During the first funding phase of open-access.network, the Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB) conducted six qualitative surveys on how open access is perceived by different stakeholders. The aim was to obtain a differentiated understanding on which status the implementation of open access has in academic publishing. Based on this, gaps in the supporting service landscape can be identified to facilitate the improvement of infrastructures and services. In addition, subject-specific insights help to find fitting solutions for specific disciplines. Based on the results, recommendations for action were addressed to different stakeholder groups, which can serve as a basis for optimising information, networking and support services. The reports were published on the Zenodo page of open-access.network (see links below).
Perception and evaluation of support measures by OA professionals
First, expert interviews were conducted with OA professionals. They play a central role in the transformation process and act as an interface between policy and practice, as they advise researchers in the field. The evaluation of existing OA services and support measures by the professionals provided valuable information on necessary steps for the OA transformation. This includes creating further scholar-led publication services without author-pays publication models. In addition, desiderata for supporting infrastructures and services were identified. The report in German can be found on Zenodo: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7593728
Perception of Open Access - Surveys on requirements and obstacles in selected disciplines
This was followed by interviews with researchers from selected disciplines in which the proportion of OA is still comparatively low: for the technical and natural sciences, mechanical engineering and chemistry were selected as exemplary subject areas, and for the humanities and social sciences, history and social work. Interviews were also conducted in the legal sciences. The three surveys were devoted to the requirements and obstacles of the respective subject area: What obstacles do the interviewees see to fully implement OA in their field? Are there specific concerns or needs for advice? How can the community be reached? What proposed solutions for a successful OA transformation exist within the subject community? The reports for the survey in the selected subject disciplines are published on Zenodo:
Mechanical Engineering and Chemistry: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7540662
Law: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7535165
Historical sciences and social work: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7540764
Implementing Open Access: Survey on participation options for companies in Open Access funding
The fifth survey focused on the role that companies in the private sector and their authors (can) play in supporting the OA movement. Experts were asked to comment on five hypotheses relating to OA funding from the private sector, also in comparison to the subscription model. One question was what incentives might exist for companies to actively contribute in the financing of scholarly publications. One major finding of the report is that further studies are necessary to better understand how companies can be increasingly involved in the transformation of the scholarly publishing system. The report in German can be found on Zenodo: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7558684
Implementing Open Access: Survey on open OA infrastructures
The sixth survey focused on open infrastructures, which are a central element of the OA transformation. An online questionnaire was used to identify desiderata in supporting infrastructures and services. In addition, insights were gained on the conditions and obstacles of the sustainable operation of these infrastructures. Furthermore, the motivating factors for founding infrastructures and strategic decisions to successfully operate them were investigated. The results of the study are also published in German on Zenodo: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7558697