma Swan and
      Leslie Chan launched OASIS (Open Access Scholarly
      Information Sourcebook), a collection of
      documents, videos, and other resources on "the
      concept, principles, advantages, approaches and
      means to achieving" OA. Its focus on practical
      details should help any institution draft, adopt, and carry out an OA

      The LIBER (Ligue des Bibliothèques Européennes de
      Recherche) Strategic Plan 2009-2012 includes
      collaboration with SPARC Europe and DRIVER to
      promote OA in Europe, especially green OA. Green
      OA activism is also built into JISC's Research
      3.0 campaign, the JISC roadmap for repositories
      2009-2013, and the JISC Strategy 2010-2012. The
      Vice Chancellor at the University of Salford,
      Martin Hall, blogged his intention to increase OA
      archiving at the university. The Harvard
      University Task Force on University Libraries
      reaffirmed the libraries' efforts to reform the
      scholarly communications and support the
      university's role in the OA movement.

      In 2009 student activism for university OA
      policies surpassed that in any previous
      year. Student groups worked --and are working--
      for OA policies at Columbia University,
      Georgetown, Uppsala, and Yale. Students at the
      University of New Mexico are trying to persuade
      professors to adopt OA textbooks. The Student
      Senate at the University of Tennessee discussed
      the launch of an OA repository for the
      university. Student editorials at Stanford and
      the University of Pennsylvania called on their
      institutions to launch OA journal funds. David
      Wiley's students at Brigham Young University not
      only compared 41 OA policies in the US, but
      recommended for an OA policy for BYU. A
      coalition of six American student associations
      issued a joint statement (Student Statement on
      The Right to Research) calling on universities,
      research funders, and researchers to mandate OA
      to research. The coalition has since grown to 19
      student organizations representing more than five million students.

      Students for Free Culture scaled up its Open
      University Campaign (launched in 2008), and
      changed its name to the Open Education Campaign
      (to prevent confusion with the Open
      University). The campaign includes a
      recommendation that universities adopt OA
      mandates. MIT students, who already have an OA
      mandate at their school, began lobbying for FRPAA
      and an OA mandate for the nation.

      Elsevier confirmed that it is lobbying UK
      universities to link to Elsevier articles at the
      journal sites rather than deposit copies in
      locally-hosted IRs, though it still gives blanket
      permission for postprint archiving.

      (3) Some growth numbers

      In 2009, the Directory of Open Access Journals
      (DOAJ) added 723 peer-reviewed OA journals,
      representing 19% growth over the previous
      year. Last year it grew by 812 journals journals
      or 27%. In 2008, it added 2.2 titles per day,
      but in 2009 the rate was closer to 1.99 titles
      per day. It now lists a total of 4,535 peer-reviewed OA journals.

      While the DOAJ grew significantly in 2009, it
      grew more slowly in 2009 than in 2008. So far we
      don't know why. There could have been fewer new
      launches, which the recession makes likely. (But
      there weren't fewer conversions to OA; on the
      contrary; see Sections 5 and 9.) Some number of
      new launches might have gone unnoticed or still
      be working their way through the DOAJ's indexing backlog.

      The number of OA repositories grew by 193 or 20%
      in Scientific Commons, 318 or 26% in the Registry
      of Open Access Repositories (ROAR), and 262 or
      20% in the Directory of Open Access Repositories
      (OpenDOAR). Using the ROAR figures, more than
      six new repositories launched every week during
      2009. Scientific Commons now lists 1,158 OA
      repositories worldwide, ROAR 1,557, and OpenDoar 1,558.

      The number of items on deposit in these
      repositories grew by 7,887,824 items or 33%
      according to Scientific Commons. That's more than 21,600 items per day.

      (Most of the numbers in this section not
      attributed to others were gathered or computed by
      Heather Morrison, Project Coordinator for the
      British Columbia Electronic Library Network. Her
      end-of-2009 figures were recorded on December 31, 2008.)

      (4) Open access archiving

      In addition to the OA repositories launched at
      individual institutions in 2009, more than six
      per week (Section 3), in 2009 we saw several new,
      systematic attempts to cover scholars and
      institutions not previously covered. Wales
      launched a project to put an institutional
      repository (IR) in every Welsh
      university. Mozambique launched a single
      national repository for all its
      institutions. The Deutsche
      Forschungsgemeinschaft launched a program to fund
      OA repositories in Germany. New Zealand launched
      a consortial repository for its Crown Research
      Institutes and several government
      departments. The Austrian Library Network and
      Service (Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbund und
      Service) is creating a national OA repository for
      ETDs. The Federated Network of Institutional
      Repositories of Scientific Documentation in Latin
      America is spreading IRs through Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico.

