Search

Intro Open Research Europe Graphic: Open Research Europe in Action. Source: Open Research Europe (2021). faster-h2020.eu The key takeaways from this article are 1 The main players in the policy area of open access in Europe and Germany, respectively, are the European Commission, the German Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR; until 2025 called the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, BMBF), and the governments of the federal states. 2 Through various policy measures, these players promote and expect open access to knowledge. 3 At the level of the German federal states, different trends in the areas of open access and open science are emerging. Practical tip The presentation “ Open Access unterstützen – Praxistipps für Landesregierungen ” lists measures with which the governments of the German federal states can practise and support open access. Object of Governance, Subject of Policy Discussion The topic of open access and the formulation and implementation of open access policies are the subject of policy discussions and negotiation processes. Who are the driving forces, and what are their positions? Open access policies are driven both from the top down – especially from the European level to the level of the national states and federal states – and from the bottom up, by committed scholars and scientists, scientific institutions, and open access initiatives. Important milestones in the debate on open access to information are (see also the History of the Open Access Movement ) are : the Declaration of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002) , the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) . Further milestones include: the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) the Amsterdam Call for Action on Open Science (2016) , The Vienna Principles: A Vision for Scholarly Communication in the 21st Century (2016) , the Jussieu Call for Open Science and Bibliodiversity (2017) , Plan S (2018) the Action Plan for Diamond Open Access (2022) . Many national and supranational institutions, for example the European Union (EU), the German Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR; until May 2025 called the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, BMBF), federal state ministries, the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG), and to some extent also universities and non-university research institutions, play a dual role in this regard. As political actors, they participate through various interventions and measures in negotiation processes on open access; at the same time, they are also research funders , and in that capacity, they directly set standards and framework conditions. In what follows, we provide an overview of the main state actors in the policy area of open access. In each case, we briefly explain how free access to scientific knowledge is enabled or promoted by policy regulations in the respective contexts. Kindling, M., Martin, L., Neufend, M., & Wenninger, A. (2022). Open Access Atlas Deutschland: Status Quo in Bund und Ländern (1.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6472672 Supranational Level At the supranational level, the European Commission (EC) and the European Research Council (ERC) provide important stimuli for the implementation of open access and open science. In 2021, UNESCO also adopted a Recommendation on Open Science . Governance of Open Access in Europe As early as 2012, the European Commission issued a Recommendation on access to and preservation of scientific information, in which it called on Member States to implement clear and binding open access policies. According to the recommendation, it should be mandatory to provide open access to publications resulting from publicly funded research, preferably immediately but no later than 6 months after the date of publication in the case of the natural sciences and 12 months in the case of the humanities and social sciences. Although European Commission recommendations are not binding, the majority of the 27 EU Member States (inter alia Belgium , Greece , Italy , Croatia , Latvia , Malta , Poland , Portugal , Slovakia , Slovenia , Spain , Czech Republic , Hungary ) and three non-member States ( Norway , Serbia, and Switzerland ) have by now adopted open access and open science strategies. In the area of research funding , the European Commission requires funding recipients to provide open access to research publications resulting from funded projects (see also Horizon Europe ). [MG1] Error 404 bei Slovenia. [PSM2] Danke – das hier scheint der richtige Link zu sein: https://www.openaire.eu/community/blogs/slovenia-open-science-in-the-recently-adopted-resolution-on-the-slovenian-scientific-research-and-innovation-strategy-2030 Open Access in Germany In contrast to many other European countries, Germany does not have a uniform national open access policy. In its coalition agreement for the legislative period 2021–2025 , the previous German Federal Government undertook to strengthen open access and open science and to establish open access as a common scientific standard. This was duly taken into account with the adoption in 2023 of Joint Guidelines of the Federal Government and the Länder for the implementation of open access in Germany (Federal Ministry of Education and Research, 2023 ). In the coalition agreement of the current federal government in 2025 , open access is not explicitly mentioned; however, access to scientific research is to be facilitated by a research data act. Federal Ministry of Education and Research At federal level in Germany, the amendment of the Copyright Act (UrhG) in 2013 created the legal framework for green open access by implementing an inalienable secondary publication right ( Pflüger, 2016 , p. 14). In 2016, the then German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; renamed the Federal Ministry for Research, Technology and Space, BMFTR, in May 2025) published a strategy for open access in Germany , which was updated in 2018. The aim of the updated strategy is to further establish open access as the standard for scholarly publishing and to close the gap between the scientific community’s desire for more open access publications and current publishing practice ( Federal Ministry of Education and Research, 2018 , p. 7). According to the strategy, various ways of providing open access should be allowed in principle, and academic freedom should remain untouched. Furthermore, publications resulting from publicly funded research should be openly accessible, and established quality assurance procedures should be ensured. Whereas the transposition into concrete policies is the responsibility of the individual federal states, the BMBF, in its capacity as a funding agency, set guidelines: Research projects funded by the BMBF – or its successor, the BMFTR – are expected to publish their results and their research data in open access . Besides scientific and scholarly institutions and libraries, funding recipients also include private sector actors, such as publishers and other service providers, that are establishing themselves in the open access landscape. Open Access at Federal State Level Because of the sovereignty of the federal states in the area of education and higher education policy, the adoption and implementation of open access and open science policies in Germany takes place mainly at federal state level (Kindling et al., 2022). These federal state policies are thus central elements of the open access transformation in the Federal Republic of Germany (Kindling et al., 2021). Some states, for example Baden-Württemberg , Berlin , Brandenburg , Hamburg , and Schleswig-Holstein have state strategies, which in some cases define concrete objectives. These objectives include, for example, an open access quota for journal articles, as well as open access officers and open access policies at all institutions ( Berlin ); the monitoring of open access publication figures ( Thuringia ); the adoption of a clear position on open access by university managers ( Brandenburg ); and a uniform technical infrastructure ( Hamburg ). Some federal state governments support open access through other instruments of higher education governance. For example, support for open access is mentioned in the science plan ( Bremen ), in the higher education development plan ( Saxony ), or in the digital strategy ( Rhineland-Palatinate , Saxony-Anhalt , Hesse ) of the respective federal states. Other federal state governments support the scientific institutions in their states through targeted measures, for example openaccess.nrw in North Rhine-Westphalia; through an open access publication fund ( Thuringia , Lower Saxony ); through open access networking units ( Berlin , Brandenburg ); or by funding openness as a cross-sectional topic ( Bremen ). Although other federal states have not yet adopted an explicit science policy position, many institutions already have well-established open access service offerings (e.g. Saarland, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Bavaria, Hesse, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Rhineland-Palatinate) (Kindling et al., 2021).The Bundesländer-Atlas (Kindling et al., 2021), the oa.atlas federal state dossiers (2024), and the Open4DE Landscape-Report ( Bärwolf et al. 2023 ) also provide an overview of current and past open access and open science activities of the German federal states. Open Access in Austria and Switzerland Open Access in Austria In Austria, various open access initiatives emerged at a national level at an early stage (see the History of the Open Access Movement ). For example, in 2014, in cooperation with the Austrian Science Fund ( FWF ), the Austrian Academic Library Consortium ( KEMÖ) , as one of the first national library consortia worldwide to do so, concluded an open access agreement with a publisher (see Mayer 2022, p. 47). The FWF had already introduced its own open access policy in 2004, with a strong recommendation to publish works open access. In 2012, Open Access Network Austria (OANA; since 2022: OSA – Open Science Austria ) was founded as a joint national networking initiative on the part of the FWF and Universities Austria ( uniko ). OANA subsequently drew up a number of recommendations, inter alia for a national open access strategy (2016) and a national open science strategy (2020). Following the publication of the 2016 recommendations paper , many research institutions published open access policies. The 2020 recommendations served as a basis for the national Open Science Policy Austria , which was adopted in 2022. A secondary publication right was incorporated into law in 2015 (see also Legal Issues in Austria ). In 2019, the national funding initiative “Digital and Social Transformation in Higher Education” of the then Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research enabled the launch of several digitalization projects with a focus on open access, for example AT2OA2 . In its Government Programme 2020–2024 , the Austrian Federal Government gave a clear commitment to open access and actively supported Plan S for the implementation of open access. The current Government Programme 2025–2029 does not focus explicitly on open access or open science. Open Access in Switzerland According to the strategic vision of the Swiss Higher Education Policy Coordination 2025–2028 (Gesamtschweizerische Hochschulpolitischen Koordination 2025–2028 ), 100% of scholarly publications from Swiss universities will be made available in open access. In particular, swissuniversities , the umbrella organisation of universities in Switzerland, plays the role of a superordinate actor for the promotion of open access. As a funding institution, swissuniversities supports various open access projects . The Swiss National Open Access Strategy published in 2017 was updated in 2024. In the updated strategy, swissuniversities and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) set the framework conditions for the country’s open access transformation. The Open Science Delegation coordinates cooperation between the stakeholders. Besides this national strategy, the Swiss Library Network for Education and Research ( SLiNER ) published National Open Access Policy Guidelines in 2019, which serve as recommendations for the institutional open access policies of Swiss universities. In 2023, 86% of universities in Switzerland had an open access policy (see swissuniversities, 2023). Eleven partner institutions are collaborating to create a national diamond open access consortium ( CoDOA ) to enable the long-term and sustainable funding of diamond open access journals. The groundwork for enshrining a secondary publication right in law is currently in progress. References Bärwolff, T., Benz, M., Dreyer, M., Neufend, M., Kindling, M., Kirchner, A., & Schmidt, B. (2023). Open4DE landscape report . Open-Access-Büro Berlin. https://doi.org/10.21428/986c5d43.bab38f02 Federal Ministry of Education and Research. (2023). Open access in Germany. Joint guidelines of the Federal Government and the Länder . https://www.bmftr.bund.de/SharedDocs/Publikationen/DE/FS/772970_Open_Access_in_Deutschland_en.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4 Federal Ministry of Education and Research. (2018). Open Access in Deutschland. Die Strategie des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung [Open access in Germany. The strategy of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research]. https://www.bildung-forschung.digital/files/2018-08-Open_Access_neu_barrierefrei.pdf Kindling, M., Neufend, M., & Wenninger, A. (2021). Bundesländer-Atlas Open Access . Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5761153 Kindling, M., Martin, L., Neufend, M., & Wenninger, A. (2022). Open Access Atlas Deutschland: Status Quo in Bund und Ländern (1.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6472672 Kindling, M., Martin, L., & Neufend, M. (2024). oa.atlas: Konzept . Open-Access-Büro Berlin. https://doi.org/10.21428/986c5d43.54fbd167 Mayer, K. (2022). Open Access im Wandel. Infrastrukturen, Monitoring und Governance als zentrale Elemente einer erfolgreichen Transformation. Baseline Report zur Open Access Transformation in der Wissenschaft . Centre for Social Innovation (ZSI), Vienna. https://doi.org/10.22163/fteval.2022.533 Pflüger, T. (2016). Open Access-Regulierung im internationalen Vergleich. In T. Dreier, V. Fischer, A. van Raay, & I. Spiecker [known as Döhmann] (Eds.), Informationen der öffentlichen Hand: Zugang und Nutzung (1st ed., Vol. 3, pp. 537–562). Nomos. https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/37572/Pflueger_0-395438.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y swissuniversities. (2023). Open access strategy review. Background report . https://www.swissuniversities.ch/fileadmin/swissuniversities/Dokumente/Hochschulpolitik/Open_Access/OA_Strategie/OA_Strategy_Review_Background_Report.pdf UNESCO. (2021). UNESCO recommendation on open science . https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5741832 Further Reading Fuhrer, C., & Schurte, R. (2018). Nationale Open Access-Strategie in der Schweiz: Herausforderungen für die Hochschulen und ihre Bibliotheken. In Zentralbibliothek Zürich, A. Keller, & S. Uhl (Eds.), Bibliotheken der Schweiz: Innovation durch Kooperation: Festschrift für Susanna Bliggenstorfer anlässlich ihres Rücktrittes als Direktorin der Zentralbibliothek Zürich (pp. 97–118). De Gruyter Saur. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110553796-004 German Science and Humanities Council. (2022). Recommendations on the transformation of academic publishing: Towards open access . https://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/download/2022/9477-22_en.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=0 Taşkın, Z., Melinščak Zlodi, I., Laakso, M., Torny, D., Arasteh, S., Bargheer, M., Klaus, T., Schima, J., Agnoloni, T., Peruginelli, G., Davidson, A., Franczak, M., María Ángeles, C. B., de Pablo Llorente, V., Dobson, H., & Heyman, J. (2024). D5.2 National overviews on sustaining institutional publishing in Europe . Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13683953 Verdicchio, D., Kissling-Näf, I. (2020). Digitale Transformation und Open Access von Forschungsresultaten in der Schweiz. In J. Schellinger, K. Tokarski, & I. Kissling-Näf (Eds.), Digitale Transformation und Unternehmensführung (pp. 11–27). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-26960-9_2...

