DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Challenges and Tasks of Open Access Publishing for Plan S Policy

Plan S 정책에 대비한 오픈액세스 출판의 추진 및 과제

  • 신은자 (세종대학교 미디어커뮤니케이션학과)
  • Received : 2020.08.19
  • Accepted : 2020.09.03
  • Published : 2020.09.30

Abstract

Plan S is a policy that mandates research papers supported by specific funders such as the European Community be published in open access journals. The funder supports APC to researchers, providing a chance to advance the era of gold open access, and is expected to bring significant changes to the scholarly publishing ecosystem. This study explored the impact of Plan S from the perspective of each stakeholder of the scholarly publishing ecosystem, such as funders, academic societies or publishers, authors, and libraries, through a review of previous studies. In addition, the status of Korean gold open access publishing and position for each stakeholder were identified through the collected data analysis. As a result of the analysis, the share of publishing gold open access journals in Korea was 22%, which was less than 26% worldwide. Korean funding agencies were predicting and preparing for the impact of Plan S. On the other hand, Korean academic societies produce about 70% of all papers, but there are not many open access papers except medicine (51%). The response of the Korean library was not sufficient, and it contrasted with the activities of librarians in the U.S. that actively provide research support services based on the research lifecycle. It was suggested that Korean libraries should also actively try to change the role of librarians; advising researchers to plan open access publishing in grant project applications, consulting on copyrights, and so on. This study identified the background, principles, and impact of Plan S policy that would be effective in 2021 and examined the response situation in Korea. This study is valuable in that it served as the necessary basis for revitalizing the academic publishing ecosystem in Korea.