      Mendeley made rapid progress toward its goal of
      becoming the world's largest OA research
      repository. In February it received $2 million
      in venture capital, and by November had 8 million
      works on deposit, 100,000 users, and a growth
      rate of 100% every 10 weeks. Twidox, another
      universal repository, moved into its public beta.

      Depot was formerly a universal repository for
      scholars in the UK, either redirecting deposits
      to the author's IR or accepting and disseminating
      deposits when the author had no IR. In 2009
      Depot generalized itself and became
      international, offering the same service to
      scholars everywhere. The OA Repository Junction
      is a JISC-funded project to turn a component of
      the Depot into a stand-alone service for
      directing deposits to any appropriate
      repository. The European Commission previewed
      its own Depot-like universal repository,
      OpenAIRE, resting on a CERN repository for
      authors without their own IR. While Depot might
      make OpenAIRE unnecessary, OpenAIRE is a welcome
      sign that the EC is ramping up its commitment to
      green OA and preparing the needed
      infrastructure. Sweden is so committed to
      distributed over central repositories for its
      national green infrastructure that the Swedish
      Research Council postponed its adoption of an OA
      mandate until it was sure that all Swedish
      institutions had IRs. (The Council announced its OA mandate in October

      The NIH said that it is "open to closer
      collaboration with institutional repositories"
      and will "consider" direct feeds from IRs to
      PubMed Central. That would allow NIH grantees to
      deposit in their local IR, which would in turn
      deposit in PMC, perhaps through the SWORD (Simple
      Web-service Offering Repository Deposit)
      protocol. When Harvard Medical School went
      public with its plans for an OA mandate, it
      revealed that it was aiming at just such a model
      in which faculty --likely to be covered to two
      mandates (NIH and HMS)-- would deposit once,
      locally, and the IR would automatically take care
      of the second deposit to PMC. Earlier in the
      year arXiv announced that was ready to accept SWORD-mediated exports from

      Microsoft released a Word add-in for SWORD-based
      direct deposits into OA repositories. A new
      script at the SWORD PHP Library allowed authors
      to use any email client to deposit articles in
      any SWORD-enabled repository. A JISC project
      used SWORD to load-test the major repository
      packages, and automatically loaded a a DSpace
      repository with more than 300,000 deposits of 9
      MB each (and counting). Another JISC project
      uses SWORD to transact the direct deposit of
      teaching materials from Moodle into an IR. SWORD
      was named the most innovative project by
      participants at the JISC Repositories and Preservation conference.

      DRIVER will add the eIFL.net countries to those
      whose repository content it harvests and
      distributes. The Research Councils UK are
      studying ways to harvest final reporting
      information from a grantee's IR. A new tool from
      the Waterford Institute of Technology will
      harvest content from the OA repositories of
      Ireland, and a new tool from the National Library
      of Sweden and the Uppsala University Library will
      do the same for the OA repositories of
      Sweden. The Australian Research Online gateway
      is harvesting the OA repositories of
      Australia. But unlike other national
      initiatives, the Australian project departs from
      the OAI standard and has led at least two
      repositories to modify their OAI interface to fit
      the non-standard harvester, threatening the
      interoperability that the OAI standard was designed to secure.

      The international Confederation of Open Access
      Repositories (COAR) launched during OA Week as an
      outgrowth of DRIVER. COAR will network more than
      1,000 OA repositories worldwide and promote
      common standards and policies. Its 28
      co-founding organizations represent 17 countries
      in Europe, North America, and Asia. The Council
      of Australian University Librarians (CAUL)
      launched the CAUL Australian Institutional
      Repository Support Service (CAIRSS). A new
      project from the InterAcademy Panel on
      International Issues (IAP) will help science
      academies in developing countries support
      institutional repositories and OA digitization
      projects. The Open Grid Forum started a Digital
      Repositories Research Group. DuraSpace created
      the DSpace Ambassador Program to help new and
      potential DSpace users make a good start and get their questions answered.

      Perseus is developing a digital library in the
      field of classics, the Scaife Digital Library,
      distributed over institutional repositories, a
      first for a disciplinary collection. (The Scaife
      Digital Library is named after Ross Scaife, a
      classicist and OA activist who died in
      2008.) PhilPapers, a new OA repository for the
      field of philosophy, entered its public
      beta. Erich Weichselgartner described plans to
      launch an OA European Psychology Publication
      Platform. The Corporate Governance Network is a
      new disciplinary repository from SSRN. Alex
      Golub laid down Mana'o, the OA repository for
      anthropology, though it might be revived if he
      can find another individual or organization to take it on.