Learn more about the political implementation of Open Access Political Standpoints Open Access Transition Open Access Policies...

Intro What are Preprints? Preprints are preliminary versions, or manuscript versions, of scholarly works – especially journal articles – that are made available to the (professional) public. As a rule, they are non- peer-reviewed versions whose public release primarily serves to expedite the sharing of research findings. Preprints are made freely available to the public on preprint servers, thereby also making an important contribution to green open access . Quelle: Becklas, Carolin; Hauss, Jonas (2025): Was sind Preprints? av.tib.eu/media/69857 The key takeaways from this article are 1 Preprints are early versions of scholarly publications that are made available to the (professional) public – as a rule without prior peer review. 2 Preprints, which are particularly common in physics and other natural sciences, are made freely available to the public on preprint servers and make an important contribution to green open access. 3 Preprint servers enable the publishing of so-called overlay journals – that is, online journals that use the infrastructure of a preprint platform for submissions and publication. Characteristics of Preprints Many months may elapse between the submission of a manuscript and its publication in a journal. According to one study ( Huisman & Smits, 2017 ), the average duration of the peer-review process is 17 weeks. In addition, time is needed for typesetting and, if applicable, copy-editing and printing. In order to expedite the dissemination of research findings, preprints are shared in many disciplines. However, cultures differ greatly across disciplines. In physics , preprints are an indispensable communication tool – depending on the subfield, preliminary versions of over 90% of all journal articles are made available to the public on the preprint server arXiv prior to publication of the final version ( Gentil-Beccot et al., 2009 ). By contrast, authors in other disciplines have not yet adopted a comparable preprint culture. It may be that not all journals in these disciplines accept manuscripts that have previously been posted as a preprint. As a rule, preprints have not yet undergone any scholarly quality assurance processes. Substantively, they may therefore differ considerably from the published versions, or they may not even be accepted for publication. While scholars and scientists are aware of this, problems may arise if, for example, the media pick up findings from preprints and disseminate them to a large audience without indicating that they are preliminary and have not been peer reviewed. To enable non-scientific readers to better understand the nature of preprints, medical preprint servers display caution statements. Source: Based on: Shafee, Thomas (2020). Typical publishing workflow for an academic journal article (preprint, postprint, and published) with open access sharing rights per SHERPA/RoMEO. Own work; adapted from diagram by Ginny Barbour Wikimedia Commons ( CC BY 4.0 International ) Preprint Servers There are numerous preprint servers. The following figure shows some commonly used ones: Source: Khurana, S. (2020). Commonly used pre-print servers for researchers Zenodo Zenodo is a universal data repository. Much of the material on this website is also accessible here in the Zenodo collection open-access.network . In principle, preprints can be disseminated through all possible channels, for example, email, institutional repositories , or research institution websites. As a rule, they are uploaded to preprint servers, which are usually dedicated to one or more specialist fields. Although no peer review takes place on these plat­forms, uploaded publications usually undergo a basic screening process to ensure that they are scientific and fit the disciplinary scope of the server. Pre­print servers have often emerged from and are financed by scientific commu­nities. Some are operated by research institutions or professional societies. Only rarely are they operated by publishers. The oldest and largest preprint server is arXiv , an open access repository for scholarly articles in eight subject areas, including physics , mathematics , and computer science , that was founded in 1991. As of April 2021, arXiv hosted over 1.8 million documents. Other important preprint platforms are bioRxiv ( biology ), SocArXiv ( social sciences ), EarthArXiv ( geosciences ), medRxiv ( medicine ), and ChemRxiv ( chemistry ). Functionalities differ across platforms. As a rule, revised versions of papers can be uploaded – for example, after acceptance by a journal – and a link can be provided to the final published version ( version of record ). Some platforms also offer a comments function so that authors can receive feedback, and findings can be discussed in the community. History As early as the 1960s, there was a system in biology whereby reports of current research findings – especially in the form of preprints – were reproduced and circulated by postal mail by a central registry ( Cobb, 2017 ). A similar system also existed in the field of high-energy physics ( Gentil-Beccot et al., 2009 ). With the advent of the Internet, the sharing of manuscripts became much easier, as they could be circulated via email. In 1991, Paul Ginsparg founded arXiv at Los Alamos National Laboratory as a server for preprints from high-energy physics ( Ginsparg, 2017 ). The manuscripts were thus freely available to all interested parties. The scope of arXiv was later extended to include other areas of physics, as well as mathematics, computer science, and neighbouring fields such as quantitative finance and quantitative biology. It was only after the turn of the century that other fields followed arXiv’s lead. For example, in 2013, bioRxiv was launched as a preprint server for biology, thereby making preprint sharing more popular in the life sciences . The initiative ASAPbio advocates the use of preprints in biology. Boosted by the success of the Open Science Framework (OSF) – an open source infrastructure that, inter alia, enables preprints to be uploaded and searched for – there has been a veritable boom in preprint servers for the most diverse subject areas since 2016. Nonetheless, the acceptance of preprints and the willingness to share them varies greatly across disciplines. During the COVID-19 pandemic, preprints have played an important role in the rapid dissemination, checking, and correction of research findings on the SARS-CoV-2 virus ( Fraser et al., 2020; Gianola et al., 2020 ). This chart on preprints in the life sciences illustrates how strongly the importance of preprints has increased in recent years: Source: Polka, Jessica K., & Penfold, Naomi C. (2020). Biomedical preprints per month, by source and as a fraction of total literature (3.0) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3819276 ( CC BY 4.0 International ) History of Open Access Find an introduction here. Preprints and Open Science Click on the picture to watch the video. Video about Preprints. Source: Youreka Science (2016). What Are Preprints? YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zMgY8Dx9co In contrast to journal articles, which are often behind paywalls, preprints are freely accessible in the long term and are thus a key component of green open access. When a journal article is not freely accessible, the preprint version can be found via services like Unpaywall provided it is linked to the publisher’s version (the version of record). Preprints also make the process of gaining and communicating scientific knowledge more transparent. They enable critical discussion of works in the community before final publication Thus, authors can receive and take into account feedback in addition to the actual peer reviews. Preprints thus form the basis for informal or formalised open peer review ( Frick, 2020 ). Overlay Journals Preprint servers enable the publishing of so-called overlay journals ( Gowers, 2015 ) – that is, online journals that use the infrastructure of a preprint platform, especially arXiv, for submissions and publication. Authors post their papers on arXiv and submit a link to the arXiV preprint to the journal in question, which then organises the review process. If the paper is accepted, it is included in the journal – that is, it is linked from the journal website and assigned a DOI and possibly a comment from the editor. In this way, the advantages of arXiv (cost-effective, freely accessible, well-known infrastructure) are combined with those of a journal (peer-review, reputation, possibly an Impact Factor). Successful examples of overlay journals are SIGMA (Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications) , Logical Methods in Computer Science (LMCS) , Discrete Analysis , and Quantum . open-access.network ( CC BY 4.0 International ) References Cobb, M. (2017). The prehistory of biology preprints: A forgotten experiment from the 1960s. PLOS Biology , 15 (11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2003995 Fraser, N., Brierley, L., Dey, G., Polka, J. K., Pálfy, M., Nanni, F., & Coates, J. A. (2021). Preprinting the COVID-19 pandemic . bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.22.111294 Frick, C. (2020). Peer-Review im Rampenlicht. Ein prominentes Fallbeispiel. Informationspraxis , 6 (2). https://doi.org/10.11588/ip.2020.2.74406 Gentil-Beccot, A., Mele, S., & Brooks, T. (2009). Citing and reading behaviours in high-energy physics. How a community stopped worrying about journals and learned to love repositories . arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/0906.5418 Gianola, S., Jesus, T. S., Bargeri, S., & Castellini, G. (2020). Characteristics of academic publications, preprints, and registered clinical trials on the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE , 15 (10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240123 Ginsparg, P. (2017). Preprint déjà vu: An FAQ . arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.04188 Gowers, T. (2015, September 10). Discrete Analysis – An arXiv overlay journal. Gowers’s Weblog . https://gowers.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/discrete-analysis-an-arxiv-overlay-journal/ Huisman, J., & Smits, J. (2017). Duration and quality of the peer review process: The author’s perspective. Scientometrics , 113 , 633–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2310-5 Further Reading Ettinger, C., Sadanandappa, M. K., Görgülü, K., Coghlan, K., Hallenbeck, K. K., & Puebla, I. (2022). A guide to preprinting for Early Career Researchers [OSF Preprints]. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/e59tk...

Intro The Path a Publication Takes Source: based on Rücknagel, J. & Schmeja, S. (2021). Open Access Basics - How to publish and What to Consider? (S.4). Zenodo. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4530414 ( CC BY 4.0 International ) The key takeaways from this article are 1 Authors can make their publications freely available by publishing them open access or by self-archiving them in an open access repository. 2 When choosing a publication venue, criteria such as thematic focus, quality, and costs should be considered. 3 When self-archiving, authors should grant third parties rights of use in the works. Scientific Publishing Only when authors publish their research results do their findings achieve visibility and can thus be adequately recognised and cited. For a long time, publishing works in print media – for example, as journal articles, monographs, or contributions to collections – was the most common way of permanently recording and disseminating scholarly and scientific information. Through the possibility of electronic publication, and especially through open access , a large number of alternative publication options have arisen. This significantly increases the citation frequency, and thus also the visibility, of research results ( Swan, 2010; Li et al., 2018 ). The aspects that should be considered when publishing open access or when self-archiving in an open access repository are outlined in what follows. Scientists can actively support the change to open science through their own publishing behavior. This practical tip "Supporting Open Access" explains how. Practical Tip What variants of open access publishing are there? Which ones are suitable for me? Where can I publish in accordance with the principles of open access? How do I find a suitable journal? What do research funders expect? You can find the answers in the presentation " Open Access Basics – How to Publish and What to Consider? " Practical Tip The AuROA catalogue of services ( Leistungskatalog ) offers a compilation of possible individual tasks and services in the open access publishing process. AuROA (Authors and Legal Certainty for Open Access) is a project that between 2021 and 2023 addressed the heterogeneous and complex needs, perspectives and demands of open access publishing in book-oriented disciplines. Publication Routes Source: based on Oberländer, A. (2020). Open Access – Es ist nicht alles Gold, was glänzt. In: Open Science. Von Daten zu Publikationen. Zenodo. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4018594 ( CC BY 4.0 International ) The road to publication usually starts with the decision as to how the research results should be published. There are many reasons in favour of open access publishing; they are summarised on the Reasons and Reservations page. Basically, two different open access strategies can be distinguished: gold open access and green open access . Gold open access refers to the publication of scholarly works as articles in open access journals , as open access monographs , or as contributions to open access collections or conference proceedings. This literature is freely available and reusable immediately, without an embargo period . Green open access means making research results freely available by self-archiving them in an institutional or disciplinary repository . This can also be done in parallel with or after publication in a journal or with a publisher. Choosing a Publication Venue Several parameters play a role when choosing a publication venue. These parameters are largely the same for closed access and open access publications. They include the thematic focus of the venue; the type of quality assurance it employs; its reputation in the field; and, if applicable, the licensing conditions under which the publications are made available and the level of any publication fees that may be charged. In the context of open access, research funders’ requirements increasingly play a role. Among funders, one finds not only regulations whereby grant holders should provide open access to the scholarly publications arising from funded research, but sometimes also specific requirements with regard to publication venues ( Dreher, 2020; Rücknagel, 2021 ). Further information on research funders’ policies and a list of funding organisations can be found on the Financing page . Die Vorteile einer Open-Access-Dissertation Quelle: Becklas, C., Hauss, J. (2024): Die Vorteile einer Open Access Dissertation. open-access.network, Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB) et al. https://doi.org/10.5446/68305#t=00:00,01:15 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) Source: Translation of a flowchart by Brinken, H. & Rücknagel, J. (2021). Open Access – Das sind Ihre Möglichkeiten für die Publikation von Artikeln. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5045255 ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ). Practical Tip The following tools can be helpful in finding suitable OA publication venues for your own manuscript: oa.finder (a tool for searching for scholarly publication venues; developed as a project by open-access.network ) B!SON (Open Access journal recommender, developed by TIB and SLUB Dresden ) Gold Open Access Finding Suitable Journals/Publishers If the intention is to publish a work open access (gold OA), for example, as a journal article, a monograph, or a contribution to a collection, it is advisable to first search for thematically suitable journals or publishers with open access offerings. On our web page Subject-Specific Open Access , we provide discipline-specific information that can offer helpful introductory pointers. Open access journals can be searched via the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) or the Electronic Journals Library (EZB) . For open access books, the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) and the online library and publication platform OAPEN are first ports of call. Suitable publication venues can also be found in conversation with colleagues. If a publisher does not offer a gold open access option, it is often worthwhile enquiring specifically whether it would allow the article to be self-archived in a repository. Quality Criteria Open access publications undergo the same quality assurance proce­dures as traditional publications. The review procedures do not differ either: from classical peer review and editorial review to open review procedures – everything can be found here. The German-language publication Qualitätsstandards für Open-Access-Monografien und -Sammelbände ( AG Universitätsverlage, 2018 ) offers guidance when choosing a suitable publisher for open access books. When choosing a journal, the German-language checklist on the quality of open access journals provided by Brinken et al. (2021) can help when assessing its quality. Further information in this regard can be found on the Open Access Journals and Open Access for Monographs pages. The impact and visibility of scholarly publications play an important role for the reputational gains and thus for the career prospects of individual scholars and scientists. Studies show that the citation frequency of open access publications is usually much higher than that of their closed access counterparts. Overviews in this regard are provided by the Open Access Citation Advantage Service and by Piwowar and colleagues’ Large-Scale Analysis of the Prevalence and Impact of Open Access Articles ( Piwowar et al., 2018 ). Journal Impact Factors , a metric of the citation frequency of articles in scholarly journals, are published in the annual publication Journal Citation Reports , which also covers open access journals. So-called altmetrics have emerged as an alternative to the traditional bibliometric indicators. They capture the diverse reactions to a scholarly publication on the Web. Financing In contrast to closed access, where libraries and users pay for access, open access publications are financed in a different way. The so-called author-pays model, whereby authors pay article processing charges (APCs) or book processing charges (BPCs) to have their works published, is very common in the open access context. To find out whether, or what level of, author fees are charged, it is usually helpful to check the website of the journal or publisher. If a journal indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) charges APCs, details are deposited in the journal record. However, a large percentage of open access journals indexed in DOAJ are free of charge both for readers and authors ( Morrison, 2018 ). These journals are financed, for example, by professional societies, academic institutions, library consortia, or – in kind – by voluntary work. For open access books, university presses run by universities or their libraries, and publishing initiatives established by scholars and scientists (e.g. the consortium ScholarLed ) are an affordable and high quality alternative to commercial publishers. Detailed information on financing open access articles and books can be found on the Financing page. Many research institutions have a publication fund from which open access publication fees can be paid. The management of the funds is usually located at the institutions’ libraries. In addition, some open access publishers offer institutional membership, which is similar to a discount model. Institutions pay an annual membership fee, thereby enabling their members to publish their works in the journal in question free of charge or for a reduced fee. Moreover, via transformative agreements with commercial publishers, such as those negotiated by the German initiative Projekt Deal , contractually agreed fees for individual hybrid open access articles in subscription journals are increasingly borne by library consortia. Information on this is provided by the open access officers at the respective institutions . The funding of genuine open access models by consortia is increasingly moving into focus: the costs are borne by a consortium, and no publication fees are payable by authors, irrespective of whether their institutions participate in the financing. In addition to funding research, some funding organisations also bear publication costs for articles in scholarly journals and other publications. When submitting a funding proposal to the German Research Foundation (DFG) , application can also be made for a publication grant. The Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) have established dedicated funding programmes to finance open access articles and books. The Volkswagen Foundation also bears the publication costs incurred by the projects it funds and expects grant recipients to publish open access. International funding organisations, such as the Wellcome Trust , as well as the EU framework programme Horizon 2020 , reimburse publication charges for open access articles within the framework of their funding. In addition, the Open Access Books Toolkit provides a l ist of funding sources for open access books . Practical Tip An overview of the requirements that open access journals must fulfil and concrete criteria that authors can use as a guide when choosing a suitable publication venue, can be found in the presentation " Publishing Open Access: How to evaluate a journal's quality ". Research Funders and Open Access Find an introduction here. Video on the Funding of Open Access Articles Source: Becklas Dorow, C., Hauss, J. (2026). Funding Open Access Articles – What Are the Options?. Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB), open-access.network. https://doi.org/10.5446/73596 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) Finanzierung von Open-Access-Monographien Quelle: Brinken, H. (2020). Finanzierung von Open-Access-Monographien, open-access.network. https://doi.org/10.5446/49535 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) Self-Archiving (Green Open Access) It is not always possible to publish open access, for example, when no suitable open access journal is available. A publication can nonetheless be made freely available by self-archiving it in an open access repository. In this way, the author can comply with the open access mandate of a funding organisation or their own institution, and the publication can be made freely accessible to everyone worldwide. Finding a Suitable Repository The self-archiving of publications can take place in institutional or disciplinary repositories. The Information for Different Disciplines page lists the repositories available in the respective disciplines. The Open Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR) and the Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR) also provide overviews. Authors do not have to pay any charges to make their publications available in an institutional or disciplinary repository, nor do readers have to pay to access these publications. What specifically needs to be considered when (self-)archiving can be read by country in our legal section . Self-Archiving Rights Most publishers allow their authors to make their works available in repositories in parallel with publication. The Sherpa Romeo database provides an overview of the open access policies of many journal publishers. Publishers often allow the author’s final version after peer-review (author’s accepted manuscript, AAM) or the published version to be self-archived. Publishing agreements should be drafted in such a way that the authors reserve the right to self-archive their works online in a freely accessible way. Ideally, authors should grant the publisher only non-exclusive rather than exclusive rights of use for the intended types of use. If this is not possible, and no alternative publishing option is available, authors can consider attaching an addendum to the publishing agreement in order to reserve a non-exclusive right to use the work online in a repository. Various possible solutions to this problem are available on the Publishing Agreements page. Under Section 38 of the German Act on Copyright and Related Rights (UrhG) , authors of scientific contributions that result from research activities at least half of which were financed by public funds, and that were published in a collection that appears periodically at least twice a year, have the right to self-archive them in an open access repository upon expiry of 12 months after publication. According to this statutory provision on self-archiving , it is therefore possible in these cases to make these works available in a repository even if the publishers have been granted exclusive rights of use ( Brehm, 2021 ). A German-language guide issued by the Communication, Information, Media Centre (KIM) at the University of Konstanz provides an overview of the topic of self-archiving. Self-archiving is easier when a work is published in an open access journal or with an open access publisher. As a rule, they allow the work to also be made available in a repository provided the place of publication is credited. Find Repositories on OpenDOAR Click here. Legal Questions Find an introduction here. Legal Parameters Wie genau funktionieren Creative-Commons-Lizenzen? Quelle: Brinken, H., Hauss, J. & Rücknagel, J. (2021). Wie genau funktionieren Creative-Commons-Lizenzen? open-access.network. https://doi.org/10.5446/52952 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) Source: Foter (2015). How To Attribute Creative Commons Photos ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) Authors who wish to make their works available in open access should observe several legal parameters. Of central importance is that the authors themselves have the right to exploit their works online. However, this is not necessarily a given in standard publishing agreements. An overview of the legal situation in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland can be found on the Legal Issues page, which provides information on copyright, making documents available in repositories, publishing agreements, licences, liability law, and data protection. Open Access Licences One important aspect of open access is the reuse of publications. In order to make it clear what rights third parties have when (re-)using research results, user licences are granted. It is up to the authors themselves to decide what degree of freedom of use of their works they wish to allow. It is recommended that they allow a free worldwide right of access to and reuse of the publication. The granting of open licences by authors should take place in consultation with the respective publishers or, if applicable, in compliance with the repositories’ licensing requirements. In the area of science and research, the open Creative Commons (CC) are the most common. An overview of various open content licensing models can be found on our Licences page . The use of licences to grant specific rights of use facilitates law enforcement in the case of misuse and gives users explicit indications as to how the document in question may be reused. At the same time, the author reserves the right to permit in separate agreements further uses that go beyond those specified in the licence. Predatory Journals Unfortunately, there are also journals that exploit publication charges. These predatory journals , which are founded by so-called predatory publishers, try – sometimes massively – to attract researchers to publish in their journals. However, they do not observe the usual standards of good scientific practice. Hence, there is no quality assurance, for example, in the form of peer review, nor is there adequate editing. Thus, predatory journals damage science and scholarship because they also publish poor-quality contributions whose compliance with academic or ethical standards has not been checked. As publications in these dubious journals can cause substantial damage to the reputations of scholars and scientists, they are urgently advised against submitting manuscripts to them. Source: Monash Health Library. Predatory Publishing A-Z Elements ( CC BY-NC 4.0 ) Online course Find the online course Predatory Journals: Identify, Avoid, and Publish Safely here Practical Tip Recognising Predatory Journals It is not always easy for authors to recognise whether a journal is predatory or not, because the providers often go to a lot of trouble to make their journals appear trustworthy. On professional-looking websites, sometimes entire editorial boards are given false names or well-known researchers are listed as editors without their knowledge. The German-language checklist on the quality of open access journals provided by Brinken et al. (2021) can help authors to make informed decisions. Other criteria for the assessment of the trustworthiness of a journal are provided by the website Think. Check. Submit. It can also be helpful to ask colleagues whether they have ever heard of the journal in question. In case of suspicion, attention should definitely be drawn to the journal. By keeping their eyes open and being the properly aware, authors can avoid publishing with predatory publishers by mistake. The Monash Health Library has published the useful Predatory publishing A-Z elements . Further German-language information on predatory journals and predatory publishers can be found in an overview provided by Helmholtz Open Science and in a fact sheet published by the Science Media Center Germany . In addition, there is a catalogue of criteria for recognising high-quality journals and so-called fake journals. References AG Universitätsverlage. (2018, September 11). Qualitätsstandards für Open-Access-Monografien und -Sammelbände . https://ag-univerlage.de/?p=1974 Brehm, E. (2021). Zweitveröffentlichungsrecht für Wissenschaftler*innen. https://doi.org/10.5446/51789 Brinken, H., Rücknagel, J., & Wenninger, A. (2021). Checkliste zur Qualität von Open-Access-Zeitschriften . Zenodo. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4643853 Dreher, L. (2020, August 27) . Open-Access-Vorgaben in EU-Projekten . OpenAccessTalk. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4048489 Li, Y., Wu, C., Yan, E., & Li, K. (2018). Will open access increase journal CiteScores? An empirical investigation over multiple disciplines. PLOS ONE , 13 (8), e0201885. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201885 Morrison, H. (2018, January 31). DOAJ APC information as of Jan 31, 2018. Sustaining the Knowledge Commons / Soutenir Les Savoirs Communs. Open Access Scholarship / Littérature Savante En Libre Accès . https://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/2018/02/06/doaj-apc-information-as-of-jan-31-2018/ Piwowar, H., Priem, J., Larivière, V., Alperin, J. P., Matthias, L., Norlander, B., Farley, A., West, J., & Haustein, S. (2018). The state of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. PeerJ , 6 , e4375. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4375 Rücknagel, J. (2021, April 15). Fördererauflagen zu Open Access - was gilt es zu beachten? OpenAccessTalk. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4694320 Rücknagel, J., & Schmeja, S. (2021, January 28). Open access basics – How to publish and what to consider? OpenAccessTalk. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4530414 Swan, A. (2010). The Open Access citation advantage: Studies and results to date . https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/268516/ Further Reading Forschungszentrum Jülich, Zentralbibliothek (2022). Predatory Publishers. "Schwarze Schafe" im Wissenschaftsbetrieb. Checkliste. URL: https://www.fz-juelich.de/de/zb/open-science/predatory-publishers Reimer N., & Halbherr, V. (2021). Kriterienkatalog zur Erkennung von qualitativ hochwertigen Journals und von sogenannten Fake-Journals. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5031928 Schmitz, J., & Schmeja, S. (2019). Bericht zum Workshop "Was tun, wenn es passiert ist? Umgang mit Publikationen, die bei einem Predatory Journal eingereicht wurden." https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3553616 Solomon, D. J., & Björk, B.-C. (2012). A study of open access journals using article processing charges. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology , 63 (8), 1485–1495. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22673...

Find out how to publish open access Open Access Publishing Open Access Journals Repositories Preprints Open Educational Resources Open Access Books Scholar-Led and Community-Driven Publishing...

