Foundations for Open Scholarship Strategy Development

Front matter

Version 1.0 – October 16, 2017 - Started document.

Version 1.1 – June 06, 2018 - Created website.

Version 1.2 – July 30, 2018 - Completed and published first draft

Purpose of this Document

This document aims to agree on a broad, international strategy for the implementation of open scholarship that meets the needs of different national and regional communities but works globally.

Scholarly research can be idealised as an inspirational process for advancing our collective knowledge to the benefit of all humankind. However, current research practices often struggle with a range of tensions, in part due to the fact that this collective (or “commons”) ideal conflicts with the competitive system in which most scholars work, and in part because much of the infrastructure of the scholarly world is becoming largely digital. What is broadly termed as Open Scholarship is an attempt to realign modern research practices with this ideal. We do not propose a definition of Open Scholarship, but recognise that it is a holistic term that encompasses many disciplines, practices, and principles, sometimes also referred to as Open Science or Open Research. We choose the term Open Scholarship to be more inclusive of these other terms. When we refer to science in this document, we do so historically and use it as shorthand for more general scholarship.

The purpose of this document is to provide a concise analysis of where the global Open Scholarship movement currently stands: what the common threads and strengths are, where the greatest opportunities and challenges lie, and how we can more effectively work together as a global community to recognise and address the top strategic priorities. This document was inspired by the Foundations for OER Strategy Development and work in the FORCE11 Scholarly Commons Working Group, and developed by an open contribution working group.

Our hope is that this document will serve as a foundational resource for continuing discussions and initiatives about implementing effective strategies to help streamline the integration of Open Scholarship practices into a modern, digital research culture. Through this, we hope to extend the reach and impact of Open Scholarship into a global context, making sure that it is truly open for all. We also hope that this document will evolve as the conversations around Open Scholarship progress, and help to provide useful insight for both global co-ordination and local action. We believe this is a step forward in making Open Scholarship the norm.

Ultimately, we expect the impact of widespread adoption of Open Scholarship to be diverse. We expect novel research practices to accelerate the pace of innovation, and therefore stimulate critical industries around the world. We could also expect to see an increase in public trust of science and scholarship, as transparency becomes more normative. As such, we expect interest in Open Scholarship to increase at multiple levels, due to its inherent influence on society and global economics.

Strategy

“Strategy generally involves setting goals, determining actions to achieve the goals, and mobilizing resources to execute the actions. A strategy describes how the ends (goals) will be achieved by the means (resources).”

Due to the length of this strategy, please note that we have also compiled an IMMEDIATE ACTION PLAN comprising the most essential immediate strategic action points.

In order to overcome the challenges and achieve our priorities, we need to build on our strengths. We have identified three main temporal components (short-, mid-, and long-term) of our overall strategy to be used as direct suggestions for action on the individual, group, institutional or national (or higher) level. We notice that this hierarchy does not fully represent the connectivity of different levels of the academic system (e.g., at the discipline level). There is clearly a need for different fields to discuss what is culturally appropriate for themselves; however, this strategy can provide a foundation for guiding those discussions.

With this, one of the principle goals for this strategy is to create communities that reciprocally support each other through learning and training (e.g., via the Open Science MOOC). These communities will have the best insight into real life barriers and how to overcome them, and will be able to identify new realities at the different hierarchical levels, which can then be incorporated into decision making processes.

We note that, due to the diversity of actors and stakeholders and their views and practices, this strategy is not a consensus document. How the different aspects are prioritised is a matter of debate based on varying perspectives. Its effectiveness will be realised when individuals and communities can implement different parts of it as cultural norms develop and shift towards a more open state.

Many view the progress of Open Scholarship in the last 2-3 decades as painfully insubstantive, a factor that might reflect a general lack of strategic thinking and implementation.

We also note that this strategy can only be based on information which we as a collective have, and it remains highly likely that there are many initiatives, policies, and programs that we have inadvertently missed. As such, it is probable that there are strategies that we have missed or not even considered. Nonetheless, we have attempted to justify our strategy where possible using evidence and reasoning, the discussion of which can be found below the strategy in Section 5.

Short-term strategy (>2 years)

Individual Level

Search

Search for existing data you can reuse instead of creating your own data.

Consider using and supporting more open search engines, such as Open Knowledge Maps, instead of proprietary services.