      As we've come to expect, JISC launched a host of
      repository-improvement projects, including
      BiblioSight, for integrating citation data into
      OA repositories; Personal Engagement with
      Repositories through Social Networking
      Applications (PERSoNA); Supporting, Harnessing
      and Advancing Repository Enhancement (SHARE); and
      PIRUS2, a successor to the 2008 PIRUS project
      (Publisher and Institutional Repository Usage
      Statistics). Cornell's arXiv received a $833,000
      grant from the US National Science Foundation to
      add new features for social networking, quickly
      identifying an article's main concepts, seeing
      articles in context, and finding related work.

      A group of Saarland University researchers ran a
      survey on how to improve OA repositories; a group
      from the University of Southampton ran one on how
      to improve OpenDOAR (Directory of Open Access
      Repositories) and ROAR (Registry of Open Access
      Repositories); and SHERPA ran one on how to
      improve the RoMEO database. A couple of
      repository-enhancement projects released their
      final reports: the Cambridge Tetra Repositories
      Enhancement Project (CTREP) and the Embedding
      repositories & consortial enhancement (EMBRACE) project.

      Even apart from the John Houghton studies (noted
      in Section 1), a number of important studies in
      2009 highlighted the value of OA repositories,
      our distance from taking good advantage of them,
      or both. The Association of Research Libraries
      Digital Repository Issues Task Force recommended
      ways in which research libraries could support
      repositories. The University of Strathclyde's
      Online Catalogue and Repository Interoperability
      Study (OCRIS) project will recommend ways to
      connect repository contents with the traditional
      library OPAC. Research and Markets published a
      (TA) report on practices at 56 institutional
      repositories in 11 countries, and the Primary
      Research Group published a (TA) report on
      university faculty on the use repositories and
      attitudes toward OA. Charles Bailey published
      the first version of his Institutional Repository
      Bibliography. A study by Sally Morris and the
      Publishing Research Consortium found that
      researchers tended to underestimate how often
      publishers permit green OA for the accepted
      version of an article and tended to overestimate
      how often they permit green OA for the published
      version of an article. A study by the Research
      Information Network (RIN) found that researchers
      have trouble accessing all the work they can now
      discover, and that access barriers slow their
      research, hinder collaboration, and "may well
      affect the quality and integrity of work produced...."

      Kumiko Vézina found that 83% of faculty at six
      Canadian universities would self-archive if their
      funder or employer required it --an even higher
      percentage than Alma Swan found in her pioneering
      studies in 2004 and 2005. However, 86% didn't
      know whether their university had an IR. Doug
      Ray reported that only 27% of articles published
      in 20 top LIS journals during 2007 had OA
      versions on deposit in repositories. (We need
      more studies like this in every field, and
      preferably every year.) The PEER (Publishing and
      the Ecology of European Research) study of the
      effects of green OA on TA journal subscriptions
      released its final report on repository deposit
      procedures, assigned its behavioral and usage
      research to teams from Loughborough University
      and University College London, and called for
      tenders on its economics research.

      Australia's draft research assessment system
      requires deposit in IRs and OA whenever
      possible. When OA is not possible, research
      evaluators will have privileged access to dark
      deposits in the IRs. To make life easier for
      faculty, and to encourage IR deposits, Queensland
      University of Technology configured its IR to
      report suitable publications to Australia's
      Higher Education Research Data Collection for
      annual research assessment. Zoe Corbyn reports
      that Universities UK recommended OA for all
      papers submitted to the next Research Excellence Framework.

      2009 was another mast year for repository
      tools. The Journal TOCs API will help IR
      managers discover new articles which ought to be
      on deposit in their repositories (and help make
      repository metadata consistent by matching it
      with the journal's). The PUMA project
      (Akademisches Publikationsmanagement) from the
      University of Kassel gooses the incentive to
      deposit in IRs by using deposit metadata to
      update author web pages and the institutional research reporting system.

      New tools for EPrints export records and searches
      in JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) and offer
      multiple points of access into complex documents
      such as document files with separate text and
      illustrations (both from Southampton). The JISC
      IncReASe project released an EPrints plug-in for
      importing metadata from arXiv. A new tool from
      Southampton University (EP2DC) allows authors who
      deposit an article in an EPrints repository to
      deposit associated data files in remote data
      repositories. A new tool from the University of
      Leeds allows anyone using Symplectic publishing
      software to deposit new work directly in EPrints
      repositories. (On the latter front, the Research
      Libraries Group's Academic Library Manifesto
      recommended the integration of publishing
      platforms with repository services.) New tools
      for DSpace allow managers to make use of
      controlled vocabularies (from Andy Bagdonov), to
      streamline the testing and installation of new
      modules (from JumpBox), and to identify available
      add-ons and extensions (from DSpace
      itself). CONTENTdm repositories can now make use
      of an open-source image viewer from the University of Nevada at Las Vegas.