Intro What Are Altmetrics? Click on the picture to watch the video on YouTube. Soruce: Altmetric (2017). A beginner's guide to altmetrics. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6XawJ7-880 The key takeaways from this article are 1 Open Peer Review is a more transparent alternative to conventional peer review. 2 Conventional bibliometric indicators such as the impact factor do not allow any conclusions about the quality of individual articles. 3 Alternative metrics (altmetrics) include usage figures, mentions, and discussions in various networks. (Open) Peer Review Peer Review is the standard quality assurance process, especially in the case of scholarly journals. Researchers working in the same field as the authors (“peers”) review the manuscripts submitted to a journal, point out errors and ambiguities, and recommend to the editors that a contribution be accepted, rejected, or revised and resubmitted. In the case of the traditional single-blind peer-review process, the reviewers know the names of the authors, but not vice versa; in the case of double-blind peer review, the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous to each other. One criticism of classical peer review is its lack of transparency. Readers of an article have no way of knowing whether the review was based on appropriate scientific criteria or whether it was conducted in a merely superficial way. Moreover, conflicts of interest – for example because the reviewers are colleagues or competitors of the authors – are not apparent to outsiders. In order to make the peer-review process more transparent and, ideally, to increase the quality of the reviews and thus also the quality of the articles, more open procedures are being discussed and have, in part, already been implemented. However, open peer review , as it is called, is not clearly defined, and it may refer to different procedures – or to combinations thereof ( Ross-Hellauer, 2017; Wolfram et al., 2020 ). When the reviews, the authors’ responses, and the editors’ decision are published alongside the article, the readers can see how rigorous the peer-review process was and how the decision of the editors came about. Errors or gaps in the review process can be more easily noticed by fellow researchers. Examples of journals with this type of open peer review include PeerJ (optional if all participants agree), the PLOS journals , and the EMBO Press journals (optional). Another type of open peer review is also known as post-publication peer review or interactive peer review. In a first step, the submitted manuscript is immediately published online after initial checking. It can then be publicly discussed by invited reviewers or all interested fellow researchers. The reviewers may be anonymous or named. The manuscript is revised by the authors on the basis of the comments, and, in a second step, the final version is published by the journal. Previous versions and the comments remain accessible. Examples of journals with this type of open peer review include Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics , F1000Research and Informationspraxis . However, open peer review can also take place completely informally without corresponding infrastructure, namely when published preprints are publicly commented on by fellow researchers, and the comments are taken into consideration when improving the manuscript ( Frick, 2020 ). Source: FOSTER (n. d.). Online-Course. Open Peer Review. https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/learning/open-peer-review ( CC 0 ) Online Course on Open Peer Review This free online course introduces you to the topic of open peer review. The Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) recommends: "Do not use journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, as a surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles, to assess an individual scientist’s contributions, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions." ( DORA ) open-access.network ( CC BY 4.0 International ) Source: altmetric.com Metrics Whereas peer review constitutes basic quality assurance before publication of a scholarly work, various methods have been developed to quantitatively describe the (actual or presumed) importance of journals, publications, and researchers for the scientific community. The best-known and most influential metric is the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) , which nowadays is calculated and marketed by Clarivate Analytics . The JIF is a measure of how often the articles published in a particular journal in the two years prior to the reference year were cited in that year. It was originally developed as a tool for comparing the impact of different journals and as an aid for librarians’ acquisition decisions. Although the JIF refers to a journal as a whole and says nothing about the impact or indeed the scientific quality of individual articles, it is often used to assess scientists’ research performance. This is not the only reason that the JIF is frequently the subject of criticism. It is also highly discipline-dependent and thus not comparable across disciplines. Moreover, it takes only the two years prior to the reference year into consideration. The calculation of the JIF is not very transparent and is often not independently reproducible ( Larivière & Sugimoto, 2019 ). The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) , which has been signed by numerous research performing organisations, research funding agencies, etc., advocates inter alia that journal-based metrics such as the JIF should not be taken into account when assessing job applications, funding proposals, etc., and that the outputs of scientific research should be evaluated based on their content rather than on the journal in which they were published. Whereas conventional bibliometric indicators such as the JIF are based on citations in the scientific literature, alternative approaches – known as Altmetrics – try to take other types of communication and reactions into consideration, for example usage figures, mentions on news portals, and discussions on social networks. Examples include the Altmetric Attention Score provided by Altmetric.com and PlumX Metrics provided by Plum Analytics. Alternative metrics have been evaluated inter alia in the project * metrics at Göttingen State and University Library (SUB). Conventional and also alternative metrics are often produced and made available for a fee by commercial providers. Reliable citation data are available mainly via commercial databases such as Web of Science or Scopus . On the one hand, these databases are fee-based; on the other hand, they do not cover many smaller publishers and journals or non-English-language literature. To remedy this, initiatives such as the Initiative for Open Citations and the Initiative for Open Abstracts have arisen in the science sector that are aimed at making these important metadata openly accessible, thereby rendering it possible to make the publications and their content findable at different locations, to link them, to perform bibliometric analyses, and to examine citations and other relationships ( Peroni & Shotton, 2020 ). References Frick, C. (2020). Peer-Review im Rampenlicht. Ein prominentes Fallbeispiel. Informationspraxis, 6 (2). https://doi.org/10.11588/ip.2020.2.74406 Larivière, V. & Sugimoto, C. R. (2019). The Journal Impact Factor: A Brief History, Critique, and Discussion of Adverse Effects. In W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicator s (pp. 3-24). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_1 , https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.08992 Peroni, S. & Shotton, D. (2020). OpenCitations, an infrastructure organization for open scholarship. Quantitative Science Studies 1 (1), 428–444. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00023 Ross-Hellauer, T. (2017). What is open peer review? A systematic review. F1000Research, 6 (588). https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11369.2 Wolfram, D., Wang, P., Hembree, A., & Park, A. (2020). Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science. Scientometrics, 125 , 1033–1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03488-4 Further Reading Williams, A. E. (2017). Altmetrics: An Overview and Evaluation. Online Information Review, 41 (3), 311–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-10-2016-0294 ....

Intro Publishing in Repositories Source: based on Koch, M. (2015). Publizieren über das Repositorium der Leibniz Universität Hannover. TIB Blog The Key takeaways from this article are 1 Repositories are document servers on which scholarly materials are archived and made available free of charge. 2 A distinction is made between institutional and disciplinary repositories. 3 Content and metadata stored in repositories are made available via OAI interfaces. The DINI Certificate ensures the quality standards of document servers. What Are Repositories? Repositories are document servers operated by universities or research institutions on which scholarly materials are archived and made available free of charge worldwide. Categories of Repositories A distinction is made between institutional and disciplinary repositories. Institutional repositories are document servers operated by institutions (mainly university libraries, other infrastructural institutions, or research organisations) that enable their members to digitally publish scholarly documents. Disciplinary depositories, by contrast, are trans-institutional. They are available to scientists and scholars to publish and archive their works on specific subjects, for example, in a specialist discipline. Examples are media/rep/ , an open access repository for publications in the field of media studies ; Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR) for the social sciences ; PubMed Central for the biomedical and life sciences ; and arXiv for scholarly articles, especially from the fields of physics , mathematics , and computer science . As a rule, authors do not have to pay a fee to make scholarly works available in institutional or disciplinary repositories, and users do not have to pay to access these works. As of November 2021, the Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR) listed 5,771 repositories, via which universities and research institutions enable scientists to make scholarly documents freely available to the public. Operating a Repository Find an introduction here. Open Access Helpdesk Please feel free to contact us with any questions you may have about open access. Focus Group on Self-Archiving Feel free to discuss developments in self-archiving with experts in the Focus Group on Self-Archiving. Rights Rights in the Case of Self-Archiving Documents that are made available in repositories are frequently also published formally with a publisher – for example, in a journal, an edited volume, or as a monograph. The use of a repository to make a work that has also been published with a publisher available to the public is refer­red to as self-archiving ; it constitutes green open access . In this case – in contrast to open access journals , for example – content licences are of minor importance. Scientists and scholars who, in addition to formal publication, also make their works available on a document server have often already transferred all rights of use to the publisher, and can there­fore no longer license the self-archived version under a content licence. Rather, the possibility of self-archiving documents that have already been published in a journal or with a publisher presupposes either that the author has reserved the right to make the work available in a repository, or that the work is covered by the relevant provisions of copyright law (in Germany, e.g., the so-called Zweitveröffentlichungsrecht ). The publisher’s open access policy might provide for the option that the work will be covered by the open access provisions of the German Alliance licences . The infographic at the bottom of this page provides brief information on self-archiving formally published works in repositories. Rights in the Case of Gold Open Access The rights situation is much simpler when repositories are used to pub­lish scholarly works for the first time ( gold open access ) – for example, to publish conference proceedings, series, or other texts that are not pub­lished in parallel with a publisher. In this case, the authors usually hold the exclusive rights in the content of the works, and are therefore completely free to choose the conditions under which they are made available. Hence, they can be licensed under one of the aforementioned content licences, or they can simply be made available in accordance with the provisions of copyright law. Works that are first published in reposito­ries, which are often known as preprints , can be found, for example, on the document servers arXiv or Zenodo . Because the documents found in repositories often vary in terms of content or subject matter, it is expedient when searching for documents to use a specialised search engine, such as the Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE), which accesses full texts in repositories. Legal issues Find an introduction here. Video über das Zeitveröffentlichungsrecht Quelle: Brehm, E. (2021). Zweitveröffentlichungsrecht für Wissenschaftler*innen, open-access.network. https://doi.org/10.5446/51789 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) Content and Added Value of Repositories The designs and functionalities of repositories are varied and extensive. Besides the classical differentiation between institutional and disciplinary repositories, repositories also vary in terms of the content provided, additional services, and their technical configuration. Many document servers provide for the archiving of all types of electronic (text) documents – for example, preprints and post-prints of journal articles, working papers, books and contributions to books, theses, and teaching and learning materials – whereas others exclude some document types. Via their interfaces and indexing services, networked repositories offer numerous value-added services: the virtual aggregation of thematically related documents from different document servers, thereby avoiding the need for time-consuming searches on numerous different servers and allowing the easiest possible access to scholarly texts personalisation functions, for example, the creation of profiles by means of which readers can be informed about new documents on a particular subject the automatic creation of publication lists or bibliographies of authors or working groups that can be dynamically integrated into personal websites or other online profiles, for example, research information systems services such as Unpaywall , INSPIRE , or Google Scholar that allow different versions of the same document to be identified, thereby possibly enabling users who do not have access to a formal closed access publication to find an open access version on a document server Repositories often allow the downloading of bibliographic data, which can then be imported into reference administration programs, thereby enabling comfortable use of the information in future publications. Services such as INSPIRE and Google Scholar make it possible to access citation data for works on document servers and thus to identify their citation impact. Statistical data show the dissemination and impact of documents in repositories. This information can be obtained in the form of download statistics (e.g., by using the data of the DFG project Open-Access-Statistik (OAS) or another statistics solution). Altmetrics capture the circulation of scholarly information in scholarly and public networks and media. Via mutual linking between related objects, such as texts and research data or software, scientists can make the entire output of a research project available in an integrated way. Document servers enable authors to comply easily with the funding guidelines of research funders, whereby project-related publications are to be made available in open access. Many repositories even enable publications to be assigned to a specific research project. For example, anyone who imports a document into Zenodo or another OpenAIRE -compatible repository can add the EU grant ID via the metadata. The aim of the above-mentioned value-added services and functions is to increase the visibility and dissemination of the publications in the repositories. In this pursuit, the repositories rely mainly on networking and cooperation with other information services or search engines. Of equal importance is the linking of personal or institute websites, annual bibliographies, or current research information systems (CRIS). Findability of the Documents The fact that most repositories use the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) immensely facilitates the search for scholarly documents. Moreover, it ensures the aforementioned dissemination of openly accessible information. The OAI-PMH allows the metadata of documents in distributed repositories to be aggregated in one database. Technically speaking, the OAI-PMH is an XML-based protocol that serves to request and transmit metadata. An OAI service provider (e.g. OAIster or BASE) supports the search by using the OAI-PMH. The service provider harvests metadata from the individual repositories (the content providers), processes them, and makes them available for search queries. This guarantees the findability as well as the maximum dissemination, and thus the visibility, of the scholarly texts. Quality Standards The Deutsche Initiative für Netzwerkinformation e. V. (German Initiative for Network Information, DINI) seeks to improve information and communication services and to promote and support the necessary developments. The DINI Certificate for Open Access Publication Services enables the standardised assessment of the reviewed document servers and the services they provide. DINI sees the certificate as quality control for document and publication services. The criteria on which certification is based include the visibility of the overall service; author support; the security, authenticity, and integrity of the technical system; and the long-term availability and findability of the archived documents. To date (as of November 2021), 469 repositories have been certified by DINI. In October 2019, the sixth edition of the DINI Certificate was released. Overview Lists of Repositories The Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR) German Repositories in OpenDOAR Austrian Repositories in OpenDOAR Swiss Repositories in OpenDOAR Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR) Search Engines for Repositories OAIster BASE Google Scholar References Further Reading Demetres, M. R., Delgado, D., & Wright, D. N. (2020). The Impact of Institutional Repositories: A Systematic Review. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 108 (2), 177–184. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2020.856 ....

