Players or Pawns? University Response to the Introduction of Plan S

Ǻ. Gornitzka, Bjørn Stensaker
{"title":"Players or Pawns? University Response to the Introduction of Plan S","authors":"Ǻ. Gornitzka, Bjørn Stensaker","doi":"10.1017/s1062798723000583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Plan S initiative intending to transform the field of academic publishing towards open access has been received with both enthusiasm and criticism. This article reflects on this case as an example of how policymaking in ‘the Europe of Knowledge’ – characterized by increasing complexity caused by problems of multi-level coordination, combined with multi-actor divergence of norms, ideas, and interests − affects and triggers university responses. The analysis of response to this initiative for reform of scientific publishing takes the concept of normative match and mismatch as its theoretical point of departure, and the article provides an overview of how Plan S has been implemented in Norwegian higher education, where the challenge for universities has been to find a balance between responding to political expectations and expectations from societal and academic stakeholders. Our findings suggest a normative mismatch related to the Plan S initiative. The article argues that the university level was left with the task of defending the academic freedom of the individual scholar, while also being delegated the responsibility of controlling the rising costs of publishing services. As a result, issues relating to academic publishing are currently of strategic interest to universities.","PeriodicalId":509559,"journal":{"name":"European Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1062798723000583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The European Plan S initiative intending to transform the field of academic publishing towards open access has been received with both enthusiasm and criticism. This article reflects on this case as an example of how policymaking in ‘the Europe of Knowledge’ – characterized by increasing complexity caused by problems of multi-level coordination, combined with multi-actor divergence of norms, ideas, and interests − affects and triggers university responses. The analysis of response to this initiative for reform of scientific publishing takes the concept of normative match and mismatch as its theoretical point of departure, and the article provides an overview of how Plan S has been implemented in Norwegian higher education, where the challenge for universities has been to find a balance between responding to political expectations and expectations from societal and academic stakeholders. Our findings suggest a normative mismatch related to the Plan S initiative. The article argues that the university level was left with the task of defending the academic freedom of the individual scholar, while also being delegated the responsibility of controlling the rising costs of publishing services. As a result, issues relating to academic publishing are currently of strategic interest to universities.
玩家还是棋子?大学对引入 S 计划的回应
欧洲 S 计划 "旨在将学术出版领域转变为开放式获取,该计划既受到了热烈欢迎,也受到了批评。本文以这一案例为例,探讨了 "知识欧洲 "的政策制定--其特点是多层次协调问题所导致的日益复杂性,以及多行为体在规范、理念和利益方面的分歧--如何影响和引发大学的回应。文章以规范匹配和错配的概念为理论出发点,分析了科学出版改革倡议的应对措施,并概述了S计划在挪威高等教育中的实施情况,大学面临的挑战是如何在回应政治期望与社会和学术利益相关者的期望之间找到平衡。我们的研究结果表明,"S计划 "倡议存在规范不匹配的问题。文章认为,大学既要维护学者个人的学术自由,又要承担控制出版服务成本上升的责任。因此,与学术出版相关的问题是当前大学关注的战略问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信