      ArXiv launched a system of author feeds to follow
      new work, and author identifiers to disambiguate
      searches. Dave Bacon created arXiview, an iPhone
      app for searching and browsing arXiv (the
      University of Florida released a similar app for
      its OA Digital Collections). Philip Gibbs
      launched viXra, an OA physics repository with no
      restrictions on what may be deposited, for those
      who believe that arXiv unfairly excludes some submitted papers.

      I launched the Open Access Tracking Project
      (OATP) to do a number of jobs at once: to
      crowdsource the job of discovering and
      broadcasting new OA developments, to ensure that
      our alert system would scale with the continuing
      growth of the OA movement, to make a larger
      volume of news easier to read or skim, and to
      make up for my need to step back from blogging at
      Open Access News and give time to my new position
      at Harvard's Berkman Center. The OATP news feed
      is available on a blog-like web page as well as
      by RSS, Twitter, and email. The project is now
      in Phase 1, and should move into Phase 2 later
      this year (more later, I promise).

      At least two IRs --Southampton and Minho-- now
      tweet their new deposits. BioMed Central now has
      a "Post to Twitter" option in the sidebar of each
      of its OA articles. A tool from Robert Simpson
      ranks arXiv papers bases on their popularity on
      Twitter. Stuart even Lewis wrote a script to
      tweet open data on New Zealand tides. RePEc
      allows users to integrate their RePEc data into Facebook.

      All the major repository software packages
      upgraded and some new ones entered the
      ring. ContentDM upgraded to version 5, DSpace to
      1.5.2, EPrints to 3.1.3, Fedora to 3.3, MOAI to
      version 1.08, PURE to 3.15, and VITAL to
      4.0. Microsoft released Zentity 1.0, its
      repository platform, and announced that it would
      soon open the source code and release an Article
      Authoring Add-in for Word. The US National
      Science Digital Library released its OA
      repository software, EduPak 1.0, and the
      University of Rochester announced the alpha
      version of own, IRplus. The National Archive
      Institute of Portugal opened the source code for
      its Repositório de Objectos Digitais Autênticos
      (Repository of Authentic Digital Objects,
      RODA). The Colegio de San Juan de Letran-Calamba
      released LSpace, a simplified version of DSpace
      written in Visual Basic and designed as an OA
      book repository, and Sun Microsystems launched
      its open-source Enterprise-Wide Digital
      Repository and Archive, based on its Open Archive
      Framework and incorporating open-source
      components from Drupal and Fedora. The Federal
      Digital System (FDsys) from the US Government
      Printing Office (GPO) entered its public beta;
      FDsys will replace GPOAccess as the OA repository
      for US federal government information.

      The Fedora Commons and DSpace Foundation merged
      to form DuraSpace, in part to reduce duplicated
      effort in pursuit of a common mission. The
      Fedora and DSpace software will not merge, but
      take advantage of new opportunities for sharing
      and synergy as they evolve. One of DuraSpace's
      first projects is DuraCloud, a cloud-based
      repository service. The Mellon Foundation
      released a report on DuraCloud, and DuraSpace and
      the Library of Congress launched a prototype. On
      the same front, CloudSocial is a new cloud-based
      repository for open educational resources from
      the University of Michigan Medical
      School. DocumentCloud is a forthcoming
      cloud-based repository, funded by the Knight
      Foundation, where journalists can provide OA to
      the documents on which they base their
      investigations and published articles. The next
      iteration of EPrints will support cloud-based
      storage in Amazon's S3/Cloudfront.

      The Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE) added
      some new features, including statistics on each
      repository it harvests. It also became the
      world's largest cross-archive search engine,
      apparently the first to surpass OAIster. The
      Hathi Trust repository released a sophisticated
      new full-text search engine which includes
      faceted search and "similar to" recommendations;
      unlike the Google search of the same content, the
      Hathi engine lists every page containing the searchstring.

      The NIH launched a demo version of AllPlus
      Search, a metasearch engine covering the NIH
      Library, the NIH Library Catalog, PubMed, and
      MedlinePlus. Bioalma launched novo|seek, a
      search engine and customized front-end for
      Medline, PubMed, and PubMed Central. The PubMed
      Central search engine was upgraded to cover
      articles on deposit but under embargo, and the
      PubMed search engine was upgraded to flag OA
      articles in its search returns. Springer's
      AuthorMapper, which searches journal articles and
      plots the location of authors on a map, added a
      filter for OA articles. Both the Google and
      Yahoo image search engines added filters for CC
      licenses. Sprixi is a new search engine
      dedicated to CC-licensed and public-domain images.