Also make sure that all of your research outputs are easily discoverable, published either in journals, websites, or other repositories, and with appropriate identifiers and metadata.

Use RSS readers such as Feedly to easily aggregate news and research updates from a number of sources.

Analysis

Adopt a broad-scale approach to the variety of open scholarly research and education practices. See the FOSTER Open Science taxonomy for guidance.

Adopt the use of open source and/or free software for the conduct of research and analysis so that the computational processing can be audited by the community, and so that the tools used are available to everyone to increase productivity and collaboration.

For the distinction between open, free, gratis and libre, see. e.g. OpenSource.com.

Establish and foster practices of re-use and remix to help create a thriving open scholarship culture, based around collaboration and sharing.

Where needed, also consider pre-registering studies, sharing protocols, and using lab notebooks to openly document research.

Writing

Answer relevant questions and join in discussions on public websites, e.g. Ask Open Science, Stack Overflow, the Open Science subreddit and Twitter.

Make individual contributions to openness that are visible in public (e.g., on a CV, open platform, or personal website/blog). Use these as the basis to develop best practice stories around role models.

Become familiar with openly collaborative writing tools such as Overleaf and Google Docs.

Also consider ‘executable writing formats’ using platforms such as Stencila.

Publication

Commit to a variety of personal open scholarly practices, such as sharing research data and materials in free, openly-licensed formats so that methods and results can be freely examined and built upon by the wider community.

Also consider sharing your work more rapidly via use of preprints.

Make sure that all supporting code, data, and other relevant information are available alongside any papers published.

Commit to sharing presentations and posters, as well as any recordings, online via platforms such as Zenodo.

Most importantly, begin with making your own work available open access, which can almost always be done in some way at no cost.

Consider only publishing in APC-free Open Access journals, or those which or operated by non-profits or learned societies.

Refuse to sign copyright transfer agreements (CTAs), unless you are allowed to retain copyright of your work under a Creative Commons license of your own choosing.

If needed, use the SPARC author addendum to legally retain the rights to your work during publicaton.

Outreach

Advocate for funding organisations, governments, research institutions, journals, conferences, and professional societies to adopt policies and mandates related to Open Scholarship practices beyond Open Access (OA) and data sharing.

For example, on open peer review, use of persistent identifiers (PIDs), open research evaluation, and preprints.

Further to that, advocate for open education with corresponding practices in order to help spread approaches to open among peers and the next generation of scientists.

Work with, and collaborate with, researchers who practice various aspects of Open Scholarship, ranging from developing Open Source software and tools to posting preprints and citizen science, and sharing experiences made with approaches to open education.

For education, sign the Cape Town Open Education Declaration to commit to the pursuit of the Declaration’s three strategies as a part of one’s teaching, learning and/or work life.

Encourage the wider adoption of an open mindset that emphasises the importance of the research process over the outcome.

Establish support structures (e.g., open workshops, openLabs, walk-in labs and support structures, makerspaces in the wider sense) that help to guide other individuals along the path towards Open Scholarship.

This can include questions of how to publish, teach, learn and do research in the open, and what tools are available to use for these (see Figures 1 and 2, and Group Level section).

Form better relationships with other stakeholders involved in Open Scholarship developments (e.g., librarians, policymakers, publishers and other service providers, Open Access advocates, and those actively teaching, plus ICT and other support positions for science & education).

Make sure to heed the Ten Directions to Move Open Education Forward.

Consider supporting community initiatives such as the Open Science MOOC for more widespread training in open scientific practices.

Assessment

Leave constructive comments/annotations on preprints/code etc. with open tools such as hypothes.is.

React positively to requests for open peer review, and requests from non-profits and learned societies.

Also consider refusing to perform peer review (and editorial work) for free to commercial publishers.

Request that all relevant materials (data, software, etc.) be made open and be properly cited in your reviewing, as per the Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative.

Sign the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) as a commitment to improving how research is assessed. Make sure to adhere to the principles too in practice.

Adopt the Leiden Manifesto for research metrics.

Do not judge work based on its impact factor or venue of publication. Consider establishing an ImpactStory profile to document your research impact more.

Group Level (e.g., labs, departments)

Many of those at the individual level will still be relevant here too, and are duplicated in part here to reflect this.

Search

Search for existing data from other labs and individuals you can reuse instead of creating your own duplicate data.

