IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i8d10.1007_s11192-021-03966-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of policies promoting open access in the scientific ecosystem: case study of ERC grantee publication practice

Author

Listed:
  • Antonio Perianes‐Rodríguez

    (Universidad Carlos III, C/Madrid)

  • Carlos Olmeda-Gómez

    (Universidad Carlos III, C/Madrid)

Abstract

The European Research Council (ERC) is one of the leading sources of research funding worldwide. This article analyses the papers published by its grantees. The primary aim was to determine the access policies of the journals chosen by researchers benefiting from public funding to disseminate their findings, based on an analysis of 44,481 papers published from 2007 to 2015. The study showed that 85% were published in hybrid or non-OA journals, with 50% to 60% of citations referring to the articles carried by such blue journals. The mean excellence rate was 6.4%, with > 11% for blue journal, nearly 8% for green journal and 6.5% for gold OA journal papers. Two lessons have been learnt from the ERC’s endeavour and experience in the international scientific ecosystem in the first decade since its institution. The first is that research proposed, reviewed and funded by scientists delivers highly influential and visible results. The second is that, while complying with OA publication recommendations and mandates, grantees prefer to publish their papers in non-gold OA journals.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonio Perianes‐Rodríguez & Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, 2021. "Effect of policies promoting open access in the scientific ecosystem: case study of ERC grantee publication practice," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6825-6836, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:8:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03966-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-03966-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-03966-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-021-03966-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elizabeth Gadd & Jenny Fry & Claire Creaser, 2018. "The influence of journal publisher characteristics on open access policy trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1371-1393, June.
    2. Terttu Luukkonen, 2012. "Conservatism and risk-taking in peer review: Emerging ERC practices," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 48-60, February.
    3. Inga Vesper, 2018. "Europe’s top science funder shows high-risk research pays off," Nature, Nature, vol. 558(7708), pages 16-17, June.
    4. Richard Van Noorden, 2017. "Gates Foundation research can’t be published in top journals," Nature, Nature, vol. 541(7637), pages 270-270, January.
    5. Richard Van Noorden, 2018. "Science journals end open-access trial with Gates Foundation," Nature, Nature, vol. 559(7714), pages 311-312, July.
    6. Alexander Kohls & Salvatore Mele, 2018. "Converting the Literature of a Scientific Field to Open Access through Global Collaboration: The Experience of SCOAP3 in Particle Physics," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-10, April.
    7. Alexis-Michel Mugabushaka & Veronika Rieder & Elena-Simona Toma, 2013. "Mobile researchers in European Research systems. Insights from data of applicants to the European Research Council," Reflets et perspectives de la vie économique, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(4), pages 81-98.
    8. Helga Nowotny, 2013. "Preserve the European Research Council's legacy," Nature, Nature, vol. 504(7479), pages 189-189, December.
    9. Terttu Luukkonen, 2014. "The European Research Council and the European research funding landscape," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(1), pages 29-43.
    10. Núria Bautista-Puig & Carlos García-Zorita & Elba Mauleón, 2019. "European Research Council: excellence and leadership over time from a gender perspective," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(4), pages 370-382.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Claartje J Vinkenburg & Sara Connolly & Stefan Fuchs & Channah Herschberg & Brigitte Schels, 2020. "Mapping career patterns in research: A sequence analysis of career histories of ERC applicants," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez & Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, 2019. "Effects of journal choice on the visibility of scientific publications: a comparison between subscription-based and full Open Access models," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1737-1752, December.
    3. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    4. Conor O’Kane & Jing A. Zhang & Jarrod Haar & James A. Cunningham, 2023. "How scientists interpret and address funding criteria: value creation and undesirable side effects," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 799-826, August.
    5. Simen G. Enger, 2017. "Closed clubs: Cumulative advantages and participation in Horizon 2020," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20170703, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    6. Albert Banal-Estañol & Ines Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2016. "Key Success Drivers in Public Research Grants: Funding the Seeds of Radical Innovation in Academia?," CESifo Working Paper Series 5852, CESifo.
    7. Nicolas Carayol, 2016. "The Right Job and the Job Right: Novelty, Impact and Journal Stratification in Science," Post-Print hal-02274661, HAL.
    8. Thomas Feliciani & Junwen Luo & Lai Ma & Pablo Lucas & Flaminio Squazzoni & Ana Marušić & Kalpana Shankar, 2019. "A scoping review of simulation models of peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 555-594, October.
    9. Elizabeth Gadd & Chris Morrison & Jane Secker, 2019. "The Impact of Open Access on Teaching—How Far Have We Come?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-17, August.
    10. O'Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Zhang, Jing A. & Cunningham, James A., 2020. "How university-based principal investigators shape a hybrid role identity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    11. J. Rigby & K. Julian, 2014. "On the horns of a dilemma: does more funding for research lead to more research or a waste of resources that calls for optimization of researcher portfolios? An analysis using funding acknowledgement ," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1067-1075, November.
    12. Laudel, Grit & Gläser, Jochen, 2014. "Beyond breakthrough research: Epistemic properties of research and their consequences for research funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1204-1216.
    13. Stephen Gallo & Lisa Thompson & Karen Schmaling & Scott Glisson, 2018. "Risk evaluation in peer review of grant applications," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 216-229, June.
    14. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:321-331. is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Dag W. Aksnes & Liv Langfeldt & Paul Wouters, 2019. "Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    16. Andrea Bonaccorsi & Nicola Melluso & Francesco Alessandro Massucci, 2022. "Exploring the antecedents of interdisciplinarity at the European Research Council: a topic modeling approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 6961-6991, December.
    17. Carole J. Lee & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Bias in peer review," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 2-17, January.
    18. Yin, Zhifeng & Liang, Zheng & Zhi, Qiang, 2018. "Does the concentration of scientific research funding in institutions promote knowledge output?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1146-1159.
    19. Elise S. Brezis & Aliaksandr Birukou, 2020. "Arbitrariness in the peer review process," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(1), pages 393-411, April.
    20. Anne Hobert & Najko Jahn & Philipp Mayr & Birgit Schmidt & Niels Taubert, 2021. "Open access uptake in Germany 2010–2018: adoption in a diverse research landscape," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9751-9777, December.
    21. Manlio Del Giudice & Melita Nicotra & Marco Romano & Carmela Elita Schillaci, 2017. "Entrepreneurial performance of principal investigators and country culture: relations and influences," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 320-337, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:8:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03966-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.