      There were new, free Google custom search engines
      for archaeology (WikiArc), the arts and
      humanities (JURN), business (FUSE), and economics
      (Economics Search Engine). There were two new
      search engines for open educational resources,
      Ensemble (from Scott Wilson) and DiscoverEd (from
      ccLearn), and two for law, MetaJuris, covering OA
      legal databases, and and LexisWeb, a free search
      service from TA LexisNexis. TechJournalContents
      is a new search engine OA and TA scholarly technology journals.

      Quertle beefed up its biomedical search engine
      with 60,000 peer-reviewed articles from BioMed
      Central. The search engines at WorldWideScience
      and CiteSeerX were upgraded. The Universities of
      Sheffield and Hertfordshire are creating a search
      engine of OA resources on modern British history,
      and Deep Web Tech relaunched its deep-web search
      engine, ScienceResearch.com. Stephen Wolfram
      launched Wolfram|Alpha, the free "knowledge
      engine" that returns direct answers and graphs,
      not just a list of pages which might contain
      answers. In short order it opened its API and
      won a slew of awards, including "Best of What's
      New" in computing for 2009 from Popular Science.

      WIPO launched a research project on tools for
      increasing access to the public domain,
      eXtensible Catalog produced an OAI Toolkit for
      sharing records via OAI-PMH. SciMate (Scientific
      Material Transfer Exchange) is a new suite of
      tools from Christopher Dyer for sharing research
      information and physical specimens. Data
      Conversion Laboratory (DCL) created four tools to
      aid in the conversion of documents to NLM XML and
      support LinkOut from PubMed Central to publisher
      web sites. CARPET (Community for Academic
      Reviewing, Publishing and Editorial Technology)
      officially launched its platform for scientific publishing tools.

      The African Copyright & Access to Knowledge
      Project (ACA2K) urged African countries to
      "create and populate Open Access Institutional
      Repositories/Research Archives to showcase
      African research." The First International
      Conference on African Digital Libraries and
      Archives, held in Addis Ababa, "identified, as a
      key priority area, the need to develop an
      integrated open access information platform for
      Africa." It called the United Nations Economic
      Commission for Africa (UNECA) to lead the
      initiative. Eight universities in seven southern
      African countries agreed to together on open education and OA research.

      (5) Open access journals

      Leaving aside the newly launched OA journals
      (Section 3), in 2009 I counted 48 journals that
      converted from TA to OA, two of which had charged
      subscriptions for more than 30 years. All 346
      journals from African Journals Online are en
      route to OA. By contrast and despite the
      recession, I know only three journals that
      converted from OA to TA, only two that converted
      from full OA to OA for just a subset of their
      content, only one that converted from full OA to
      hybrid OA, and only one that converted from
      no-fee OA to fee-based OA. I counted 615 that
      converted from TA to hybrid OA, and one from
      hybrid OA to full OA. I counted eight that
      converted from TA to delayed OA, including one
      which had charged subscriptions for more than 80
      years. Seven databases converted to OA, and 32
      journals converted only their backfiles to OA,
      including five which had been publishing for more
      than 100 years and six which had been publishing
      between 25 and 99 years. (All these numbers are
      based on what I noticed in my daily blogging, and could well be

      2009 was not the first year that universities
      established funds to pay publication fees at
      fee-based OA journals. In January there were
      already more than 15 university funds
      worldwide. (It's hard to be sure because some
      funds were temporary and it's easier to count
      launches than expirations.) But the campaign to
      launch university funds stepped up considerably
      in 2009, which is remarkable in light of
      recession-squeezed budgets and the lower cost of
      green OA. In September, Harvard launched the
      Compact for Open-Access Publishing Equity (COPE),
      a commitment to launch a fund and encourage other
      institutions to do the same. The founding
      institutions were Cornell, Dartmouth, Harvard,
      MIT, and the University of California at
      Berkeley. At the time, only Berkeley had a fund
      and only Harvard and MIT had green OA
      mandates. Since then, Columbia, the University
      of Ottawa, and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering
      Cancer Center have also joined. Apart from COPE,
      journal funds appeared at Lund University and the
      Universities of Oregan and Tennessee in 2009,
      bringing the worldwide total to 22, according to
      the Open Access Directory list of funds, which
      itself launched in 2009. The research committee
      at Norway's University of Agder recommended that
      the university launch a fund. By contrast, only
      one fund, at the University of Amsterdam, had to
      close in 2009 for financial reasons.