Plan S는 유럽공동체 등 특정 단체로부터 지원받은 연구논문은 반드시 오픈액세스 학술지에 출판할 것을 의무화한 정책이다. 이는 연구자에게 APC를 지원하여 오픈액세스 출판을 지원하는 것이기에 골드 오픈액세스 시대를 앞당기는 계기로 작용할 수 있고, 이것이 전환점이 되어 학술출판 생태계가 크게 변화할 가능성도 많다. 이에 이 연구는 Plan S가 연구지원기관, 학회 및 출판사, 연구자, 도서관 등 학술출판 생태계를 구성하는 주체에게 미칠 영향을 선행연구 고찰을 통해 알아보았다. 아울러 데이터를 수집하여 국내의 골드 오픈액세스 출판 현황과 구성주체별 준비상황을 파악하였다. 분석 결과, 국내 골드 오픈액세스 학술지 비중은 전체의 22%로 세계 수준인 26%에 못 미치고 있었다. 국내의 연구지원기관은 Plan S의 영향력을 인지하고 대응을 서두르고 있는 반면, 학술지의 약 70%를 생산하고 있는 국내 학회의 오픈액세스 논문 비중은 의약학(51%)을 제외하고는 높지 않았다. 국내 도서관의 이해와 대응도 충분하지 않은 상황이어서, 연구의 생애주기에 따라 활발하게 연구지원서비스를 하는 미국을 비롯한 해외 도서관과 대비되었다. 이로써 국내 도서관도 연구자가 오픈액세스 출판을 잘 하도록 연구과제 지원서 작성을 돕고, 오픈액세스 학술지 저작권 상담을 수행하는 등 사서의 연구지원서비스 영역을 확대해 나가야 할 것으로 판단되었다. 이 연구는 2021년 전격 시행을 앞 둔 Plan S의 추진 배경, 원칙, 영향 등을 알아보고, 국내의 대응 상황을 점검함으로써, 향후 국내 학술출판 생태계의 보존과 발전에 필요한 기초자료를 제공하였다는 데 연구의 의의를 두었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Kim, Gyuhwan. 2016. "An OA Policy Study on Research Outcomes Funded by Public Institutions." In Proceedings of the Korean Library and Information Science Society, 337-353.
  2. Kim, Soon. 2019. "Research Support Service of Library for the Open Science Era." In 2019 OAK Conference, 53-65.
  3. Kim, Hwan Min. 2018. "Survey on Perception of Korean Researchers Regarding Open Access Publishing." In Proceedings of the Korean Library and Information Science Society, 183-189.
  4. Kim, Hwan Min. 2019. "A Case Study of Flipped Journals: From Subscription to Open Access." In Proceedings of the 2nd KESLI Seminar for Open Knowledge, 1-24.
  5. Seo, Tae-sul, Hye-Sun Kim, Dong-Hoon Choi, Mi-Hwan Hyun, and Youngim Jung. 2019. Trends and Strategies for Open Access Scholarly Publishing. Daejeon: KISTI Research Report 2018KRR003.
  6. Oh, Sunhye and Seing-Jin Kwak. 2020. "A Study on the Research Support Services of the University Library based on the Research Life Cycle." Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 54(2): 155-178.
  7. Lee, J. Y. 2019. "Challenges and Opportunities of Academic Society for OA Publishing." In 2019 OAK Conference, 5-28.
  8. Ihm, Sahng Hyeog. 2017. "The Open Access and Copyrights Transfer of Articles of Journals: Focus on the Policy of the Korean Research Foundation." Korean Journal of Law & Society, 55(2): 235-268. https://doi.org/10.33446/KJLS.55.9
  9. Chae, Jong Il. 2019. "A Study on the Issues of Open Access and Copyright Law in Academic Papers." Law Review, 60(1): 319-359.
  10. Choi, Seon-Heui and Hye-Sun Kim. 2018. "Policy Development: Top Priority in Activating Open Access." KISTI Issue Brief, 2: 1-12.
  11. Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information. 2018. Establishment of Scholarly Information Sharing System. Daejeon: KISTI Research Report K-18-ID-1102-R.
  12. Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information. 2020. Overview and Service Description of KOAR. [online]. [cited 2020.7.10]. .
  13. Korean Association of Library and Information Science Professors. 2019. Directory of Korean Library and Information Science Professors (including Curriculum). Seoul: KALISP.
  14. National Research Foundation. 2020. Started Full and Immediate OAs by Linking KCI sites with Korean University Libraries: NRF and KCLA signed MOU. [online]. [cited 2020.7.10]. .
  15. Brainard, J. 2019. "Scientific Societies Worry about Threat from Plan S." Science, 363(6425): 332-333. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.363.6425.332
  16. Dal-Re, R. 2019. "Plan S: Funders are Committed to Open Access to Scientific Publication." European Journal of Clinical Investigation, 49(6): 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13104
  17. Debat, H. and D. Babini. 2019. "Plan S in Latin America: A Precautionary Note." PeerJ Preprints, 1-11.
  18. Dempsey, L. 2017. "Library Collections in the Life of the User: Two Directions." Liber Quarterly, 26(4): 338-359. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10170
  19. Frantsvag, J. E. and T. E. Stromme. 2019. "Few Open Access Journals are Compliant with Plan S." Publications, 7(2): 1-18.
  20. Guzik, T. J. and A. Ahluwalia. 2019. "Plan S: in Service or Disservice to Society?" European Heart Journal, 40(12): 949-959. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz065
  21. Haug, C. J. 2019. "No Free Lunch-What Price Plan S for Scientific Publishing?" The New England Journal of Medicine, 380(12): 1181-1185. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMms1900864
  22. Huh, S. 2019. "Journal Statistics, Coping Strategy with Upcoming Scholarly Journal Publishing Environment Including Plan-S, and Appreciation for Reviewers and Volunteers." Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 16: 1-4. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2019.16.1
  23. Kim, K. 2020. "Plan S." Science Editing, 7(1): 78-79. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.195
  24. McNutt, M. 2019. "Opinion: "Plan S" Falls Short for Society Publishers-and for the Researchers They Serve." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(7): 2400-2403. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900359116
  25. Mering, M. 2020. "Open Access Mandates and Policies: The Basics." Serials Review, 46(2): 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2020.1727400
  26. Moore, S. A. 2019. "Revisiting "the 1990s Debutante": Scholar-led Publishing and the Prehistory of the Open Access Movement." Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 71(7): 856-866. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24306
  27. Oberlander, A. and T. Reimer. 2019. "Open Access and the Library." Publications, 7(3): 1-3.
  28. Revez, J. 2018. "Opening the Heart of Science: a Review of the Changing Roles of Research Libraries." Publications, 6(1): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications6010001
  29. Schiltz, M. 2018. "Science without Publication Paywalls: cOAlition S for the Realisation of Full and Immediate Open Access." PLoS Medicine, 15(9): 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002663
  30. Tennant, J. P., F. Waldner, D. C. Jacques, P. Masuzzo, L. B. Collister, and C. H. Hartgerink. 2016. "The Academic, Economic and Societal Impacts of Open Access: an Evidence-based Review." F1000Research, 5: 1-54. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7039.1
  31. Wise, A. and L. Estelle. 2020. "How Society Publishers Can Accelerate Their Transition to Open Access and Align with Plan S." Learned Publishing, 33(1): 14-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1272