Consider using and supporting more open search engines, such as Open Knowledge Maps, instead of proprietary services.

Use RSS readers such as Feedly to easily aggregate news and research updates from a number of sources.

Analysis

Adopt best practices for Open Scholarship, including shared data as a research output, addressing publication bias, and “questionable research practices” with bias-reducing workflows.

Highlight best practice showcases in order to demonstrate what is actually possible with Open Scholarship, and what the wider advantages can be.

Adopt a broad-scale approach to the variety of open scholarly research practices. See the FOSTER Open Science taxonomy for a starting point, and further expand this to include e.g. Social Sciences and the Humanities as well as Education and Scholarly Communication practices.

Most importantly, begin with making your own work available open access, which can almost always be done in some way at no cost.

Adopt the use of open source and/or free software for the conduct of research and analysis so that the computational processing can be audited by the community, and so that the tools used are available to everyone to increase productivity and collaboration.

Where needed, also consider pre-registering studies, sharing protocols, and using lab notebooks to openly document research.

Writing

Answer relevant questions and join in discussions on public websites, e.g. Ask Open Science, Stack Overflow, the Open Science subrredit and Twitter.

Consider having group/lab profiles where needed on these platforms.

Commit to using openly collaborative writing tools such as Overleaf and Google Docs.

Publication

Refuse to engage with publishers who have restrictive preprint, Open Access, and copyright policies, or are otherwise antagonstic to progressive open scholarship practices and policies.

Commit to sharing preprints for the open and rapid dissemination of your work.

Make sure that all supporting code, data, and other relevant information are available alongside any papers published.

Outreach

Locate Open Scholarship hotspots (i.e., venues or groups for regular exchange and discussion about community building) and find a way to link them together to help community cohesion and expansion.

If a local Open Scholarship hotspot does not yet exist, establish it (e.g., using the Meetup platform).

Use these national/international/regional communities to support lower-level learning and knowledge sharing of Open Scholarship practices, especially in varying cultural settings.

Start discussions towards an implicit or explicit (shared) open science pledge or code of conduct for your department, lab, or research group. This can be based on existing ones, such as the Contributor Covenant.

Establish rights experts who might help with questions regarding copyright issues and the effective use of Creative Commons licenses.

Advocate to decision makers at scholarly journals, publishers, funders, and higher education and research institutions to recognize and reward a variety of Open Scholarship activities, particularly regarding research evaluation and open education policies.

Initiate debates on meaningful standards and practices at a disciplinary level for publishing data (e.g., the FAIR principles).

Improve engagement between faculty advisory boards, researchers, students and librarians regarding Open Scholarship practices (see Fig. 1 and 2) and principles.

Consider e.g. Hartley et al. 2019’s notion of expert user communities that might also be expanded to not only encompass OA publishing, but also other Open Science and Scholarship tools, services and corresponding communities in the variety of areas of Open Scholarship.

Assessment

Engage communication departments and research assessment officials. Organize sessions to tell them about open science and scholarship, and be sensitive to the fact that it may imply they change their entire view of what is important in science and what their role could be.

Start discussions with University Ranking Providers (e.g., QS, Times Higher Education) to include an openness element to their indicators.

Institute Level (including research and funding bodies, and professional societies)

Sharing

Explore substituting proprietary software with open source alternatives.

Require researchers to work with open standards and file formats (either exclusively or in addition to proprietary standards and file formats).

Publication

Map and coordinate when current subscription and big deal licenses will run out across research institutes, and let it happen. Where cancellations or terminations occur, ensure that there is adequate post-subscription access and support using existing sustainable and legal mechanisms (e.g., Inter-Library Loan).

Make sure that there is sufficient co-ordination between libraries and relevant others beforehand, so that libraries can continue to provide outstanding services without interruption.

Explore routes for reinvesting money saved for library budgets.

Purchase back any legacy documents and incorporate them into the scholarly body of work. Also improve the open sharing and archiving of legacy articles on which copyright has expired.

Help to inform researchers more about the Author Alliance termination of transfer tool to help them retain their rights as authors.

Research funders can define the limits of what is an acceptable standard of publication. They therefore have the power to mandate publication in journals with a cap on APCs and BPCs, or in OA-only venues (with specific licenses), or in those with short or zero-length embargoes on self-archiving (e.g., Emerald, The Royal Society).

Refuse to engage with publishers that double dip on payments.