      In March, Universities UK (UUK) and the Research
      Information Network (RIN) helped turn the tide by
      recommending that universities and funders should
      start to pay publication fees on behalf of
      faculty and grantees. The Biosciences Federation
      publicly endorsed the UUK/RIN
      recommendations. The Wellcome Trust was already
      paying fees for grantees, and committed 2 million
      pounds above and beyond its earlier
      commitment. The Netherlands Organisation for
      Scientific Research (NWO) committed 5 million
      Euros. JISC asked UK institutions whether it
      should create a central fund for the nation. The
      Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) took an
      indirect approach and now funds universities
      which in turn cover publication fees incurred by
      their faculty. Austria's Förderung der
      wissenschaftlichen Forschung (Fund to Promote
      Scientific Research, FWF) adopted a policy to
      cover publication fees not just for OA journals
      but also for OA monographs. The Research
      Councils UK suggested that they may soon move
      beyond their green OA mandates to support for gold OA.

      The UK National Institute for Health Research
      (NIHR) entered a "Supporter Membership
      arrangement" with BMC to discount the fees for
      NIHR-funded researchers. It's not the first
      funder to do so, but it's the first public
      funder. Pfizer began to pay publication fees at
      BMC journals for its own scientists, and created
      a fund to cover fees for researchers from
      low-income countries. It's not the first
      corporation to cover its own researchers, but
      it's the first to launch a fund for others. It
      may be a sign that pharmaceutical companies --and
      soon perhaps other companies-- recognize their
      interest in barrier-free access to peer-reviewed
      research. Springer and the University of
      California struck a deal allowing UC's
      subscription payments to cover publication fees
      for articles by UC authors at Springer's hybrid
      OA journals. It's not Springer's first such
      deal, but the first with a US institution.

      These funds and subsidies are small potatoes
      compared to the money spent every year on
      subscriptions. But they matter because they are
      a sign that more and more institutions see the
      growth of peer-reviewed OA journals as an
      investment in the future of scholarly
      communication, and even as a way to disarm
      objections to faster-growing, wider-ranging, and
      less expensive green OA. (How does do gold OA
      funds disarm objections to green OA? By
      providing reassurance that if green OA eventually
      triggers cancellations of peer-reviewed TA
      journals, then we'll have viable peer-reviewed OA
      journals to take their place and financial
      support for TA journals that choose to
      convert.) So far this type of financial support
      for gold OA is limited to fee-based OA journals
      and doesn't reach the 70% peer-reviewed OA
      journals which charge no fees at all.

      Within the movement to launch university OA
      funds, there is a mini-movement to withhold funds
      from hybrid journals using a double-charge
      business model (i.e. refusing to promise to
      reduce subscription prices in proportion to
      author uptake of the OA option). In 2009, the
      new funds at Cornell, Harvard, Lund, and Oregon all took this position.

      EMBO joined the (still small) group of hybrid OA
      publishers promising to avoid double-charges for
      its OA articles. The Wellcome Trust called for
      greater transparency from hybrid publishers on
      whether they were shunning or embracing the
      double-charge business model. The Open Access
      Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) called
      on universities and funding agencies to clarify
      when they were willing to pay publication fees at fee-based OA journals.

      The Open Information Science Journal (TOISCIJ)
      from Bentham Science accepted a paper of
      computer-generated nonsense submitted by Philip
      Davis and Kent Anderson, and sent them a bill for
      $800. When they exposed the hoax, the editor of
      TOISCIJ resigned, but claimed that the article
      had been accepted without his knowledge or
      approval. A board member of an unrelated Bentham
      journal also resigned, to dissociate himself from
      the company. Bentham's director of publications
      did not resign and defended the journal's action,
      claiming that "we were aware that the article
      submitted was a hoax, and we tried to find out
      the identity of the individual by pretending the
      article had been accepted for publication when in
      fact it was not." The hoax should deter this
      kind of embarrassing behavior, whether it arises
      from incompetence or dishonesty, and reduce the
      number of scams giving OA journals a bad
      name. But there's no doubt that it also feeds
      hasty generalizations about OA journals and
      steepens the incline for the honest majority of OA journals.

      On the other side of the access watershed,
      Elsevier published a collection of Merck-funded,
      Merck-authored articles puffing Merck products,
      and disguised the collection as a peer-reviewed
      journal ("Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint
      Medicine"). When caught it admitted that it had
      published five other fake journals for other
      pharma companies. The tally of its fake journals
      eventually rose to nine. Elsevier was also
      caught paying users for five-star ratings of its
      textbooks at Amazon and Barnes & Noble. At the
      time of both incidents, another arm of the
      company was lobbying Congress with the argument
      that OA would undermine peer review.

