1 / 20

SELL 2010 Open Access in France Francis André Jean-François Lutz Mariette Naud

SELL 2010 Open Access in France Francis André Jean-François Lutz Mariette Naud. Parliament. High Council for Science & Technology. President of the Republic Prime Minister. POLICY. Ministry of Economy, Industry and Employment. Ministry of Higher Education and Research.

lilka
Télécharger la présentation

SELL 2010 Open Access in France Francis André Jean-François Lutz Mariette Naud

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SELL 2010Open Access in FranceFrancis AndréJean-François LutzMariette Naud

  2. Parliament High Council for Science & Technology President of the Republic Prime Minister POLICY Ministry of Economy, Industry and Employment Ministry of Higher Education and Research High Council for Research & Technology Other Ministries Research Foundations AGENCIES / PROGRAMMES OSEO ANR Regional Agencies Research Organisations (CNRS, INSERM…) Programmes Firms Universities and other Higher Education EVALUATION R&D PERFORMERS STRUCTURE OF THE CIVIL RESEARCH SYSTEM AERES

  3. REFORMS IN UNIVERSITIES • 85 universities, 1,3 million students (2.3 in higher education) • University Act (2007) : • Greater autonomy in recruiting staff and faculty • University board more open to external personalities • Budget autonomy, full ownership of real estate (optional) • Possibility of creating fundations • « Campus » Plan (2008) • Renovation of university campuses • 10 projects selected • Financed through interest revenues instead of subsidies

  4. SOME PUBLIC RESEARCH ORANISATIONS

  5. NUMBER OF RESEARCHERS BY INSTITUTION TYPE AND SUBJECT (2005)

  6. FRENCH PUBLICATIONS

  7. OA HISTORY (I) • At the begining : a researchers’ initiative • Role of Frank Laloe • CCSD created in 200O, HAL running in 2001 • The research institutions involement • Berlin declaration • 2005 : Archimer • Role of the ANR • 2007 : CLEO

  8. OA HISTORY (II) • In Universities : • 1998, Early Cybertheses project : University of Lyon II, 1998 • 2004, REVEL • 2004, Couperin Manifesto • Set up of many theses repositories • Many universities tend to join HAL • Funding agencies • ANR statement, 2006 

  9. OA HISTORY (III) • What does the SNE (French publishers union) think ? • Ok for OA • But ask to take disciplinary spectificities into account • Preserve a viable and sustainable economic model for STI

  10. A NATIONAL AGREEMENT TOWARDS OPEN ARCHIVING • Signed in 2006 for 2 years : national ly coordinated approach to open access to scholarly communcation • Signed by CEA, CEMAGREF, CIRAD, CNRS, CPU (Universities), INRA, INRIA, INSERM, Pasteur institute, IRD, Conférence des Grandes Ecoles = 80% of the French research community • Raising awareness in the scientific community, sharing common directory of laboratories and research institutions, sharing a core metadata set, linking local systems and HAL, proving long term preservation, offering legal support to authors • Not renewed in 2008…

  11. FRENCH OPEN ACCESS JOURNALS • March 2010 : 168 existing open access journals • No embargo period • 6 were referenced in the Thomson – JCR • Titles possibly missing

  12. A LARGE MAJORITY OF PUBLICLY FUNDED JOURNALS

  13. A LARGE MAJORITY OF HSS JOURNALS

  14. ONE PLATFORM CENTRALIZES MORE THAN HALF OF THE TITLES

  15. A LACK OF VISIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL TOOLS

  16. FRENCH OPEN ARCHIVES • March 2010 : 68 repositories • Central, thematic, institutional repositories taken into account • No labotatory repositories

  17. VARIETY OF DOCUMENT TYPES

  18. HAL’S CENTRAL ROLE

  19. INSTITUTIONS

  20. STILL A LONG WAY TO GO… • Raised initial enthusiasm among early advocates • Keen discernment from some decision-makers • Recent concern of universities for research exploitation potential • Mandates : decision still depending on institutions • Consensus on OA as a good mean for research output exploitation • Still some disagreement as to the approach

More Related