Reports & Reviews

OPERAS: bringing the long tail of Social Sciences and Humanities into Open Science


Abstract


The paper will present OPERAS, a comprehensive infrastructure aimed at providing a pan-European infrastructure to rethink and reshape publishing, discovery and dissemination addressing the specificity and the critical issues of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH).
The paper will try to set the scene examining the status of scholarly communication, the developments of Open Access and Open Science, and the specific demands for SSH. A second part will outline how OPERAS meets these needs, taking care of all the steps of the scholarly communication cycle.
OPERAS unique approach is to unite researchers, libraries and publishers in a common effort, in order to take back control over scholarly communication. Not merging nor replacing, but nurturing existing realities, OPERAS provides innovative services to bring SSH into Open Science.
OPERAS is designed to elaborate effective and scalable long-term strategies for the future development of the digital infrastructure and community building needed to innovate scholarly communication in the SSH. OPERAS pervading idea of science as communication holds an immense potential for an inspiring model of Open Science with direct societal impact, based on continuous communication.

Keywords


Open Science; Open Access; Publishing; Social Sciences and Humanities.

Full Text:

TEXT


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4403/jlis.it-12523

NBN: http://nbn.depositolegale.it/urn%3Anbn%3Ait%3Aunifi-24370

References


“Amsterdam Call for action on Open Science”, Dutch presidency of the European Union, Open Science – from vision to action conference, Amsterdam April 5, 2016, https://www.government.nl/documents/reports/2016/04/04/amsterdam-call-for-action-on-open-science.

“Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities”, 2003, https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration.

“Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing”, 2003, http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm.

Bordier, Julien. 2016. “Évaluation ouverte par les pairs: de l'expérimentation à la modélisation. Récit d'une expérience d'évaluation ouverte par les pairs.” HAL, https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01283582.

Borgman, Christine L. 2010. Scholarship in the digital age: information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Boston: MIT press.

Bourne Philip E., et al. 2017. “Ten simple rules to consider regarding preprint submission.” PLoS Computational Biology 13, no. 5: e1005473. Accessed September 13, 2018. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005473.

“Budapest Open Access Initiative.” 2002, http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read.

Burgelman, Jean Claude, “The role of research data & Open Science”, presentation at the conference New Roles in Open Science and Data Stewardship, Venice, 25 November 2016. https://phaidra.cab.unipd.it/detail_object/o:307440?mycoll=o:306049.

European Commission, “Recommendation on access to and preservation of scientific information (2012/417/EU)”, 2012, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32012H0417&rid=1.

European Commission, “Open Science Monitor”, accessed September 13, 2018, https://ec.europa.eu/info/open-science/open-science-monitor_en.

European Commission, “EOSC Declaration”, 2017, https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/pdf/eosc_declaration.pdf.

European Commission, “Information Note: towards a Horizon 2020 platform for open access”. https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/pdf/information_note_platform_public.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none.

European Commission, “EOSC implementation roadmap”, 2018, https://era.gv.at/object/document/3898/attach/st07188_en18.pdf.

European Commission, “Recommendation on access to and preservation of scientific information (2018/790/EU)”, 2018, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32018H0790.

European Council, “The transition towards an Open Science system. Council conclusions”, May 27, 2016 http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-9526-2016-INIT/en/pdf.

Eve, Paul Martin, 2014. Open access and the humanities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316161012.

Ferwerda, Eelco, Frances Pinter, and Niels Stern. 2017. A landscape study on open access and monographs: Policies, funding and publishing in eight European countries. Knowledge Exchange. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.815931.

Fitzpatrick, Katherine. 2011. Planned obsolescence: publishing, technology, and the future of the academy. New York: New York University Press.

Guédon, Jean Claude. “Open Access: towards the Internet of the mind.” Report, BOAI15, 2017, http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/open-access-toward-the-internet-of-the-mind.

Heilbron Johan et al. “European Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) in a Global Context. Preliminary findings from the INTERCO-SSH Project”, 2017. Project Report, http://interco-ssh.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/European-Social-Science-in-a-Global-Contextv2.pdf.

Hey, Tony and Stewart Tansley and Kristin Tolle eds. The fourth paradigm: data-intensive scientific discovery. Redmont: Microsoft Research, 2009, https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/fourth-paradigm-data-intensive-scientific-discovery/.

Humphreys, Alex et al. 2018. “Reimagining the digital monograph. Design thinking to build new tools for researchers.” Journal of electronic publishing 21(1). Accessed September 13, 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0021.102.

Kramer, Bianca and Jeroen Bosman. “101 innovations in scholarly communication”, 2017, https://101innovations.wordpress.com/.

Kramer, Bianca and Jeroen Bosman. “Rainbow of Open Science practices”, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1147024.

Larivière Vincent et al. 2015. “The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era”. PLoS ONE 10, no. 6: e0127502. Accessed September 13, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127502.