      I counted 14 new OA journal or book publishers
      established in 2009: Bloomsbury Qatar Foundation
      Journals, Bookbon, Fountain Publishers, French
      Creek Press (and its academic division, Kenwood
      Academic), Impact Journals, iMedPub Journals and
      Books, MediaCommons Press, Open Academic Press,
      Open Access Press, Open Access Publications, Open
      Monograph Press, Page Press, and
      Sciyo. Mysteriously, one of them, Advanced
      Research Journals, initially linked from its logo
      to the Elsevier ScienceDirect home page, though
      it stopped when the link was publicized.

      The University of California relaunched
      eScholarship (formerly eScholarship Repository)
      as an OA publishing platform for books and
      journals. Soon after, it launched University of
      California Publishing Services (UCPubS) to
      combine the OA publishing from eScholarship with
      the print publishing of the University of
      California Press. Indiana University proposed a
      cooperative digital publishing infrastructure to
      serve many journals, university presses, and
      non-profit societies at make it unnecessary for
      them to turn to commercial publishers. Co-Action
      Publishing and two partners launched Open Access
      Solutions, a suite of services and professional
      skills to help small OA publishers preserve their
      independence from large publishers.

      A new platform called BestThinking publishes
      unrefereed OA articles by attributed authors,
      like Citizendium or Google Knol, and plans to
      enter the STM journal market. Meantime, Knol
      added peer-review management features and did
      enter the STM market, starting with PLoS
      Currents: Influenza, the first journal in the
      PLoS Currents series. All the peer-reviewed
      journals from Internet Medical Publishing will
      also use Knol. Publiss is a new suite of
      web-based publishing tools optimized for OA. The
      Public Knowledge Project released Open Journal
      Systems version 2.3.1, translated it into Basque,
      Danish, Romanian, and Welsh. The PLoS journals
      upgraded to Ambra upgraded to version 0.9.5.

      SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online)
      launched a branch in South Africa based on the
      original in Brazil. All ScieELO journals are OA,
      and at year's end SciELO South Africa had a portfolio of seven titles.

      CERN's project for converting TA journals in
      particle physics to OA, SCOAP3 project
      (Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing
      in Particle Physics), recruited new members or
      expressions of interest from institutions in
      Canada, Finland, Spain, and 62 institutions or campuses in the United

      The Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association
      (OASPA) nearly doubled its membership in 2009,
      and just last month signed up the British Medical
      Journal and Oxford University Press. It
      announced its first cohort of elected board
      members and officers, launched a blog, hosted its
      first conference on OA publishing (Lund, Sweden,
      September 14-16, 2009), and plans an annual series of conferences.

      In 2009, Thomson Reuters reported that five OA
      journals had the highest impact factors in their
      fields for 2008. Four were from PLoS: PLoS
      Neglected Tropical Diseases (first in Tropical
      Medicine, out of 15), PLoS Pathogens (first in
      Parasitology, out of 25), PLoS Computational
      Biology (first in Mathematical & Computational
      Biology, out of 28), and PLoS Biology (first in
      Biology, out of 71). The fifth was the Journal
      of Medical Internet Research (first in Medical
      Informatics, out of 20). (The founding editor
      and publisher of JMIR, Gunther Eysenbach, also
      won the first Public Knowledge Project Community
      Contribution Award for editors.) The Journal of
      Nuclear Medicine, which is OA after a six-month
      embargo, ranked first in the field of medical imaging.

      PLoS ONE began releasing article-level impact
      data, including page views, citations, usage,
      social networking links, comments, user ratings,
      and press coverage. Soon all seven PLoS journals
      were doing the same. Late in the year they added
      blog coverage, as measured by
      ResearchBlogging.org. Mendeley plans to support
      article-level impact metrics as well. Citemine
      created a new metric of what is worth reading by
      integrating a bidding system into OA
      repositories, when bids represent user judgments
      of a paper's promise in attracting future citations.

      SHERPA introduced a major upgrade to its RoMEO
      database and the RoMEO API. During 2009 it
      passed the milestone of cataloguing the copyright
      and self-archiving policies of 600
      publishers. (Currently 62% allow self-archiving
      in some form.) The University of Stuttgart and
      the Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek
      launched a German version of RoMEO, and the
      Universities of Barcelona and Valencia launched
      Dulcinea, a RoMEO cousin for Spanish
      journals. OAKList, the Australian supplement to
      RoMEO, added a web form allowing users to submit
      new information on publisher copyright and
      archiving policies. The CAUL Australian
      Institutional Repository Support Service launched
      Open Access Policies Search, which searches
      journal copyright policies across RoMEO, OAKList
      and AcqWeb. ccLearn launched a more distant
      RoMEO cousin, University Copyright Ownership
      Policies (UCOP), wiki-based database of
      university policies on who owns what work produced by faculty.

