In the publishing industry, perhaps the only issue that is talked about more than COVID-19 is Plan S. I’ll spare everyone a recap of Plan S (but we’ve written about it here and discussed it extensively here), but the ISMTE virtual conference held in August included a plenary discussion on the topic of Plan S with plenty of intriguing updates. Unsurprisingly, many of the new developments with regard to Plan S are influenced by COVID-19 and its far-reaching impacts.
By far, the biggest blow to the implementation of Plan S is the withdrawal of support from the European Research Council in July of 2020. Other funders have withdrawn their support for cOAlition S, but the ERC’s decision is arguably the biggest defection so far. The decision was ultimately related to hybrid journals, which was discussed during the ISMTE virtual conference as one of the most confusing issues in the Plan S conversation, as the coalition has repeatedly flip-flopped its stance on the medium. The ERC objected to cOAlition S declaring hybrid journals as “non-compliant” starting in January 2021. Hybrid journals are subscription-based journals that present the option of immediate open access to authors if the authors are willing to pay an article processing charge. Since these journals would be considered non-compliant, under Plan S, the authors (not the funders) would be responsible for paying these charges, which can be up to $5,000 or more. The ERC argued that this policy would unfairly hurt early career researchers, researchers in countries with fewer funding opportunities, and those who work in subject matter fields with limited OA opportunities.
And it goes without saying that COVID-19 looms large over these decisions as well and could lead to increased scrutiny with regard to the launch of Plan S. Many subscription-based journals are hinging their Plan S compliance on transformative agreements with research institutions or libraries, although as we’ve discussed, these institutions have been hit by budget cuts caused by COVID-19. This could put future transformative agreements in jeopardy. When asked about the chances that other funders will pull out of the coalition and whether Plan S in general may “tank,” Angela Cochran, vice president of publishing for American Society of Clinical Oncology, said that they are “stronger every day. Transformative agreements are not primed to have much momentum in the COVID-ravaged 2021 budgets.” All of this might have contributed to the recent controversial decision by cOAlition S to allow their authors to publish in subscription-based journals using a newly developed rights retention strategy.
Despite these setbacks, cOAlition S is not slowing down. The launch is still planned for January 2021, and one update mentioned during the ISMTE conference is that the coalition has awarded a contract to develop a journal checker tool that authors can use to determine if a journal is compliant with Plan S. So, if you are a journal, now is the time to decide whether you want to be Plan S–compliant and begin taking the steps to make sure that you will be listed on the journal checker tool. What are your current views on Plan S? Will your journal be compliant by January of 2021? Let us know in the comments below.