Demand transparency and data in cases where there is a suspicion that this is occurring (for an overview, see e.g. Buranyi, 2017).

Refuse to engage with publishers in which there is no transparency around pricing for either subscriptions or Open Access. This includes with publishers who insist on using non-disclosure agreements as part of licensing contract terms.

Engage publishers on being more transparent about the financial aspects of their publishing workflows, similar to those such as Ubiquity Press.

Refuse to engage with publishers who have restrictive preprint, Open Access, or copyright policies.

Insist that publishers make all bibliographic records, usage metrics, and citation data freely available and accessible in both a human- and machine-readable format.

Develop rights retention policies for scholarly research at research institutes that currently lack them.

Adopt the CASRAI CRediT (Contributor Rules Taxonomy) guidelines to help identify paper author contributions more clearly, and additionally identify the contributions of authors of other products (data, software, etc.) as clearly as possible.

Encourage further adoption by publishers of the Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC) in conjunction with the wider uptake of open standards.

For research institutes that currently lack them, either launch and maintain an Open Access repository or find an existing resource to use, and adopt an Open Access policy. Make these easily discoverable and accessible on the institutional website, and any relevant indexing services.

Examples of Open Access policies can be found e.g. via the ROARMAP.

Examples of Open Education / OER policies are listed in e.g. the Creative Commons OER policy registry, or the European Union’s Policy approaches to Open Education, 2017.

Outreach

Research libraries should collect information about how the sector as a whole interacts with the research literature. Such information could be used to help with publisher negotiations, break up big deal contracts, and cancel subscriptions by providing evidence into the cross-sectorial value of services, and includes:

Which venues researchers are publishing in;

Who is doing the editorial and peer review work;

How much is being spent on serial subscriptions;

How much is being spent on Article Processing Charges (APCs) and Book Processing Charges (BPCs) for Open Access; and

Which articles are being downloaded and cited.

Promote and compensate time and effort spent on training and advocacy for the various aspects of Open Scholarship, including Open Source, Open Access, and Open Education.

Enable and foster local support structures such as openlabs and open publication and research learning, guidance and advice offers.

Assessment

Engage with research communities to develop and advertise quantifiable incentives for sharing preprints, open data, reproducible analyses, and OA in hiring, promotion, and tenure decisions.

Define new ways of describing these wider contributions to scientific communities.

Encourage and adopt the principles for fairer research assessment outlined in DORA.

Make sure that those in charge of research assessment, including hiring, tenure, and grant-awarding committees adhere to these.

Explore the Dutch paradigm of researchers’ portfolios.

National Level (or higher)

Search

Implement currently available sort, filter and search/discovery technology across scholarship outputs.

Enable unrestricted text and data mining over this content.

Writing

Mandate ORCID for researchers across all research outputs to help assist in the persistent identification of authors across the entire research literature, and easier research discoverability.

Publication

Build on faculty and funder support for Open Access and related quality assurance initiatives (e.g., peer review) that are decoupled from journals.

Agree on, and develop, a governance structure for a world-wide scholarly infrastructure (e.g., W3C).

Create scholarly standards to implement an alternative non-profit and community-owned scholarly publishing platform/environment (using the funds freed from subscriptions, building on existing repositories/environments and infrastructure).

A reduction of article-processing charges (APCs) in hybrid titles to match the market average for OA-only journals.

NOTE that with the new funding stream of Horizon Europe, publications to hybrid journals are not eligible.

A reduction of article-processing charges (APCs) and book-processing charges (BPCs) in hybrid titles to match the market average for OA-only journals and presses.

The scholarly publishing market might require a detailed government-level investigation in order to stabilise this.

Where subscriptions have not yet expired, mandate offsetting agreements for hybrid journal titles in order to reduce double-dipping.

Where offsetting deals are in place, these can be streamlined and standardised across sectors to reduce administrative burden.

For scholarly publishers to engage with the new UK Scholarly Communications License that enables authors to retain more of their rights.

This would reduce the time spent on embargo processing, the cost spent on hybrid APCs and BPCs, and for researchers in the UK, help them to comply with the UKRI Open Access policy.

For those outside of the UK to consider extending the UK SCL (or relevant variations of it) towards other regional funding and licensing strategies.

Sector-wide adoption of no-questions-asked fee waiver policies for researchers from lower- to middle-income countries, or those with a demonstrable financial need.

To transform (or flip) the majority of scholarly journals from subscription to Open Access publishing in accordance with community-specific publication preferences.

Outreach

Create new or support/contact existing international library consortia/collaborations (e.g., the International Coalition of Library Consortia) to co-operate on infrastructure developments (e.g., LIBER, EIFL, ARL, and SPARC).

Sign on to the Global Sustainability Coalition for Open Science Services (SCOSS), and investigate coalitions with the Open Research Funders Group.

Consortia like the German Projekt DEAL could provide examples of how to take the first step towards this at a national level.

Gaining support from SPARC for any such developments would also be useful.

Particularly for the European area and with a focus on the long tail of science, OpenAIRE could provide interoperability resolutions to institutional repositories and enhance their outputs visibility.

Consider the ramifications of Plan S, which aims for full and immediate Open Access to publications from publicly funded research, for your national and local context, and see what can be done to implement Plan S for your context. Further reading: Kramer & Bosman, 2018

Support collaborations such as Metadata 2020, NISO/NIST, and eLife, to help build a richer connectivity between scholarly communication systems and communities.

Take action against the privatisation of scholarly works and processes in order to achieve transformation of the publishing industry into one comprised of fair licensing, fair market competition, and under the ownership of the scholarly community.

Develop sustainable, regional and national roadmaps for Open Scholarship.

Encourage a wider adoption of preprint and Open Access policies similar to those at the NIH (USA), Wellcome Trust (UK) and the European Commission.

Encourage research funders to develop calls to support evidence- and theory-based interventions to promote Open Scholarship.

Fund determinant studies that use behavior change theory to map the determinants of engaging in different Open Scholarship practices

For example, why do some researchers routinely publish preprints while others do not? Are the arguments produced by researchers opposed to data sharing indeed the reasons why those who do not share data, do not?.

Fund studies that use stakeholder theory to explore ways to achieve more Open Scholarship policies at research and education institutions.

To invite all relevant stakeholders, including universities, research institutions, learned societies, funders, libraries, and publishers, to collaborate on a transition to open research practices for the benefit of scholarship and society at large.

Create showcases/highlights/good practices of Open Scholarship practices on national websites or portals, together with relevant information and resources.

OpenAIRE National Open Access Desks (NOADs) already working on that and could provide input and facilitate communication between all stakeholders towards establishing national guides of sorts.

Encourage the formalisation of Open Science Training Courses, such as that offered by FOSTER or as part of OpenScienceMOOC, in graduate school training programs (and further).

Assessment

Create a cost-effectiveness analysis of Open Scholarship (e.g., true cost of article publishing) to be used as the basis for an argument about how much taxpayer money it costs every year to delay decisions in the above areas.

Research funders and libraries hold most of the purse strings, and further engagement on this front is essential, especially in defining their relative roles in developing or funding scholarly infrastructure.

Simply channelling more money into the existing system, with perverse incentives and skewed power dynamics, is clearly no longer sustainable for research.

Encourage research funders to diversify the portfolio of what is considered as a research output for assessment purposes.

Encourage and adopt the principles for fairer research assessment outlined in DORA. Make sure that those in charge of research assessment, including hiring, tenure, and grant-awarding committees adhere to these.

Mid-term strategy (2-5 years)

The expectation at this point is that specific parts of the short-term strategy will have been initiated, based on the needs of respective groups, and are either in place or in development. Often, these are ongoing processes, and therefore might overlap with the mid-term strategy, and are not worth repeating here. However, all of the items mentioned in the short-term strategy are still relevant at this stage, depending on the pace of development.

Individual Level

Continue instructing new researchers in best practices regarding Open Scholarship.

In areas where this might be lacking, build strategic community networks to increase the strength of advocacy efforts.

Ensure that all your research processes and outputs, including historical ones, are openly licensed and available for re-use in appropriate venues.

Develop workflows that take advantage of Open Scholarship practices to demonstrate their increased effectiveness in comparison to traditional, more closed workflows.

Continue to innovate in new research processes and workflows as new services, outlets, and technologies become available.

Make use of semantic web technologies in order to spread already-existing and newly-developing research output; this may include tagging (see e.g. approaches such as OATP and the Openness and Education scholarly article network by DeVries, Rolfe, Jordan and Weller, 2017), or annotating existing content e.g. with Hypothes.is.