      Inderscience Publishers converted its 345
      journals to hybrid OA, Brill converted its 135
      journals, Walter de Gruyter its 100, and
      Schattauer Verlag its 20, and Nature Publishing
      Group an additional 11. Nature launched a new
      hybrid journal, Nature Communications, its first
      online-only journal. Hogrefe introduced a hybrid
      OA option for Psychologischen Rundschau.

      A handful of hybrid OA journals liberalized their
      terms in order to comply with the policies of the
      Wellcome Trust and the UK Funders Group, which
      require libre OA when they pay publication
      fees. The Royal Society modified its hybrid
      business model to charge by the article, not by
      the page. Mamiko Matsubayashi and colleagues
      released a study showing that, in biomemedicine
      in 2005, TA and hybrid OA journals published
      nearly twice as many OA articles as full OA journals.

      Journals and publishers continued to experiment
      with new policies and business models. Open
      Medicine began publishing selected articles in
      three formats (HTML, PDF, and wiki) and
      encouraged readers to modify the wiki
      versions. David Linden argued in an editorial
      that the Journal of Neurophysiology should drop
      the the Ingelfinger rule, and asked readers to
      weigh in on the question. When PLoS articles
      depend on open-source software, PLoS journals may
      soon ask authors to submit the software along
      their manuscripts; if the manuscripts are
      published, the software would be available from a
      special repository. DeepDyve will "rent" journal
      articles for $0.99 each; the fee buys 24 hours of
      access without any rights to print, download, or screen-capture.

      SPARC released a report by Raym Crow detailing
      the many business models used by OA journals. A
      study by the National Humanities Alliance
      concluded that publication fees were "not
      currently a sustainable option" for eight
      surveyed journals in the social sciences and
      humanities. It did not investigate other
      business models for OA journals or acknowledge
      that most OA journals don't charge fees. In the
      wake of the report, the eight societies
      publishing the journals studied in the report
      expressed a determination to find viable no-fee models for providing OA.

      Stuart Shieber's systematic scan of all journals
      in the DOAJ found that fewer than 20% charged
      publication fees. Bill Hooker redid a 2004
      Cornell study on what universities would pay if
      all peer-reviewed journals converted to OA,
      corrected its false assumptions (among others,
      that all OA journals charged publication fees),
      and concluded that universities would pay less in
      that hypothetical future world than they pay now
      for TA journals. Heather Morrison calculated
      that libraries would save "at least 64%" from such a conversion.

      PLoS expects to become financially
      self-sustaining during 2010. Three of its
      journals --PLoS One, PLoS Genetics, and PLoS
      Pathogens-- have already broken even.

      Sami Kassab at Exane BNP Paribas reported that
      Elsevier cut the 2010 prices for its nuclear
      physics journals by 20% while raising prices on
      its other titles, which he interpreted as an
      effect of market pressure from OA. At the same
      time Bernd-Christoph Kaemper noted that
      submissions at Elsevier's high-energy physics
      journals declined by 30% to 50% in the last 4 years.

      Ted Bergstrom, Paul Courant, and R. Preston
      McAfee used state open-record laws to force the
      disclosure of Big Deal contracts between
      publishers and academic libraries. Elsevier
      failed to persuade a court to block the release
      of the Washington State University contract. In
      France, a journalist forced the disclosure of the
      book-scanning contract between Google and the City of Lyon.

      Nature Publishing Group and Oxford University
      Press added an OAI-PMH interface for their
      journals, and Drupal became OAI compliant. OCLC
      finished the job of incorporating the OAIster
      database into WorldCat. Contrary to some early
      doubts, it also promised a separate, OA version
      of the OAIster records by this month (January
      2010). OCLC also released a suite of tools to
      support OAI-PMH data sharing among museums. The
      George Mason University Center for History and
      New Media released Omeka 1.0, new software for
      publishing OAI-compliant scholarship and cultural
      heritage exhibits. eXtensible Catalog released
      its OAI Toolkit for sharing library records through the OAI-PMH.

      The DOAJ launched a long-term preservation
      program for OA journals, in partnership with
      National Library of the Netherlands, and received
      the SPARC Europe Award for Outstanding
      Achievements in Scholarly Communications,
      2009. Mir@bel (Mutualisation d'Informations sur
      les Revues et leurs Accès dans les Bases En
      Ligne) is a new OA index of online journals,
      especially Francophone journals in <br/><br/>(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.