Institutional principles for negotiating with publishers

From Open Access Directory
Revision as of 12:37, 18 February 2022 by Petersuber (talk | contribs) (→‎M)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This list is part of the Open Access Directory.

  • This list is still under development. Every part of it may change before the official launch, including its title, URL, scope notes, and method of organization.
  • This is a list of library and university principles for negotiating with publishers. Some are from consortia rather than individual institutions.
    • When possible, include the date of public release.
    • When possible, include associated publicity such as announcements, blog posts, news articles, and interviews.
  • Alphabetical by institution.



A

C

F

G

I

J

  • Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC)
    • The JISC page on its role in open access includes sections on "Negotiating a transition to open access", "Requirements for transitional agreements", "Requirements for transformative journals", and "Requirements for green compliant agreements".

L

M

N

  • NorthEast Research Libraries Consortium (NERL) [consortium]
    • NERL demands a better deal, March 3, 2021. These are the NERL negotiating principles.
    • NERL endorsed the MIT Framework in the doc above and in a separate doc, January 21, 2021
    • This blog post has a useful table of the NERL negotiating goals, May 26, 2021.
  • Norwegian directorate for ICT and joint services in higher education and research (UNIT)

S

U

  • University of Washington
    • UW apparently has similar principles but we haven’t found them yet. U Maryland mentions them in its principles (above).