Abstracts
Abstract
For two decades, open access (OA) has gained momentum worldwide. However, adoption of OA in Canada is lagging compared with other countries. Using data from Dimensions and Érudit, this paper provides an overview of OA dissemination in Canada, focusing on the effect of institutions, language, and funding. Papers in French, and from Quebec universities, are more likely to be OA, while papers from engineering-oriented institutions are less likely to be OA. Regarding funders, those in health sciences have higher OA compliance. The paper concludes discussing disciplinary differences in OA dissemination, low compliance to OA mandates in Canada, and the role of Érudit.
Keywords:
- Open access publishing,
- scientometrics,
- scholarly communication,
- research dissemination,
- Canada
Résumé
Au cours des deux décennies, le libre accès (LA) a pris de l’importance à travers le monde. Toutefois, son adoption au Canada est à la traîne par rapport à d'autres pays. À l'aide des données de Dimensions et d’Érudit, cet article donne un aperçu de la diffusion en LA au Canada, en se concentrant sur l’effet des institutions, de la langue et du financement. Les articles en français et ceux des universités québécoises sont plus susceptibles d'être en LA, tandis que les établissements axés sur le génie sont moins susceptibles. En ce qui concerne les bailleurs de fonds, ceux en sciences de la santé ont une conformité plus élevée au LA. L'article conclut en discutant des différences disciplinaires dans la diffusion en LA, de la faible conformité aux mandats de LA au Canada et du rôle d'Érudit.
Mots-clés :
- Publication en libre accès,
- scientométrie,
- communication savante,
- dissémination de la recherche,
- Canada
Appendices
Bibliography
- Albert, Karen M. 2006. “Open Access: Implications for Scholarly Publishing and Medical Libraries.” Journal of the Medical Library Association 94 (3): 253–62. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1525322/.
- Archambault, Éric, Didier Amyot, Philippe Deschamps, Aurore Nicol, Françoise Provencher, Lise Rebout, and Guillaume Roberge. 2014. “Proportion of Open Access Papers Published in Peer-Reviewed Journals at the European and World Levels - 1996-2013.” D 1.8 version: 11p. European Commission. https://science-metrix.com/sites/default/files/science-metrix/publications/d_1.8_sm_ec_dg-rtd_proportion_oa_1996-2013_v11p.pdf.
- Basson, Isabel, Marc-André Simard, Zoé Aubierge Ouagré, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, and Vincent Larivière. 2021. “Data Sources and Their Effects on the Measurement of Open Access. Comparing Dimensions with the Web of Science.” In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Scientometrics & Informetrics, 93–98. KU Leuven, Belgium. https://issi2021.org/proceedings/.
- Beaudry, Guylaine, Martin Boucher, Tanja Niemann, and Gérard Boismenu. 2009.“Érudit : le numérique au service de l’édition en sciences humaines et sociales.” Mémoires du livre / Studies in Book Culture 1 (1). https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/memoires/2009-v1-n1-memoires3559/038637ar/.
- Björk, Bo-Christer, and Paul Catani. 2016. “Peer Review in Megajournals Compared with Traditional Scholarly Journals: Does It Make a Difference?” Learned Publishing 29 (1): 9–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1007.
- Callaway, Ewen. 2020. “Will the Pandemic Permanently Alter Scientific Publishing?” Nature 582 (7811): 167–68. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01520-4.
- Cameron-Pesant, Sarah. 2018. “Usage et diffusion des revues savantes québécoises en sciences sociales et humaines : analyse des téléchargements de la plateforme Érudit.” Recherches sociographiques 59 (3): 365–84. https://doi.org/10.7202/1058719ar.
- Clark, Jocalyn, and Richard Smith. 2015. “Firm Action Needed on Predatory Journals.” BMJ 350 (January): h210. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h210.
- Digital Science & Research Solutions Inc. 2020. “Why Did We Build Dimensions.” Dimensions. https://www.dimensions.ai/why-dimensions/.
- Directorate-General for Communication of the European Commission. n.d. “Trends for Open Access to Publications.” Trends for Open Access to Publications. Accessed November 14, 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/strategy/strategy-2020-2024/our-digital-future/open-science/open-science-monitor/trends-open-access-publications_en.
- Domnina, T. N. 2016. “A Megajournal as a New Type of Scientific Publication.” Scientific and Technical Information Processing 43 (4): 241–50. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0147688216040079.
- Elliott, Carl. 2012. “On Predatory Publishers: A Q&A With Jeffrey Beall.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 5, 2012. https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/on-predatory-publishers-a-qa-with-jeffrey-beall.
- Evans, James A., and Jacob Reimer. 2009. “Open Access and Global Participation in Science.” Science 323 (5917): 1025. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1154562.
- Fonds de recherche du Québec. 2019. “Politique de diffusion en libre accès des Fonds de recherche du Québec.” http://www.frqs.gouv.qc.ca/documents/10191/539200/Politique-libre-acces_avril19.pdf/24216d8c-9513-440e-8795-97ea929acb92.
- Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé. 2012. “Politique de libre accès aux résultats de recherche publiés.” http://www.frqs.gouv.qc.ca/documents/11314/435506/Politique-de-libre-acces-aux-resultats-de-recherche-publies/f0a628b7-f36c-409f-b2b9-4334713e0085.
- Gibbs, Kenneth, Jr. 2014. “Diversity in STEM: What It Is and Why It Matters.” Scientific American (blog), September 10, 2014. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/diversity-in-stem-what-it-is-and-why-it-matters/.
- Government of Canada, Innovation. 2016. “Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications.” Science.Gc.Ca. Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. December 21, 2016. https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/063.nsf/eng/h_F6765465.html.
- Government of Canada, Innovation. 2020. “Call for Open Access to COVID-19 Publications - Science.Gc.Ca.” March 13, 2020. https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/063.nsf/eng/h_98016.html.
- Herzog, Christian, Daniel Hook, and Stacy Konkiel. 2020. “Dimensions: Bringing Down Barriers Between Scientometricians and Data.” Quantitative Science Studies 1 (1): 387–95. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00020.
- Iyandemye, Jonathan, and Marshall P. Thomas. 2019. “Low Income Countries Have the Highest Percentages of Open Access Publication: A Systematic Computational Analysis of the Biomedical Literature.” PLoS ONE 14 (7): e0220229. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220229.
- Larivière, Vincent, and Benoit Macaluso. 2011. “Improving the Coverage of Social Science and Humanities Researchers’ Output: The Case of the Érudit Journal Platform.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62 (12): 2437–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21632.
- Larivière, Vincent, and Cassidy R. Sugimoto. 2018. “Do Authors Comply When Funders Enforce Open Access to Research?” Nature 562 (7728): 483–86. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-07101-w.
- Larivière, Vincent, and Cassidy R. Sugimoto. 2020. “Knowledge Synthesis: The Past, Present and Future of Scholarly Communication [Report Submitted to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada].”
- McCabe, Mark J., and Christopher M. Snyder. 2014. “Identifying the Effect of Open Access on Citations Using a Panel of Science Journals.” Economic Inquiry 52 (4): 1284–1300. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12064.
- Ottaviani, Jim. 2016. “The Post-Embargo Open Access Citation Advantage: It Exists (Probably), It’s Modest (Usually), and the Rich Get Richer (of Course).” PLOS ONE 11 (8): e0159614. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159614.
- Peters, Diane. 2021. “Performance-Based Funding Comes to the Canadian Postsecondary Sector.” University Affairs (blog), February 22, 2021. https://www.universityaffairs.ca/news/news-article/performance-based-funding-comes-to-the-canadian-postsecondary-sector/.
- Philipps, Katherine W. 2014. “How Diversity Makes Us Smarter.” Scientific American, October 1, 2014. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-diversity-makes-us-smarter/.
- Piwowar, Heather, Jason Priem, Vincent Larivière, Juan Pablo Alperin, Lisa Matthias, Bree Norlander, Ashley Farley, Jevin West, and Stefanie Haustein. 2018. “The State of OA: A Large-Scale Analysis of the Prevalence and Impact of Open Access Articles.” PeerJ 6 (February): e4375. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4375.
- “Science Benefits from Diversity.” 2018. Nature 558 (7708): 5–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05326-3.
- Siler, Kyle. 2020. “Demarcating Spectrums of Predatory Publishing: Economic and Institutional Sources of Academic Legitimacy.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 71 (11): 1386-1401. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24339.
- Siler, Kyle, Vincent Larivière, and Cassidy R. Sugimoto. 2019. “The Diverse Niches of Megajournals: Specialism within Generalism.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 71 (7): 800-816. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24299.
- Siler, Kyle, Philippe Vincent-Lamarre, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, and Vincent Larivière. 2021. “Predatory Publishers’ Latest Scam: Bootlegged and Rebranded Papers.” Nature 598 (7882): 563–65. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02906-8.
- Spooner, Marc. 2021. “The Ugly Side of Performance-Based Funding for Universities.” Academic Matters, April 22, 2021. https://academicmatters.ca/the-ugly-side-of-performance-based-funding-for-universities-2/.
- Tennant, Jonathan P., François Waldner, Damien C. Jacques, Paola Masuzzo, Lauren B. Collister, and Chris. H. J. Hartgerink. 2016. “The Academic, Economic and Societal Impacts of Open Access: An Evidence-Based Review.” F1000Research 5 (September): 632. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.8460.3.
- UNESCO. 2020a. “UNESCO Mobilizes 122 Countries to Promote Open Science and Reinforced Cooperation in the Face of COVID-19.” UNESCO. March 30, 2020. https://en.unesco.org/news/unesco-mobilizes-122-countries-promote-open-science-and-reinforced-cooperation-face-covid-19.
- UNESCO. 2020b. “Open Access to Facilitate Research and Information on COVID-19.” UNESCO. April 7, 2020. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/communicationinformationresponse/opensolutions.