Lavoie, Brian, and Eric Childress, Ricky Erway, Ixchel Faniel, Constance Malpas, Jennifer Schaffner, and Titia van der Werf. 2014. The Evolving Scholarly Record. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC. https://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2014/oclcresearch-evolving-scholarly-record-2014-overview.html.

MacCallum, Catriona. “Promoting innovation and reducing inequity in scholarship: Europe’s Plan S for Open Science”. Hindawi blog, September 11, 2018, https://about.hindawi.com/blog/europes-plan-s-for-open-science/.

Manifesto for the Digital Humanities, 2010, https://tcp.hypotheses.org/411.

Moedas, Carlos and Guenther Oettinger. “Open science for a knowledge and data-driven economy”. Press release, June 23, 2015, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/commissioners/2014-2019/oettinger/blog/open-science-knowledge-and-data-driven-economy_en.

Mons, Barend. 2016. “Preface”. in Realising the Open Science Cloud. First report and recommendations of the Commission High Level Expert Group on the European Open Science Cloud, 5. Brussels: European Commission, https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/index.cfm?pg=open-science-cloud.

Moody, Glynn. “Open access: all human knowledge is there − so why can’t everybody access it?” Ars technica, 6 June 2016, https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/06/what-is-open-access-free-sharing-of-all-human-knowledge/.

Morrison, Heather. “DOAJ APC information as of Jan 31, 2018.” Blog post in Sustaining the Knowledge Commons/Soutenir les savoirs communs, January 31 2018, https://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/2018/02/06/doaj-apc-information-as-of-jan-31-2018/.

Mounier, Pierre. 2017. “The structure of research in social sciences and humanities.” In OPERAS Design study, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1009543.

Nielsen, Kristian H. 2013. “Scientific Communication and the Nature of Science.” Science & Education, 22:2067−2086. Doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9475-3.

OPERAS Design study, 2017, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1009543.

Landscape study on Open Access publishing. Annex 1 to the OPERAS Design study, 2017, https://operas.hypotheses.org/design-study/ds-annex-1-landscape-study.

Pinchon, Thomas. 1965. The crying of lot 49. Philadelphia: Lippincott.

Piwowar Heather et al. 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.

Priem, Jason. “When will everything will be open access?”, blog post, Impact Story blog, February 22, 2018, http://blog.impactstory.org/oa-by-when/.

Ross-Hellauer, Tony. 2017. “What is open peer review? A systematic review [version 2; referees: 4 approved]”. F1000Research 6:588, Doi: 10.12688/f1000research.11369.2.

Schiltz, Marc. “Preamble to cOAlitionS and PlanS.” 2018, http://scieur.org/preamble.

Schreibman, Susan and Ray Siemens and John Unsworth eds. 2016. A New Companion to Digital Humanities. 2 edition. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

Science Europe. “cOAlitionS and PlanS.” 2018, https://www.scienceeurope.org/coalition-s/.

Shamash, Katie. “Article processing charges (APCs) and subscriptions.” JISC Report, 2016, https://www.jisc.ac.uk/reports/apcs-and-subscriptions.

Sterns, Niels, and Jean Claude Guédon, and Thomas Wiben Jensen. 2015. “Crystals of knowledge production. An intercontinental conversation about Open Science and the Humanities.” Nordic perspectives in Open Science, 1. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7557/11.3619.

Suber, Peter. 2012. Open Access. Boston: MIT press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/open-access.

Swan. Alma. “Open Access policy effectiveness: a briefing paper for research institutions.” Report for Pasteur4OA project, 2015, http://www.pasteur4oa.eu/resources/131#.Wq46b3zSKUk.

Tennant, Jon @protohedegehog. “To support ‘open science’ you don’t have to agree”, Twitter, February 27, 2018, https://twitter.com/Protohedgehog/status/968533465439330305.

Terrace, Melissa and Julianne Nyhan and Edward Vanhoutte eds. 2016. Defining digital humanities: a reader. London and New York: Routledge, (2 ed).

Van de Sompel Herbert et al. 2004. Rethinking scholarly communication: building the system that scholars deserve. D-Lib Magasine, 10, no. 9. Accessed September 13, 2018, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september04/vandesompel/09vandesompel.html.

Van de Sompel Herbert and Carl Lagoze. 2009. “All aboard: toward a machine-friendly scholarly communication system.” In Hey, Tony and Stewart Tansley and Kristin Tolle eds. The fourth paradigm: data-intensive scientific discovery. Redmont: Microsoft Research, 2009, 193−199.

Van de Sompel. “Herbert, Scholarly Communication: Deconstruct & Decentralize?” video, Paul Evan Peters Award & Lecture, December 12, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4nUe-6Ln-8.

Wilkinson, Marc D. et al. 2016. “The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship.” Nature Research, 3, 160018, Doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18.


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Elena Giglia

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Logo Università di FirenzeLogo EUMJLIS.it is a journal of the SAGAS Department, University of Florence, published by EUM, Edizioni Università di Macerata (Italy).

ISSN: 2038-1026

Openaire Logo DOAJ seal