Intro SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DEAL-WILEY AGREEMENT FOR OPEN ACCESS Significance and opportunities of the DEAL-Wiley agreement for the open access transformation. Source: Jobmann, A. (2019). Meaning and opportunities of the DEAL-Wiley contract for the open access transformation. OA2020-de.org. Available at: https://oa2020.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/en/blog/2019/03/18/meaning_opportunities_wileydeal_openaccesstransformation/ Key Takeaways from This Article 1 Open access transformation means the most comprehensive possible transformation of the scholarly publishing system to open access. 2 Numerous measures and actors are contributing to this transformation. 3 The transformation is fuelled by its implementation in practice with clear objectives. Open Access Transformation Open access transformation means the most comprehensive possible transformation of the scholarly publishing system to open access. This implies moving away from the traditional subscription and acquisitions model whereby libraries pay for access to scholarly works. Although current efforts are focused on scholarly journals, a complete transformation of the scholarly publishing system to open access presupposes the inclusion of all publication types. Moreover, all regions of the world must also be included At EU level and in Germany, respectively, the open access transformation has for some time been an established policy goal of the European Commission, the Federal Government – and also of state governments (see Policy Frameworks ), scientific organisations, and research funding organisations (see Research Funders and Open Access ). The development is dynamic and is shaped by numerous approaches and actors. However, criticism has been voiced from various perspectives. Some publishers and professional associations, for example, have pushed for deceleration or exceptions. Other stakeholders have drawn attention to possibly unintended consequences of the transformative approaches. These include a further strengthening of the position of major publishers, possible lock-in effects, or a further increase in article processing charges ( APCs ), which are already too high. Scholar-led initiatives have expressed the wish that publication infrastructures be placed in the hands of the scientific institutions themselves. In addition to the desire for open access to scientific research, they take a critical view of the scholarly publishing system and have put alternative standards for research evaluation on the agenda. Video on the Status of Open Access in 2023 Source: Philipp Zumstein. (2023, September 29). Der Weg ist nicht das Ziel: Über Ideale und Irrwege bei der Open-Access-Transformation. Open-Access-Tage 2023 (OAT23), Berlin. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8388502 oa.helpdesk If you have any specific questions about open access, you can ask them here. Instruments for the Transformation The basis of many transformative approaches is the reallocation of acquisitions funds. The underlying idea is that no additional funds are needed, but rather the current (global) funds can be used for open access publications. To be able to implement this, publishers must be encouraged to convert their publications to open access models . By converting existing publications to open access, publishers can take the acquired reputation and experiences with them. Transformative Agreements Transformative agreements , where some of the content of subscription journals is published open access and the expectation is that this proportion will gradually increase to 100%, are currently the instrument that is attracting the most attention and has had the greatest open access effects. However, it is not always clear whether such a transformation will be achieved in a binding way (see, e.g., Mittermaier, 2021, 2025; Rothfritz et al., 2024). The German initiative Projekt DEAL (now Konsortium DEAL; see below) is a key player in the field of transformative agreements. The hope is that with these transformative agreements a critical threshold will be exceeded, above which the publishers will convert their entire portfolios to open access. Transformative Journals In addition, individual journals can be established as transformative journals with the clear goal of steadily increasing the share of open access content (see Plan S ). Journal Flipping For individual journals, the complete and immediate conversion to open access – so-called journal flipping – is the quickest transformation option. Depending on the position the publisher takes, and on who owns the title rights, the flipped journal can continue under the same name, or the editors can be withdrawn, and the journal can start anew at a different location. Starting Open Access Publications from Scratch Starting open access publications from scratch means that new journals, book series, or conference proceedings are planned as open access products from the very beginning. These instruments are driven by various actors and supported by them over and above providing extensive publication funding: Research Performing Organisations Research performing organisations support this process by operating publishing services, university presses, journal platforms, etc. These offerings are non-commercial and may even be subsidised if the organisation covers the operating costs, thereby reducing cost pressure and increasing scientific control. Research Funding Organisations On the one hand, research funders provide financial support with publication charges for open access articles and monographs. On the other hand, through their open access mandates (or – weaker – expectations), they support authors’ decisions to publish their works open access. Furthermore, several programmes are funding projects dedicated to creating infrastructure for the open access transformation. Libraries Libraries negotiate all kinds of open access agreements, carry out publication and cost monitoring, and develop new open access models. They are increasingly using acquisitions funds for open access (see German Library Statistics and the Open Access Monitor ). Procedures are put in place to monitor the transformation to open access in accordance with institutional and statutory provisions and the compliance with open access policies . Libraries and Commercial Actors Libraries and commercial actors operate consortia or jointly fund open access publications. Open Access Repositories Open access repositories serve as venues for the self-archiving of contributions in parallel with publication (see green open access ), thereby enabling authors to meet research funders’ requirements with regard to open access (see also Plan S and the Rights Retention Strategy ). As is the case in almost all other aspects of the open access debate, scholarly journals are also dominant in the transformation context. In principle, all instruments are also applicable to books and book series as well as other types of publications, such as conference proceedings. However, in individual cases, new complexities arise. Thus, all actors are called upon to include all publication types in their open access transformation measures. Although various transformation approaches can be applied in parallel, they occasionally also collide. This happens especially in the case of scarce resources or strategic orientations. Whereas transformative agreements focus more on large bundles or entities (large journal packages, large publishers), approaches such as journal flipping tend to emphasize aspects such as scientific control or a complete and immediate transformation to open access. One challenge faced by all approaches is the constant search for sustainable funding opportunities that follow on from and further develop the existing acquisitions structures (see Schenke et al., 2025 ). Research Funders and Open Access You can find an introduction here. What are Repositories? You can find an introduction here. Consequences of the Transformation The main consequence of the open access transformation is the growing share of freely available and possibly reusable scholarly literature (see Arguments and Reservations ). Within research performing organisations, the open access transformation is changing work steps and responsibilities, and there may be a need to redistribute financial resources. The background for this is that the costs of scholarly publishing are increasingly distributed based on publication output rather than purely on the size of the research performing organisations. New tasks are arising, especially for scholarly libraries. Here, acquisitions funds must be reallocated, the development of the publication figures must be monitored, and financial support must be made available for publication costs and consortial funding models. In addition, transformative agreements must be managed, and some tasks must be redistributed among publishers, libraries, and authors. Depending on the organisation, the libraries are responsible for advising researchers on open access publishing. Thus, open access has developed from a special topic to a core task of libraries. Key Actors Science Organisations In recent years, the Digital Information initiative of the Alliance of Science Organisations (Alliance Initiative for short) has published several position papers on the open access transformation (especially Bruch et al., 2016). The key demands are the anchoring of open access in the libraries, in licensing practice , and in the acquisitions budgets; the gradual reallocation of acquisitions funds; the disclosure of journal subscription costs and open access publication charges and figures; and the development of scalable processes in the libraries. In 2024, the Alliance Initiative published a study on the mapping and description of open access services in Germany ( Biela et al., 2024 ) that reflects the status quo of publicly funded scholarly open access services and infrastructures in Germany The German Research Foundation (DFG) is a key science policy actor in the open access transformation. It supports the development and operation of open access publication funds and infrastructures with several funding programmes and thus significantly influences developments in these areas. In its positions on research policy , the DFG supports key initiatives such as the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, OA2020, the Action Plan for Diamond Open Access , the EU Council Conclusions on Scholarly Publishing 2023, and the International Science Council (ISC). It also cooperates with other national and international open access initiatives. Although it supports the efforts of cOAlition S , the DFG does not mandate open access publishing. In two position papers ( DFG, 2018 ; DFG, 2022 ), it has taken a stance on current challenges in academic publishing In 2022, the German Science and Humanities Council (Wissenschaftsrat) published comprehensive “ Recommendations on the Transformation of Academic Publishing: Towards Open Access ” in which it declared that the goal of the transformation was for gold open access to become standard practice for the publication of scientific results. To monitor publication costs and strategically plan the funding of academic publishing in the long term, the Council recommended that scientific institutions establish information budgets . DEAL Konsortium Projekt DEAL, now known as the DEAL Konsortium, was initiated by the Alliance of German Science Organisations under the leadership of the German Rectors’ Conference with the aim of concluding uniform national licence agreements for all (digital) journals of major commercial academic publishers. The agreements that the DEAL Konsortium concludes on behalf of over 900 eligible institutions have an open access component : Authors affiliated with participating institutions can publish their works open access in the publishers’ subscription-based journals with an open access option (so-called hybrid journals ) at no cost to themselves (hence the high proportion of open access publications among the research articles from German institutions). In addition, participating institutions have access to the publisher’s entire journal portfolio. The publication fees are invoiced centrally to the publishers’ contractual partner, DEAL Open Access Services (DEAS) gGmbH , which in turn invoices the participating institutions. To date, DEAL agreements have been concluded with three publishers: Wiley , Springer Nature , and Elsevier . Forum 13+ Working Group Forum 13+ was established as an independent working group of experts from German library consortia to coordinate the negotiation of transformative agreements between scientific institutions and small and medium publishers or professional associations – beyond the realm of the major scholarly publishers with whom DEAL transformative agreements have been concluded. In this capacity, the working group has published a guide to the assessment of open access transformative agreements and publishers’ offerings (“ Bewertung von Open-Access-Transformationsverträgen und Verlagsangeboten ”). Plan S/cOAlition S Plan S is an initiative of an international consortium of research performing and research funding organisations ( cOAlition S ). Since 2021, cOAlitionS has been calling for scholarly publications from publicly funded research to be published in recognized open access journals or on open access platforms or to be made immediately available through open access repositories without an embargo. Joint implementation guidelines are implemented in the funding guidelines of the participating research funders. One key element is a fundamental rejection of hybrid open access, except as part of discernible transformative arrangements. cOAlitionS attaches great importance to cost transparency on the part of publishers. Thus, it reflects the general trend that research funders currently have the most effective and simplest instruments: by linking awards of third-party funding to open access obligations, they can intervene decisively. However, German research funding organisations are not officially members of cOAlitionS. Open Access Consortia SCOAP³ – Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics is an international consortium under the leadership of CERN that is dedicated to the promotion of open access in high-energy physics (HEP). It is a globally unique initiative that has converted several key journals in the field of HEP completely to open access without authors having to pay the article processing charges ( APCs ) themselves. Libraries and organisations from all other the world contribute financially to the project. The level of contributions is based on the publication output of the respective scientific institutions. As a consortial model, KOALA enables sustainable funding for diamond open access . Scientific institutions – especially libraries and research performing organisations – jointly fund journals, which can then switch to a diamond open access model: Thematically focused journal bundles are offered to scientific insitutions for community funding. As soon as the funding target has been reached, the journal is funded for 3 years and is made completely freely accessible. Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology University Library ( TIB ) in Hanover acts as a central service provider and coordinates the KOALA model as part of its regular operations. Scientific Communities and Professional Associations Professional associations are self-organizing bodies that also set professional standards. Some of them have signed the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, discussed the topic of open access internally (see Bärwollf et al., 2023 ), or taken a science policy stance on the open access transformation – as, for example, the German Physical Society (DPG) did in a position paper ( DPG, 2021 ) in which it expressed criticism of certain developments in the area of open access. Authors Besides institutional actors, the researchers themselves have a key role to play in shaping the open access transformation. By choosing an open access publication organ and model , using their secondary publication right , and making their publications available under an open content licence , they can make a decisive contribution to the free accessibility of their research results. Moreover, researchers can set up an open access journal themselves , convert an existing journal to open access ( journal flipping ), or get involved in scholar-led diamond open access initiatives. Open Access Transformation in Practice What the many different approaches to the open access transformation have in common is the aim that in future the largest possible share of scholarly publications will be freely available. To be able to assess the measures and develop them further, they should be as transparent as possible. This includes the provision of information on possible intermediate steps on the path to complete transformation to open access (especially in the case of transformative agreements), the anchoring of irreversible steps to increase the share of open access publications, and transparency regarding the underlying publication figures ( information budget ). Cost-cutting mechanisms should be incorporated to prevent a further increase in article processing charges ( APCs ). The creation of a network of actors should be aimed for, without fundamentally limiting the diversity of the options. However, new initiatives would be well advised to obtain advice and support. The project open-access.network offers opportunities for networking and individual advice . Because the open access transformation is clearly anchored as a public policy goal and as an intention on the part of research funding and research performing organisations, all actors in the scientific landscape are called upon to take appropriate action in their respective fields of activity. Many aspects must be considered when converting a journal to open access – from academic freedom, through scientific control, sustainable and fair funding, and additional tasks in institutions, to calls for the redistribution of financial resources across institutions. However, the immediate criterion remains: Will the most comprehensive possible transformation to open access succeed? References Bärwolff, T., Benz, M., Dreyer, M., Neufend, M., Kindling, M., Kirchner, A., & Schmidt, B. (2023). Open4DE landscape report. Open Research Office Berlin. https://doi.org/10.21428/986c5d43.bab38f02 Biela, J., Stalla, M., Hohmann, L., & Holzer, A. C. (2024). Kartierung und Beschreibung der Open-Access-Dienste in Deutschland. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11121906 . Bruch, C., Geschuhn, K., Hanig, K., Hillenkötter, K., Pampel, H., Schäffler, H., Scheiner, A., Scholze, F., Stanek, U., Timm, A., & Tullney, M. (2016). Empfehlungen zur Open-Access- Transformation. Strategische und praktische Verankerung von Open Access in der Informationsversorgung wissenschaftlicher Einrichtungen. Empfehlungen der Ad-hoc-AG Open-Access-Gold im Rahmen der Schwerpunktinitiative „Digitale Information“ der Allianz der deutschen Wissenschaftsorganisationen. https://doi.org/10.3249/allianzoa.011 German Physical Society (DPG) (2021). DPG position paper on the future of scientific publishing. https://www.dpg-physik.de/veroeffentlichungen/publikationen/stellungnahmen-der-dpg/wissenschaftssystem/pdf/dpg-positionspapier_publikationswesen_en_final.pdf German Research Foundation (DFG). (2018). Förderung von Informationsinfrastrukturen für die Wissenschaft [Funding information infrastructures for research]. https://www.dfg.de/resource/blob/173200/positionspapier-informationsinfrastrukturen.pdf German Research Foundation (DFG) | Working Group on Publications. (2022). Academic publishing as a foundation and area of leverage for research assessment – Challenges and fields of action. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6538163 Mittermaier, B. (2021). Transformationsverträge – Stairway to Heaven oder Highway to Hell? Zeitschrift für Bibliothekskultur / Journal for Library Culture, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.21428/1bfadeb6.d80f0652 Mittermaier, B. (2025). Transformationsverträge sind eine Sackgasse: In Erinnerung an Irene Barbers (1966–2025). O-Bib. Das Offene Bibliotheksjournal Herausgeber VDB, 12(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.5282/o-bib/6117 Rothfritz, L., Herb, U., & Schmal, W. B. (2024) Trapped in transformative agreements? A multifaceted analysis of > 1,000 contracts. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.20224 Schenke, J., Stork, K. S., & Tullney, M. (2025). Das Diamond-Open-Access-Modell KOALA aus erwerbungsbibliothekarischer Sicht: Ein Auswertungsbericht. O-Bib. Das Offene Bibliotheksjournal , 12(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.5282/o-bib/6162 Further Reading Arning, U., Bargheer, M., Meinecke, I., Schobert, D., & Tobias, R. (2022). Open-Access-Transformation für Bücher: Die Rolle von institutionellen Verlagen und Publikationsdiensten. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6346234 ESAC Initiative (2024, 11 August). Guidelines for transformative agreements. https://esac-initiative.org/about/transformative-agreements/guidelines-for-transformative-agreements , German Science and Humanities Council (WR). 2022. Recommendations on the transformation of academic publishing: Towards open access. https://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/download/2022/9477-22_en Hacker, A., & Tullney, M. (2020). “Stell Dir vor, es ist 2020 und Open Access läuft immer noch nicht.“. https://doi.org/10.5446/49691 Knoche, M. (2021). Raus aus den DEAL-Verträgen! Sieben Gründe für den Ausstieg. Aus Der Forschungsbibliothek Krekelborn . https://biblio.hypotheses.org/2598 Oberländer, A., & Tullney, M. (2021). Gemeinschaftliche Open-Access-Finanzierung als Aufgabe für Bibliotheken. https://doi.org/10.5446/52895 Pampel, H. (2021). Strategische und operative Handlungsoptionen für wissenschaftliche Einrichtungen zur Gestaltung der Open-Access-Transformation. Philosophische Fakultät der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. https://doi.org/10.18452/22946 Rösch, H., Geschuhn, K., Barbers, I., Bove, K., Pohlmann, T., & Satzinger, L. (2022). Open Access ermöglichen: Open Access-Transformation und Erwerbung in wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken – ein praktischer Leitfaden. doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6090208 Schimmer, R., & Geschuhn, K. (2017). 3c. Open-Access-Transformation: Die Ablösung des Subskriptionswesens durch Open-Access-Geschäftsmodelle. In K. Söllner & B. Mittermaier (Eds.), Praxishandbuch Open Access (pp. 173–180). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110494068-020 Schön, M., & Mittermaier, B. (2025). Empfehlungen zur Gestaltung des institutionellen Publikationskostenmonitorings. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14748772 Šimukovič, E. (2024). Transformative agreements are a blind alley. Katina Magazine. https://doi.org/10.1146/katina-20241008-1 Taubert, N., Sterzik, L., & Bruns, A. (2024). Mapping the German Diamond Open Access journal landscape. Minerva, 62(2), 193–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-023-09519-7 Ziegler, G.M., & Dirnagl, U. (2024). Warum die „Deal“-Verträge (k)ein Gewinn für die Wissenschaft sind. https://www.forschung-und-lehre.de/politik/warum-die-deal-vertraege-kein-gewinn-fuer-die-wissenschaft-sind-6595...

Intro Converting Journals to Open Access Quelle: Brinken, H., Hauss, J. & Rücknagel, J. (2022). Ab jetzt Open Access. open-access.network. https://doi.org/10.5446/59191 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) The key takeaways from this article are: 1 The conversion of subscription-based journals to open access (“journal flipping”) has many advantages, inter alia increased visibility and findability. 2 Before conversion, the parameters must be clarified and the requirements analysed. 3 There are various funding models for open access journals. Journal Flipping Dreher (2021) conducted a qualitative survey of editors of humanities journals that had converted to open access. One interviewee noted that visibility had increased strongly both for readers and potential authors, and that submissions were much more numerous than before conversion (p. 13). Advantages such as these mean that more and more journals are successfully converting to an open access model (Open Access Directory, 2021). The process of converting traditional subscription-based journals to open access is also known as “journal flipping”. When converting a scholarly journal to open access, various parameters – for example the journal concept, policy and technical realisation – must be rethought (Solomon et al., 2016). Editorial workflows often have to be changed, too, especially if the journal is leaving its current publisher. In any case, converting to open access requires careful preparation and planning. Several studies have reported that flipping a journal generally takes at least a year (Dreher, 2021; Solomon et al., 2016). To outline this process in more detail, the present article addresses important points that should be considered when converting a journal to open access. Basic recommendations for action have been drawn from Edig and Rücknagel (2022). There are several reasons to consider flipping a journal to open access. Besides personal affinities to the idea of open access, there is an increasing demand on the part of scientists for open access publishing options (Open Access Monitor, 2022), and there are political demands on the part of research funders such as Horizon Europe and Plan S . Studies on flipped journals show that they have higher visitor numbers (Wenaas, 2021), that their acceptance and impact remain the same (Mallett et al., 2021), and that their publication output increases (Momeni et al., 2021). OA Talk Journal Flipping Find an introduction here How does one start the flipping process? Click here to go directly to the section How does one communicate the conversion of the journal to open access? Click here to go directly to the section What funding models are there for open access journals? Click here to go directly to the section Do some existing processes have to be revised? Click here to go directly to the section What licence is suitable? Click here to go directly to the section What must the journal policy state? Click here to go directly to the section What will happen to back issues? Click here to go directly to the section There are several reasons to consider flipping a journal to open access. Besides personal affinities to the idea of open access, there is an increasing demand on the part of scientists for open access publishing options (Open Access Monitor, 2022), and there are political demands on the part of research funders such as Horizon Europe and Plan S . Studies on flipped journals show that they have higher visitor numbers (Wenaas, 2021), that their acceptance and impact remain the same (Mallett et al., 2021), and that their publication output increases (Momeni et al., 2021). Paths to the Golden Road: Models of Open Access Transformation for Journals Find more information about the Open-Access-Transformation models. Parameter If you are considering converting a journal to open access, you should first clarify the parameters (Edig & Rücknagel, 2022). There are two ways to achieve conversion. The first is journal flipping, where an existing journal is converted to an open access model and keeps its name and all its metrics. The second way is to found a new journal. In this case, the persons involved in an existing subscription journal (primarily the editorial board) move to a new journal. A well-known example of the latter approach is the journal Glossa (Gutknecht, 2015). To find out more about the things that must be considered when launching a new journal, and the challenges that this involves, see our Publishing Open Access Journals page. Whether you can convert a journal to open access depends on the approval of all those involved in the publishing process. If you cooperate with an external publishing partner, you will have to present the idea to them. If the publisher is not interested in converting to an open access model, you can – depending on your publishing agreement – undertake the conversion alone or with the help of a new partner. The following questions can guide you in the process: Who has the rights to the journal? Who receives revenue from the journal, and what activities are currently funded from the revenue? Do the members of the editorial board support flipping the journal, or are there enough supporters to create a new journal? How familiar is the respective scientific community with open access? When concluding a publishing agreement, many large publishers require organisations to transfer the rights in the journal to them. This also includes the rights to the journal name. Also in the case of journals that were founded by a publisher, the publisher usually reserves all rights. If you are in this situation, and the publisher is not willing to convert the journal to open access, the foundation of a new journal is probably the only conversion option. Determine the Status Quo Before you start the process of flipping a journal, you should first check the status quo. Here, it is matter of determining, for example, who holds the rights to the journal name. To find this out, it is worthwhile taking a look at contractual documents or the journal website. In addition, you should familiarise yourself with the process of flipping and, for example, read first-hand reports of the experiences of editors of flipped or newly created journals. These reports are also a source of information about possible conversion strategies, which will make it easier for you to decide on a strategy of your own. In any case, you should draw up as precise a timetable as possible for the individual steps. Moreover, you should calculate all costs exactly. When