Plan S Briefing Presentations

I thought it might be useful for the research community in Ireland and beyond to share the slides for the presentations used on Tuesday’s Briefing on Plan S for Open Access

Here are the five main presentations (shared here with permission from the Royal Irish Academy):




Don’t forget that the deadline for submission of feedback on the Plan S proposals is February 8th 2019!

8 Responses to “Plan S Briefing Presentations”

  1. The main problem I see with Plan S is that one of the main evils, namely overblown profit margins for the publishers, still exists. It is just that the funding doesn’t come from subscriptions or page charges or learned societies but rather from higher up. This might actually be worse than the current situation in some respects, as the typical author might not be aware of the cost.

    • telescoper Says:

      Publishers have introduced inflated APCs in order to maintain revenues, but the difference is that researchers now see directly how much they are being stung so there’s a hope that they will recoil from it.

      • But isn’t one of the ideas of Plan S that the individual researcher does not directly feel how much the APC is, because it is paid from a central source (whereas now page charges are paid by the author or someone close to them, ditto for subscription, etc).

      • telescoper Says:

        It’s not clear where the money will come from, and it will probably vary in different countries, but researchers will definitely be aware of how much it is costing.

      • But where is the added value from the point of view of the researcher? (From the point of view of the reader, everything is accessible, so that is a plus.) The author knows now what the APC costs, and can easily find out what the subscription costs.

      • telescoper Says:

        Added value compared to what? Open Access publications get higher citation rates, for one thing. But if Plan S does its job it will mandate researchers to publish in this mode.

        Then they will have the choice to decide whether to blow $4000 dollars from their grant on an APC Gold Publication or go the sensible Green route and go to a couple of conferences or buy new computers or…

      • All else being equal, open-access articles probably get more citations, because more people can read them. However, articles in well known reputable journals probably get more citations even if they are not open access than open-access articles in obscure journals. OK, a benefit for the author. But under the current scheme the author pays, either directly with APCs or page charges, or indirectly because their institute has a subscription and that money could be used for something else.

        Open access is an important goal, but it seems to have been hijacked by the publishers who are happy to make articles open access, but for a fee which, as you have argued elsewhere, is highly inflated.

        On the other hand, since most stuff is on arXiv, why should open-access articles get more citations? People can read it on arXiv and cite the proper reference.

      • telescoper Says:

        The publishers may be trying to hijack it, but I don’t think they’re going to succeed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: