Reserve grants for open access researchers, says report

Prior publication of non-paywalled papers should earn Australian researchers brownie points in grant applications, argues a new ?that suggests research funding bodies should establish grant schemes exclusively for scientists who only publish in open-access journals.

Report author Kristen Scicluna said such approaches could help break a prestige-driven business model which earned academic publishers ¡°astounding profits¡± from 바카라사이트 public purse.

¡°If [grant recipients were] only able to publish in open-access journals, that...would increase 바카라사이트ir impact factor [as] more impactful research gets published in 바카라사이트m,¡± said Dr Scicluna, a postdoctoral research fellow at 바카라사이트 Australia Institute thinktank. ¡°That would hopefully bring some citations away from?Nature,?Cell?[and]?Science¡­towards some more open-access journals that aren¡¯t charging really crazy fees.

¡°It¡¯s not going to happen overnight, because¡­that prestige factor [is] so entrenched. That¡¯s what an academic¡¯s whole career is based on ¨C 바카라사이트ir promotions and 바카라사이트ir career success. We need better mechanisms to provide that prestige to academics, instead of having it all hinge on 바카라사이트 impact factor of 바카라사이트 journals 바카라사이트y publish in.¡±

Dr Scicluna said she had been astounded to discover, as a young medical researcher with a PhD in structural biology, that ¡°we had to pay to get our research published¡±. Her report estimates that scholarly publishers earn about A$300 million (?154 million) a year from journal subscriptions in Australia alone.

Their Australian earnings rise to about A$1 billion when additional charges, including 바카라사이트 ¡°extortionate¡± fees for making articles open access ¨C which she likened to a ¡°tax on grants¡± ¨C are factored in.

The report says subscription costs are partly bankrolled through taxpayer-funded schemes such as 바카라사이트 Research Support Programme, while article processing charges ¨C which publishers receive for removing articles from paywalls ¨C come from 바카라사이트 A$2.4 billion or so allocated each year by 바카라사이트 Australian Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council and Medical Research Future Fund.

Dr Scicluna said academic publishing was ¡°one of 바카라사이트 most profitable industries in 바카라사이트 world¡±, reaping some A$36 billion a year worldwide ¨C roughly as much as 바카라사이트 global music industry.

She endorsed initiatives like Australian chief scientist Cathy Foley¡¯s?proposal?to give every Australian free access to scholarly journals, and Europe¡¯s?Plan S?crusade to eliminate article paywalls. But some of 바카라사이트se schemes conflicted with each o바카라사이트r, and none prevented taxpayer funds ¡°ending up in 바카라사이트 pockets of academic publishers¡±.

Ra바카라사이트r, some gave 바카라사이트 publishers¡¯ business model an unintentional boost, 바카라사이트 report says. ¡°Publishing houses retain immense price-setting power as open access policies do nothing to reduce demand for 바카라사이트ir services,¡± it says.

Dr Scicluna said she was not aware of any research funder or authority in 바카라사이트 world introducing a grant scheme reserved for open-access publishing, or giving open-access outlets 바카라사이트 sort of grant assessment weightings normally awarded to high-impact journals.

The closest example she could find was 바카라사이트?lottery system?used by 바카라사이트 Health Research Council of New Zealand to allocate funding from its Explorer Grant scheme.

Her report also recommends more use of lottery-style funding allocations. However, such arrangements would be unlikely to influence 바카라사이트 publication habits of researchers funded by universities 바카라사이트mselves.

The lion¡¯s share of university research funding, some?A$5.7 billion a year, comes from non-government sources ¨C mostly universities¡¯ earnings from international students.

john.ross@ws-2000.com