doing so, you should also take into account the “hidden” costs for technical resources and the working time spent on organising. Ab jetzt Open Access - Combinatorial Theory Quelle: Beck, M. & Strauß, H. (2022). Ab jetzt Open Access - Combinatorial Theory. open-access.network https://doi.org/10.5446/59877 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) One of the editors of flipped humanities journals interviewed by Dreher (2021) noted: You have to make your priorities clear to yourself beforehand. We were a small journal that wanted to be published beautifully on a beautiful platform and to have broad accessibility. How much effort do you want to put into publications? If you want to have less effort, then you can go the university [press] with OJS [Open Journals Systems] or to the repository, but if you want beautiful journals, it’s worth the effort. You’ve got to realise that you will have to say goodbye to some things, in our case, for example, print. Dreher, 2021, p. 11 ; our translation from the German Set Goals Set yourself clear goals from the very beginning: What are your aspirations? What does an ideal price/performance ratio look like? Should the conversion take place with a publisher or independently? It is also useful to carry out a requirements analysis. In this way, you can determine which processes, tools and solutions are good and indispensable in the case of the current journal, and which can be optimised in the course of the conversion. It is best to obtain several offers in order to determine which provider best suits your wishes. You should also clarify whether a conversion to open access is feasible and desirable at your current publishing venue (e.g. publisher). If a publisher is open to flipping, it is worthwhile examining the conditions against the background of your requirements analysis. If you aim to switch publisher, or to publish independently, you should ensure that all requirements can be met. If you plan to operate the journal yourself, it is advisable to be very aware of your own resources, and to get support from service facilities when it comes to assessing your capacities. In addition, you should consider the following: The same ISSN can be used only if the title remains the same. Identifiers (ISSN, DOI) must be “re-registered” if responsibilities or the publisher changes. It must be ensured that the delivery of metadata to indexing services etc. will continue without interruption. What will happen to submissions that are currently being processed? Communication One aspect of the flipping process that should not be underestimated is communication with all stakeholders. These comprise both internal participants, such as members of the editorial board, the publisher’s staff, and reviewers, as well as external stakeholders, such as subscribers, authors and the respective scientific community. After the idea of flipping the journal emerges, internal persuasive efforts are called for. Following Dreher (2021), direct personal communication is a promising way of dispelling reservations. You should also prepare for possible negotiations with the current publisher. The support of universities and other advisory services with open access experience can be enlisted in this regard. Transparency throughout the entire process, and communication of the rationale are key to the acceptance and success of the conversion (Dreher, 2021). Furthermore, it is advisable to develop a marketing strategy for the first year of the conversion. It can be helpful to conduct a survey of authors, readers and other stakeholders about their opinions regarding the conversion. In this way, you can not only identify and address possible reservations, but possibly also identify weaknesses in your planning. Even after the conversion process is completed, a good communication strategy is a worthwhile way of enhancing the reach and the standing of your publications and gaining more readers and submissions. From now on Open Access - Glossa: a journal of general linguistics. Quelle: Rooryck, J. & Brinken, H. (2022). From now on Open Access - Glossa: a journal of general linguistics. open-access.network, Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB). doi.org/10.5446/59193 SPARC Europe provides a New Business Plan Toolkit for OA Journals to support them in developing a business plan. Find the New Business Plan Toolkit for OA Journals here. Business models for Journals Funding Models Above all, journal flipping requires switching to a new business model. There are various models for funding open access journals. Detailed information on these models can be found on our Business Models for Journals web page. Examples include: Institutional funding Consortial funding Subscribe to Open Donations or third-party funding APC-based model When choosing a funding model, all costs must be recorded, and a small buffer planned for. You should way up the pros and cons of the various models. For example, article processing charges (APCs) may be difficult for some disciplines in which authors lack financial means – and they usually give rise to additional administrative effort for authors, journals and libraries. In addition, you should estimate what impact the conversion might have on the numbers of submissions and readers, as well as on findability. In other words, you should not only know whether you have adequate financial and personnel resources for the current number of articles, but also whether you are capable of coping with a rising or decreasing number of submissions and publications. If it is a matter of reducing publishing costs, one of the easiest ways of doing so is to dispense with print issues. This can also result in an opportunity to introduce better digital publishing formats. For example, the contributions can be made available in HTML, XML or other machine-readable formats, and the continuous, immediate online publication of the articles can be established. In Dreher’s study (2021) on the conversion experiences of journal editors, several editors recommended a courageous attitude towards change. Concerns that it would be necessary to keep the journal the way it was (e.g. by retaining the print version) had proved unfounded. In the words of one interviewee: To be less anxious about what the consequences might be. It may appear to be a tough decision, and we did worry about the lay readers with the print version. But things keep on going, they develop, and everything turned out to be good. (Dreher, 2021, p. 11; our translation from the German) Ab jetzt Open Access - Fossil Record Quelle: Paß, S., Witzmann, F. & Brinken, H. (2022): Ab jetzt Open Access - Fossil Record. open-access.network https://doi.org/10.5446/59244 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) Revise Processes Converting a journal to open access offers an opportunity to question and improve current processes. Based on the requirements analysis conducted at the start, you can examine what new solutions, providers and tools may be suitable. When doing so, you can scrutinise all aspects – from the policy of the journal, through the review and publishing processes, to the layout, the website and the metadata. Preparing and making available as extensive metadata as possible can be worthwhile not only for search-engine optimisation. It also improves the findability and indexability of the articles. The most important context information is: Title Abstract Citation Identifiers for researchers (e.g. ORCID iD), research organisations (e.g. ROR ) and research funders (e.g. funding number); identifiers for related resources (e.g. the DOI of the corresponding dataset) If you plan to apply for inclusion in other registers, you should also take account of their guidelines, as well as the metadata schemas for DOI registration, for example those of Crossref and DataCite . Licences Find more information here Choose a Licence Open access journals are journals “whose articles are available and reusable worldwide free of charge and without restrictions immediately on publication” (see our Open Access Journals page). This presupposes the granting of a corresponding licence, ideally a Creative Commons licence, in order to clearly indicate what rights will apply when using open access publications. It is recommended to use the current Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (see our Publishing Open Access Journals page; see also Redhead, 2012). Advantages of CC BY: It permits as open reuse as possible. It conforms with the principles of Plan S . Other licence variants may have possible negative consequences (e.g. CC BY-NC ). The licence details should be made transparent and should be included in the metadata of the individual articles, on the landing page, and in the document itself. Important Basics To successfully operate an open access journal, it is advisable to take some basic measures. A number of international organisations advocate for high standards in open access publishing and offer their support. Membership, for example of the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association ( OASPA ), may therefore be of advantage for your open access journal. In addition, to enhance the reach of the journal, it is helpful to apply for indexing in registers, for example the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) , even though this is a time-consuming process. Furthermore, the standards and guidelines of Plan S , OASPA and the DOAJ can provide guidance when drawing up a policy for an open access journal. Back Issues In addition, you should consider how you are going to deal with back issues of your journal. Are you allowed – and do you want – to make them available in open access (retrodigitised or with an embargo period)? If you decide in favour of doing so, and it is legally possible, you should consider contacting the authors and, if applicable, getting legal assistance. If you are changing publishing venue, you should determine whether and how already published content can migrate with you. There will always be articles that are still going through the publication process at the time of flipping. Open communication with the affected authors – also regarding licensing terms and conditions – is essential. Moreover, when migrating, it must be ensured that the documents and metadata can be seamlessly transferred to the new system. It is also conceivable to have a hybrid form of publishing for a certain period of time, rather than transitioning to an immediate separation between closed and open access. This short-term hybrid form should be taken into account in the financing plan, and all participants should be transparently informed about it. If you wish to avoid a hybrid form, this must be planned for in good time in the publishing process. Conclusion It is important to note that the concrete implementation of the conversion of a subscription-based journal to open access depends very much on the individual case and the prevailing circumstances. It is therefore advisable in any case to seek the support of experts. The scholars and librarians who have joined forces in the Fair Open Access Alliance (FOAA) support inter alia editors who are interested in converting their journals to open access. The advice offered by the open access officers at scholarly libraries should also be availed of. If you are intimidated by the number of questions that have to be clarified, you should bear in mind that you are not alone in the process of conversion, and that you can avail of external support. Well- planned journal flipping is worthwhile, and it leads to success. This is evidenced by examples such as Quantitative Science Studies , a journal that was successfully flipped in 2019 (Tullney, 2019). Further examples of successfully flipped journals are listed in the Open Access Directory (2021). Quelle:Pandita, R., & Singh, S. (2022). A study of distribution and growth of open access research journals across the world. Publishing Research Quarterly, 38(1), 131-149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-022-09860-x, Table 1. References Bautista-Puig, N., Lopez-Illescas, C., de Moya-Anegon, F., Guerrero-Bote, V., & Moed, H. F. (2020). Do journals flipping to gold open access show an OA citation or publication advantage? Scientometrics, 124 (3), 2551–2575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03546-x . Dreher, L. (2021). Open-Access-Transformationserfahrungen von Zeitschriftenherausgeber*innen. o-bib - das offene Bibliotheksjournal , 8(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5282/o-bib/5756 Edig, X. van, & Rücknagel, J. (2022). Von closed zu open - wie Sie Ihr Journal zu Open Access flippen. Zenodo . https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6412164 Gutknecht, C. (2015). Massenrücktritt des Editorial Board beim Elsevier Journal Lingua. wisspub.net. https://wisspub.net/2015/11/04/massenruecktritt-des-editorial-board-beim-elsevier-journal-lingua/ Mallett, J. J., Chin, D. L., Rush, I. M., & Smith, J. R. (2021). The transition of ARVO journals to open access. Learned Publishing , 34 (2), 262–271. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1338 Momeni, F., Mayr, P., Fraser, N., & Peters, I. (2021). What happens when a journal converts to open access? A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 126 (12), 9811–9827 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03972-5 Open Access Directory (2021). Journals that converted from TA to OA. http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Journals_that_converted_from_TA_to_OA Open Access Monitor (2022). Verteilung der Zeitschriftenartikel in Deutschland. https://open-access-monitor.de/#/open-access Redhead, C. (2012). Why CC-BY? Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association . http://oaspa.org/why-cc-by/ Solomon, D., Laakso, M., & Björk, B.-C. (2016). Converting scholarly journals to open access: A review of approaches and experiences . http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:27803834 Tullney, M. (2019). Erfolgreiches Journal Flipping: TIB unterstützt neue Zeitschrift Quantitative Science Studies. TIB Blog . https://blogs.tib.eu/wp/tib/2019/01/14/unterstuetzung-journal-flipping-qss/ Wenaas, L. (2021). Attracting new users or business as usual? A case study of converting academic subscription-based journals to open access. Quantitative Science Studies , 2 (2), 474–495. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00126 Further reading Hopf, D., Dellmann, S., Hauschke, C., & Tullney, M. (2022). Wirkungen von Open Access. Literaturstudie über empirische Arbeiten 2010-2021 . https://doi.org/10.34657/7666 Matthias, L., Jahn, N., & Laakso, M. (2019). The two-way street of open access journal publishing: Flip it and reverse it. Publications , 7 (2), 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7020023 Scholastica (2021). How to start or flip fully open access journals: Academy-owned publisher guide. Scholastica Blog. https://blog.scholasticahq.com/post/how-to-start-flip-open-access-academic-journal...

