The evaluation of scientific research is undergoing a seismic shift, driven by the integration of Current Research Information Systems (CRIS), Open Science principles, and Artificial Intelligence (AI). In our recent paper, Otmane Azeroual, Joachim Schöpfel and I explore the concept of Revolutionising Research Assessment: The Role of CRIS, highlighting the transformative changes in the research landscape of France and Germany, and presenting

In 2020, Joachim Schöpfel and I planned to publish an anthology on research data, focussing on topics such as fake data (including AI-generated data), their detection, data markets, data reuse rates, blockchain, and health data. However, we had underestimated what had changed since 2018. Back then Open Divide – Critical Studies on Open Access, edited by Joachim and me was published.

On November 12, 2024, I had the pleasure of delivering a workshop titled “ Scientific Publishing: Publication Strategies, Open Science, and Open Access” at the Hamburg University of Applied Sciences. This event aimed to provide researchers with essential insights and practical strategies for navigating the complex world of academic publishing.

On October 22, 2024, I delivered a keynote lecture at the LundOnline Conference 2024 (not surprisingly held in Lund, Sweden) titled Balancing Aspirations and Outcomes – A Critical Look at Open Access Policies and Their Evolution . In my talk, I explored the development of Open Access policies since their inception, focusing on key aspects such as who sets these policies, their intended targets, and the types of materials made openly

The book “Open Divide: Critical Studies on Open Access” edited by Joachim Schöpfel and me, Ulrich Herb, was published in 2018.

Plan S, an initiative by European funders to increase open access to journal articles, has led to progress, but not in the way originally intended. Although it aimed to dismantle paywalls and boost fully open-access publishing, most of the growth has occurred in hybrid journals, which mix open-access and paywalled articles.

I am very happy to be giving a keynote on October 22nd at the LundOnline conference, which, despite its name, will take place in person in Sweden. The conference’s theme is Turning policy into practice – opportunities and consequences for stakeholders in scholarly communication , and accordingly, my presentation will focus on the role of policies in Open Access.

In September, a journalistic article on Diamond Open Access (by Wolfgang Benedikt Schmal and myself) and a preprint on Transformative Open Access Agreements (by Laura Rothfritz, Wolfgang Benedikt Schmal, and myself) were published. On Diamond Open Access &

The Summa Cum Fraude team dealt with retractions as part of a university project. As the person responsible for the open access repository at my university and member of this team, I am particularly interested in whether and how articles that have been retracted in a journal are still available as regular (non-retracted) articles in Open Access repositories.

This week, I had some encounters with Diamond Open Access that got me thinking, especially about the connotations of “Diamond Open Access”. These include invoice-like payment requests from a Diamond Open Access platform, editors switching their journal from Hybrid to Diamond Open Access, purchase offers for Diamond Open Access journals and the intention of the German Research Foundation DFG to set up a service centre to further develop and

As some people abroad were interested in my earlier posts on the German DEAL contracts, I have decided to summarise here some key points of the new contracts with Wiley, Springer Nature and Elsevier. The three contracts differ in some aspects, but at least there are two issue they have in common: They are opt-in contracts , only those organisations that actively join the contract will benefit from the conditions.