The United States federal government pumps billions of dollars into research every year. Now, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) is asking for receipts, issuing new guidance to ensure the results of those investments are made available to the public for free.
In an August 25 memo that was cheered by open access advocates, the OSTP directed federal agencies to update their guidelines to require all federally funded, peer-reviewed research results and findings be made available "without an embargo or cost." Journals sharing results can no longer lock them behind a paywall; they'd previously been able to limit articles to subscribers for up to one year. The new rules have to be implemented by the end of 2025 and agencies have up to 12 months to come up with plans for expanding public access to research. The changes build on a 2013 memo that pushed agencies and departments with more than $100 million in annual research expenditures to boost public access, but also allowed the limited embargo.
"The American people fund tens of billions of dollars of cutting-edge research annually," said Alondra Nelson, head of the OSTP, in a White House statement. "There should be no delay or barrier between the American public and the returns on their investments in research."
The OSTP also called for making data from peer-reviewed research studies available on publication, so others can build on the original work. It said the changes were aimed at accelerating the impact of new research and were motivated by a desire to tackle "discrimination and structural inequalities-such as funding disadvantages experienced by minority-serving colleges and institutions."
The Association of Research Libraries said the new guidance marked a "historic moment for scientific communications" that would speed efforts to tackle global health and climate challenges, as well as encouraging agencies to "work equitably for people from underserved backgrounds and for early-career researchers."
Although the OSTP acknowledged the important role journals play in supporting research, notably through peer reviews, publishers were more cautious about the changes, wondering how the shift to full open access would be funded. In a statement, Shelley Husband, a senior vice president at the Association of American Publishers, said the guidance was announced "without formal, meaningful consultation or public input during this Administration on a decision that will have sweeping ramifications, including serious economic impact."
To find out what the impact might be-including on Boston University and its researchers, many of whom receive funding from the federal government-The Brink spoke with Mark Newton, University librarian ad interim. An advocate for open access to research, he's also a former journal editor, previously helping lead the Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication.