Continue to develop the aspects of the Short-term strategy (Section 2.1).

Group Level

Create a comprehensive set of mechanisms that allow fully open research processes to public participation (no more piggybacking, no more “human processing units”, etc.).

Develop Open Scholarship workflows for all group members to take advantage of increasingly well-developed open scholarly infrastructure and tools.

The European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) aims at creating a safe environment with federated services and tools for Open Science.

Ensure that group members are trained in a wide variety of relevant skills, including public engagement, policy development, data analysis, Web development, citizen science, and scholarly communications.

Showcase developments and success stories from Open Scholarship practices.

Continue to build and empower local Open Scholarship communities, including newer researchers and students.

Continue to develop the aspects of the Short-term strategy (Section 2.1).

Institute Level

Implement opt-out automatization of manuscript handling/single-click submission to a local or remote open repository under default open licenses.

Implement opt-out automatization of data deposition under default open licenses.

Implement opt-out automatization of code accessibility and version control under default open licenses.

Implement single-click submission in the repository (cf. HAL) or adopt an existing tool (cf. Dissemin).

Backfill the open repositories with full text for all works which are in the public domain, permissively licensed or otherwise permitted by copyright exceptions and other policies, and help authors do the same for the remaining works.

Convert saved resources currently spent on closed-journal subscriptions into funds supporting sustainable Open Access business models, scholarly infrastructure, and other relevant support services.

Develop and teach courses on the various practices of Open Scholarship (e.g., as required seminars/workshops for graduate school programs).

Continue working with other research institutes to share resources, infrastructure, and services in a more sustainable manner.

Engage with research funders to have explicit and enforced mandates regarding Open Scholarship, making sure not to impinge upon academic freedoms.

Continue to only engage with publishers and other vendors that have progressively open services, tools, and policies in place.

Commit to openly sharing institute-level data and metrics on research activities, records and behaviour.

Continue to ensure that research assessment policies are evidence-informed, rigorous, and adhered to at all levels.

Develop an equivalent to the CASRAI CRediT (Contributor Rules Taxonomy) guidelines to help identify the contributions of authors of non-paper products (data, software, etc.) as clearly as possible.

National (or higher) Level

Analysis

Start implementing semantic technology across all scholarship outputs, including for the purposes of enabling unrestricted text and data mining.

Publication

For any remaining hybrid journals that attain a higher proportion of Open Access over subscription articles, encourage them to flip to pure Open Access with an APC that reflects the running costs of the journal.

For remaining hybrid journals that have not attained this level, refuse to support publication of Open Access articles in those venues, and also refuse to renew subscriptions.

Outreach

Increase funding for outreach, especially to under-represented demographics.

Fund further research into determinants identified as relevant to engage in Open Scholarship.

Fund intervention development of interventions to target individuals and institutions to adopt Open Scholarship practices and policies.

Engage library consortia (e.g., LIBER, EIFL) with national negotiation consortia, and any relevant higher education unions, in order to strengthen researcher coalitions. Supplement these with scholarly collaborations (e.g., eLife, NISO) in order to further develop relationships and collaborations across the scholarly communication sector.

Begin implementation of national or international scholarly infrastructures, with cross-stakeholder agreed upon open standards, roadmaps, and governance structures. Ensure this is supported with sustainable funding streams diverted from refreshed library budgets after expensive publishing contracts have been terminated or expired.

Publicise the outcomes of any research or investigations into the status of national-level scholarly publishing markets.

Assessment

Formulation of recommended career metrics that incentivize Open Data publication, Open Materials, Open Source software release, and research support.

Formulate recommended career metrics that incentivize Open Data publication, Open Source software release, and open research support.

Formulate recommended career metrics that value candidates’ efforts towards open learning and teaching / open education.

Ensure that fairer and more rigorous research assessment policies are in place, and well-supported and monitored.

Long-term strategy (5-10 years)

The expectation at this point is that specific parts of the short- and mid-term strategies will have been initiated, based on the needs of respective groups, and are either in place or in development. Often, these are ongoing processes, and therefore might overlap with the long-term strategy, and are not worth repeating here. However, all of the items mentioned in the short-term strategy and mid-term strategy are still relevant at this stage, depending on the pace of development.

Individual Level

Support the formal training of junior researchers in the usage and best practices of newly developed scholarly infrastructure tools and services.