Site search

Journals Committee

The Journals Committee is a forum for research and discussions on issues surrounding dissemination of biology research, especially relating to Open Access publishing and repositories. It aims to present the views of researchers and learned societies, for whom dissemination of scientific information is often a key objective. The Committee is specifically concerned with the effectiveness and efficiency of dissemination of bioscience research outputs (see Remit). The Chair is Sue Thorn (Chief Executive of the Society for Endocrinology) and the Committee's membership comprises representatives of a number of the Society of Biology’s Member Organisations. The group continues the work of the Biosciences Federation Journals Committee.

Latest news: Open access article reaches wide audience

The article detailing the overall findings of the 2008-9 Open Access Survey and Report, published in Serials March 2009, is one of the top six articles from 2009 and, as such, was reproduced in a special conference issue for the UKSG conference in April 2010.

Resources

2009 Authors’ guide to UK funders’ policies on open access

This briefing is to assist authors of scientific papers to ascertain the current practice of funding bodies. It includes answers to common questions and links to more detailed information.

See menu on the left for the Authors' Guide.

Recent projects

Response to consultation on US Public Access Policy (January 2010)

The US Office of Science Technology and Policy conducted a consultation on a Public Access Policy for the outputs of publicly-funded research in December 2009-January 2010, as part of the Open Government initiative. In keeping with our aim to present a balanced view of publications issues from the perspective of biological sciences researchers and their learned societies, the Journals Committee submitted a response. The main thrust of the response was that, if the US government wishes to insist on deposit of state-funded researchers’ articles in openly-accessible repositories, then the only sustainable way to achieve this is to ensure funds are made available to pay author-side fees. The report also noted that this would only work for researchers who have access to grants of this type.

Information on the US OSTP Public Access Policy information can be seen at www.ostp.gov/cs/public_access/public_access_forum

The response from the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) can be read at www.alpsp.org/ngen_public/article.asp?id=1&did=47&aid=195572&st=&oaid=-1

UUK/RIN report on Paying Open Access Charges (April 2009)

Biosciences Federation press release - April 2009.  Biosciences Federation welcomes UUK / RIN guidelines on funding open access publishing. The Biosciences Federation supports the recommendations made by the recent Universities UK / Research Information Network report on open access publishing (Link to report).  This report lays out guidelines to make it easier for researchers to access funds to satisfy funding bodies’ open access mandates.  The report recommends:

  • Higher Education Institutions should each set up a dedicated budget to pay author-side open access publication charges.
  • Funding bodies should clarify how they will provide support for researchers to meet their open access policies, especially regarding the payment of open access publishing fees.

The guidelines also note that authors should make use of resources such as the Biosciences Federation’s Authors’ guide to UK funders’ policies on open access (see menu, left).

Publication of Universities UK and RIN recommendations on Paying Open Access Charges - March 2009
A set of recommendations have been published by Universities UK and RIN, covering the practicalities surrounding Open Access (OA) publication fees.  The report provides practical recommendations to funders, university administrators, researchers and publishers. A key recommendation is that universities should set up ring-fenced publication funds for researchers to draw on for OA fees. Two members of the Journals Committee were on the panel that produced the report and it was initiated as a result of the BSF's position statement of September 2007. Member Organisations are urged to make their members aware of the report, so that they can draw it to the attention of their funders and employers should they experience difficulty accessing funds.

Researchers will also find the Society of Biology Authors' guide to UK funders' policies on Open Access useful, and MOs are requested to include details of this and a link to it on their society and journal web sites.

2008-9 Open Access Survey and Report

The BSF carried out research into various aspects of biosciences societies and Open Access. Three surveys were conducted.

1.        The first surveyed societies to establish the funds they received from UK higher education establishments in terms of institutional publications income and how much they contributed financially to those establishments in terms of grants and other support. The key finding of this was that the societies who responded contributed on average more than twice what they received.

2.        The second survey covered the societies’ attitudes to Open Access publishing and self-archiving. This found that, while none of the journals were fully Open Access, most had fairly liberal policies, including making material free after an initial period, typically 12 months.

3.        The third survey covered the views of researchers on Open Access and self-archiving. There were 1368 usable responses and key findings included that there was substantial confusion as to what is an Open Access journal or an archive repository.

2007 Position Statement on Open Access

The BSF issued a position statement on Open Access which led to productive discussions with the Commons Science and Technology Select Committee, Wellcome, RCUK, HEFCE, JISC and others.