Intro Open-Access-Vorgaben in EU-Projekten Quelle: Dreher, L. (2020). Open-Access-Vorgaben in EU-Projekten, open-access.network. https://doi.org/10.5446/48698 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) The Key Takeaways from This Article are 1 Many research funding organisations now oblige grant recipients to provide open access to the published results of the research that they fund, and in some cases lay down very concrete guidelines for the implementation of this mandate. 2 Numerous funding organisations provide researchers with financial support for publication costs that may arise when publishing works open access. 3 There are also programmes that promote open access in a targeted manner. Funders and Their Requirements Research funding organisations play a key role in science and academia. In many disciplines, research would be practically impossible without their support. Whereas in Germany, research funders do not mandate open access , some funding organisations in other countries lay down compulsory guidelines for the provision of open access to published outputs that arise from their funding. Pioneers in this regard include, for example, Wellcome Trust (UK) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH; USA). Where research funders mandate that open access must be provided to research results and publications arising from their funding, they may: mandate that research data or scientific publications resulting from funded projects be made freely available to the public (if applicable, subject to an embargo period ), at least in a repository ; set maximum limits for embargo periods, or mandate that embargo periods should not be observed. Most public-sector research funders expect grant holders to publish outputs that arise from the research that they fund in gold open access venues, or to self-archive the publications in open access repositories after an embargo period ( green open access ). They frequently require that open licences be used. Researchers are advised to compare the guidelines of the funding organisation with those of the publisher, and, in the event of uncertainties, to make enquiries as soon as possible. Many funders have open access policies in which they adopt a clear position. As a rule, these policies also specify concrete funding conditions. Useful information about research funders’ open access policies is provided by Open Policy Finder . In the case of minor discrepancies between the open access policies of the funder and the publisher, authors should contact the publisher. In the case of major discrepancies, alternative publication venues should be considered. In the following, the open access guidelines and funding programmes of leading research funders are outlined. Policy positions on open access at the (supra-)national level can be found on our Policy Frameworks page . Practical Tips Here you will find the slides from the Open Access Talk Fördererauflagen zu Open Access – was gilt es zu beachten? (in German) Here you will find the guide Open Access in die Förderpraxis integrieren – Empfehlungen für Stiftungen und private Förderer (in German) Financing Find an introduction here. Open Policy Finder On this website, you can find information on research funders' open access policies. re3data Here you can find repositories for research data. Helpdesk Our Helpdesk is happy to help with all questions open access. cOAlition S & Plan S Video zu Plan S und Förderung Quelle: Rooryck, J. (2020). Plan S and Funding. What is going to change?, open-access.network. https://doi.org/10.5446/49702 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) Launched in 2018, cOAlition S pursues with Plan S a strategy of ensuring open access to scholarly publications arising from publicly funded research. With effect from 2021, scholarly publications resulting from research funded by organisations participating in cOAlition S must be published in open access journals or on open access platforms, or made immediately available without embargo through open access repositories ( Rücknagel, 2021 ). Plan S Principles The initiative is built around the 10 Principles of Plan S , which are binding for all projects funded by organisations participating in cOAlition S. The main principles are ( Rücknagel, 2021 ): Authors or their institutions retain the rights in their publications. Publications must be made openly available immediately and under an open licence, preferably a Creative Commons Attribution licence (CC BY). Where applicable, the open access publication fees are covered by the research institutions or funding organisations, not by the authors. Publishers’ pricing is fair and transparent. Hybrid publishing is not financially supported unless transformative arrangements exist. Funders shall assess the intrinsic merit of the research work, not the reputation of the publication channel. The cOAlition S Journal Checker Tool can be used to check whether an open access journal is compliant with Plan S. Members of cOAlition S The most well-known organisations participating in cOAlition S are: European Commission Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Agence nationale de la recherche (ANR) Research Council of Norway (RCN) World Health Organization (WHO) The German Research Foundation (DFG) and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) have declared their support for cOAlition S but have not adopted Plan S. European Commission In the EU framework programme for research and innovation Horizon 2020 (2014–2020), the European Commission already required funding recipients to ensure open access to research outputs resulting from funded projects. This stipulation has been retained by the successor programme, Horizon Europe (2021–2027). The European Commission offers funding beneficiaries an open access publishing service, Open Research Europe (ORE) , at no cost to them. Preprints submitted to ORE undergo comprehensive prepublication checks to ensure that all policies and ethical standards have been adhered to. After publication, the articles undergo open peer review . The post-prints of articles that pass peer review are sent to major indexing databases and repositories. Further details of the procedure can be found here . Conditions An overview of Horizon Europe’s framework conditions in relation to open access can be found in the programme's factsheet on open science . Besides ensuring immediate open access to scientific publica­tions, funding recipients are required to manage research data as far as possible in line with the FAIR Principles – under certain circumstances some degree of closed access will be tolerated. Within the framework of the Model Grant Agreement ( European Commission, 2021, pp. 108–109 ), the following requirements apply to peer-reviewed scientific publications relating to the results of funded research: At the latest at the time of publication, a machine-readable electronic copy of the published version or the final manuscript accepted for publication must be deposited in a trusted repository (see OpenDOAR ). Immediate open access must be provided to publications under a CC BY licence or a licence with equivalent rights. For monographs and other long-text formats, the licence may exclude commercial uses and derivative works (e.g. CC BY-NC, CC BY-ND). Information must be given via the repository about any research output or any other tools needed to validate the conclusions of the scientific publication. Moreover, funding beneficiaries (or authors) must retain sufficient intel­lectual property rights. Metadata of deposited publications must be made openly accessible under a CC 0 licence or a licence with equivalent rights. Further information on this topic – and on the framework condi­tions for research data management – can be found on pages 108–109 of the Model Grant Agreement ( European Commission, 2021 ). Support for Publication Costs Publication fees will be reimbursed under the following conditions ( European Commission, 2021, p. 109 ): The work must be published in a fully open access publication venue. The publication venue must fulfil open access publication standards (licensing, peer review). Projects for the Promotion of Open Access The European Commission supports several projects on open access and open science, such as OpenAIRE, the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) , and HIRMEOS . The catch-all data repository Zenodo , among other things, was created within the framework of OpenAIRE . Click on the picture to watch the video. Open Research Europe: The new EU open access publishing platform. Source: EU Science & Innovation (2021). Open Research Europe: The new EU open access publishing platform. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7bW2_xX3iU Practical Tip Here you can find the slides of the Open Access Talk Open Access requirements in EU projects (in German) German Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR) With its guideline for the promotion of projects to accelerate the transformation to open access ( BMBF, 2020 ), the BMFTR (formerly BMBF) has strengthened the establishment of open access as a standard model of scholarly publishing in Germany. The aim is to accelerate the transition to open access within the framework of a national open access strategy , and to ensure that, by 2025, 70% of all newly published scholarly publications will be exclusively published open access or additionally made available to the public in open access. Open access is not mandatory – the decision remains in the hands of the BMFTR-funded researchers. However, funding recipients are encouraged to provide gold or green open access to the results of BMFTR-funded research. Support for Publication Costs Publication costs that arise when publishing works open access may be covered from project funds or included in the project proposal. Thus, for publications during the lifetime of the project, the financing of publica­tion costs that arise when publishing works open access is assured. The Post-Grant Fund reimburses publication costs incurred when publishing results of completed BMBF-funded projects ( BMBF, 2017 ). The approval period may not date back more than three years. Moreover, con­tributions must be published under a licence that grants at least a cost-free, worldwide right to read the work in electronic form and to re­produce, disseminate, and make it available to the public ( Rücknagel, 2021 ). Projects for the Promotion of Open Access The former BMBF has supported 20 projects related to the transition to open access . German Research Foundation (DFG) The DFG signed the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities in 2003. For the purpose of scientifically adequate communication, the DFG requests researchers in receipt of DFG funding to either publish project results directly in peer-reviewed and/or renowned open access journals or on open access platforms, or to deposit their articles in disciplinary or institutional open access repositories, if possible without delay, in addition to traditional publication by a publisher ( German Research Foundation, 2021, pp. 42–43 ). Although the DFG supports cOAlition S, it has not made open access mandatory to date. Programmes Providing Support for Publication Costs The DFG offers the following funding options to support the financing of publication costs: The funding programme Open Access Publication Funding is the successor of the long-standing programme Open Access Publishing . It grants research institutions a fixed open access allowance. Individual researchers may use project-related publication expenses for open access publications. However, to avoid double funding, they should check with their library or central service units. The Publication Grants programme supports inter alia the publication of fee-based e-books and open access e-books. According to the Guidelines for Publication Grants , the decision not to publish open access requires explicit justification. Programmes for the Promotion of Open Access Within the framework of the funding programme Infrastructures for Scholarly Publishing , the DFG supports projects relating to open access. The funding programme has three focus areas: Structures for Transitioning to Open Access Open Access Infrastructures Digital Publishing Moreover, within the framework of this programme, proposals may be sub­mitted for projects that aim to set up or further develop an individu­al open access journal or to convert an existing journal to open access. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) The Austrian Science Fund (FWF) is also a signatory of the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. Moreover, it is a participant in cOAlition S. Hence, researchers are required to provide open access to peer-reviewed research outputs that result in part or in full from projects funded by the FWF. Conditions Three open access publishing options are available ( Rücknagel, 2021 ): Publication in an open access publication venue Publication in a transformative open access publication venue Self-archiving of the accepted manuscript under a CC BY licence or an equivalent open licence on the date of publication. In exceptional cases, a CC BY-ND licence may be used, but this must be approved by the FWF. Up to three years after completion of a project, applications can be sub­mitted for funding to cover the costs of of peer-reviewed publications. The publication venue must fulfil the following requirements ( Rücknagel, 2021 ): According to Plan S, publication in hybrid journals is not sufficient unless a transformative arrangement exists. The cOAlition S Journal Checker Tool can be used to check whether an open access journal is compliant with Plan S. The quality of the publication venue must be appropriate: journals must be listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) , book publishers must be listed in the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) , and repositories must be listed in OpenDOAR . Pricing and quality assurance ( peer-review ) must be transparent. Since 2019, the FWF expects research data on which scholarly publica­tions resulting from FWF-funded projects are based to be made available in open access in line with the FAIR Principles. In the case of all other research data, the provision of open access is at the discretion of the principal investigator. Where open access is mandatory, the research data should be published under a CC BY licence or an equivalent open licence as soon as possible – at the latest, together with the correspon­ding scholarly publication. Should open access to research data not be possible, this must be justified. Programme for the Promotion of Open Access The FWF promotes stand-alone publications , including "new formats such as apps, wiki-based publications, annotated scientific databases". The establishment or modernisation of scholarly journals is promoted with the aim of meeting the minimum requirements of Plan S. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) is a signatory of the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities and supports Plan S ( Philipp, 2018 ). It requires grantees to provide open access to the results of SNSF-funded research because "research findings funded with public money belong to the public". Therefore, "everyone should be able to access them electronically and free of charge". Conditions Researchers may choose between green or gold open access . Hybrid publications also fulfil the SNSF’s open access requirement. However, in contrast to gold open access publications, the costs of publishing in hybrid journals are not covered by the SNSF. Funding Guidelines describe the various options and the procedure for complying with the SNSF’s open access mandate. Via the SNSF’s open access platform (mySNF) , authors can apply for funding to cover the costs of gold open access publishing. In this connection, the SNSF recommends that authors check whether their journal of choice is listed in the DOAJ. If this is the case, the SNSF’s open access requirement is automatically fulfilled. If authors choose green open access, journal articles must be made avail­able to the public in a repository six months at the latest after publica­tion; for books and book chapters, the maximum embargo period is 12 months. The self-archived version should be at least the author’s accep­ted manuscript (with the changes made after peer review but without the publisher’s layout). It must be deposited in a repository that allows permanent, cost-free access. In the event that the publisher stipulates a longer embargo period than that permitted by the SNSF, the above-mentioned Guidelines suggest a standard email for contacting publi­shers. The Guidelines also include the requirements that repositories must fulfil, and a list of approved institutional repositories. Programme for the Promotion of Open Access The SNSF also has a programme that finances the publication of open access books . Volkswagen Foundation The Volkswagen Foundation supports open access in principle and "expects the research results funded by it not only to be published in the traditional print media but also to be made available on the internet via open access" ( Volkswagen Foundation, 2021, p. 7 ). Embargo periods of between six and 12 months are possible ( Rücknagel, 2021 ). Support for Publication Costs Researchers can apply for earmarked funds to cover article processing charges (APCs) or book processing charges (BPC). With regard to the quality requirements that journals and book publishers must fulfil, it should be noted that ( Volkswagen Foundation, 2018 ): journals must be listed in the DOAJ; in the case of monographs, the chosen publisher should be listed in the DOAB or be an OASPA member . A further prerequisite for the reimbursement of publication costs is that persistent identifiers (e.g. DOIs ) and metadata should be assigned and the most open CC licence possible should be granted. Moreover, the Volkswagen Foundation recommends that authors retain their rights to exploit their works ( Volkswagen Foundation, 2018 ). The Foundation supports the sustainable storage of research data from the projects that it funds and the provision of open access to these data in line with the FAIR Principles. Funding applicants are requested to submit a data management plan together with their proposals. Further information on research data, as well as on open source programmes that arise in the context of projects funded by the Foundation, can be found in the Foundation guidelines ( Volkswagen Foundation, 2018 ). References Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. (2017, August 28). Richtlinie zur Förderung von Open Access-Publikationen aus abgeschlossenen BMBF-geförderten Projekten (Post-Grant-Fund), Bundesanzeiger vom 01.09.2017 . BMBF.de. https://www.bmbf.de/bmbf/shareddocs/bekanntmachungen/de/2017/09/1404_bekanntmachung Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. (2020, May 18). Richtlinie zur Förderung von Projekten zur Beschleunigung der Transformation zu Open Access, Bundesanzeiger vom 17.06.2020 . BMBF.de. https://www.bmbf.de/bmbf/shareddocs/bekanntmachungen/de/2020/06/3044_bekanntmachung Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. (2021). Verwendungsrichtlinien. Allgemeine Bedingungen für Förderverträge mit der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft e.V. (DFG) . https://www.dfg.de/formulare/2_00/v/dfg_2_00_de_v0121.pdf Europäische Kommission. (2021). Horizon Europe (HORIZON) Euratom Research and Training Programme (EURATOM). General Model Grant Agreement EIC Accelerator Contract. https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/common/agr-contr/general-mga_horizon-euratom_en.pdf Philipp, T. (2018, September 4). Freier Zugang zu Publikationen: Der SNF unterstützt den europäischen Plan S . SNF.Ch. https://www.snf.ch/de/0pAC5oBtDJQ10ABP/news/news-180904-freier-zugang-der-snf-unterstuetzt-plan-s Rücknagel, J. (2021, April 15). Fördererauflagen zu Open Access - was gilt es zu beachten? OpenAccessTalk. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4694320 Volkswagenstiftung. (2018). Information Open Access - Open Data - Open Source . https://www.volkswagenstiftung.de/sites/default/files/downloads/OpenAccessOpenDataOpenSource-Hinweise_10_2018.pdf VolkswagenStiftung. (2021). Bewilligungsgrundsätze . https://www.volkswagenstiftung.de/sites/default/files/downloads/Bewilligungsgrunds%C3%A4tze%2002_2021.pdf Further Reading Dreher, L. (2021). Open-Access-Vorgaben in EU-Projekten. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5223006 Europäische Kommission. (2017). H2020 Programme. Guidelines to the Rules on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Open Access to Research Data in Horizon 2020. (Version 3.2.). https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_en.pdf Rooryck, J. (2020). Plan S and funding - what is going to change?. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4159203...