You are here
Open access and the 2029 Research Excellence Framework (REF)
The PSA recently responded to a consultation on the REF 2029 Open Access Policy, which looks to extend open-access requirements to longform publications and to shorten the embargo periods that apply to journal articles. While the PSA fully supports the promotion of accessible research, its submission highlights how some of the proposed changes might inadvertently negatively impact some scholars and learned societies. You can see our REF29 Landing page here for more information about REF 2029.
Professor Nicholas Allen, Royal Holloway, University of London
PSA Trustee with oversight of publications
Longform publications
The consultation exercise was initiated earlier this year by the UK’s four national higher education funding bodies. The most radical departure from the REF 2021 rules, and certainly the most consequential for individual scholars in political studies, is a requirement for all longform outputs—monographs, edited books and book chapters—to be made freely available to read, download and search within 24 months after the date of publication. To be eligible for REF 2029, the accepted version needs to be deposited with an institutional repository or other publishing platform (much like journal articles in REF 2021) if not immediately published as open access.
While the underlying principles of this policy have obvious virtues, the devil is in the detail. Books are more expensive to publish than individual journal articles, and they are generally expected to have a longer commercial lifespan. Some monographs may be in print for several years. Publishers insisting on a longer embargo period would be effectively out of bounds to scholars who want to publish their book with them and for it to be eligible for REF 2029. Trade publishers, who can be a crucial conduit for public engagement, might be especially resistant to a short embargo.
Funding is currently available to facilitate the immediate open-access publication of UKRI-funded research, including longform outputs. The number of open access books now being published by university and other presses is a welcome development. But existing resources would not be sufficient to make all longform outputs targeted for REF 2029 immediately open access. Moreover, existing resources have largely benefited scholars with funded projects. The new policy could exacerbate any structural inequalities in grant-capture success.
The PSA’s response to the consultation expressed particular concern about the potential impact of the proposed requirements on those sub-disciplines in which longform publications are especially important. It similarly noted the potential impact on early-career researchers, many of whom may not have access to funding and who may effectively be prevented from publishing monographs.
If longform outputs are to be included in future REF exercises, the PSA would support both a longer embargo period and more generous tolerance limits for non-compliant longform outputs (as a proportion of all longform outputs submitted as part of the unit of assessment) than the 10% currently proposed. Ideally, open access requirements for longform publications should be delayed until the next REF but one, to ensure scholars and institutions have time to adapt their research plans.
Journal articles
Open access requirements for journal articles were very much part of REF 2021, and the requirements for REF 2029 are essentially revisions to past practice. Some changes are relatively technical. Those that may reduce the overall administrative burden, such as relaxing depositing deadlines, are to be welcomed. Those that may remove flexibility for colleagues, like restricting licensing choices, are not.
A not-so technical change is a reduction in the length of the open access embargo around journal articles. To be eligible for REF 2029, journal articles in all SHAPE subject areas, including political studies, will need to be made available to read and download within 12 months (rather than the 24 months allowed for REF 2021) when not published immediately as open access.
The changes here have implications for learned societies as well as individual scholars. Since REF 2021, the journal-publishing industry has been revolutionised by ‘transformative agreements’. These are deals between individual universities or consortia of universities and publishers that give institutions access to journals covered by the agreement and enable affiliated academics to publish their articles immediately open access in them.
The agreements have greatly increased the number of open access articles, but at some cost. Publishers want journal editors to accept more articles, in part to justify the value of transformative agreements to the universities that pay. These pressures have fuelled concerns that academic rigour is being sacrificed. They also have workload implications. More journal articles mean more reviewers are needed, thereby increasing the amount of hidden academic labour.
Implications for learned societies
For learned societies like the PSA that largely depend on journal-subscription revenues for their income, transformative agreements have also adversely affected funding streams. As the PSA’s submission notes, learned societies are vital part of the UK’s research ecosystem. They help to socialise, support, and train young scholars, sustain professional networks and champion disciplines to wider audiences. They also contribute to disciplinary delivery around EDI. Yet, learned societies receive no direct funding from research councils despite contributing to their strategic objectives.
Given the way that REF policies tend to drive behaviour across all parts of the sector, the proposed open access requirements for REF 2029 should be carefully assessed for their impact on scholars, institutions, publishers and learned societies alike. The UK higher education bodies need to model fully the proposed changes.
While the pressure to extend the open access principle in academic publishing is unlikely to abate, and rightly so, policy makers and funding councils need to be more open about the question of who ultimately pays? They should also pay greater heed to the long-term sustainability of learned societies.