the tools and services that we provide our members with, and as well as the library community to help achieve the goal of open access to publications. So first about planners and coalition s. The reason planners was set up was basically out of a sense of frustration, because

access to scientific articles remains a problem. 20 years after the various declarations from open access. Still, only 55% of the world's research is published open access and we don't think that's that that's good enough. So planners in 2018 stated that from 21 onwards all scholarly publications, funded by research councils and funding

bodies must be published in open access journals open access platforms are made available in repositories without embargo. So basically, the publications must be made available immediately on publication.

So that means that it must be available in immediate open access with a CC by license or the equivalent of a CC by license, which allows researchers to retain their intellectual rights, this is very important and the reason why we selected CC by is that CC by is the most open license that allows the user to adapt to publication. Any reader can adapt to publication provided that appropriate credit is given. So in a sense it's very

different to the traditional academic standard of citing the people that you that you use the ideas of. So basically the user has to indicate whether the publication has been changed, or whether it has to have been paraphrased.

And so in that sense it is really the most, the most open license that allows the author to retain very much right, while at the same time, allowing for we use by other users, provided appropriate credit is given planners is built on very strong principles, open

access might be immediate as I said no embargo periods publication must be under CC by license we do not accept the hybrid model of publication so we want to push the publishers to move hybrid publications to full open access, because we think that hybrid is simply a bad idea behind it is not led to the expected transition to open access that we had all expected. 15 years ago,

we believe that pricing contracts and publication fee should be transparent and in line with the surface provided because we have the impression that a lot of these fees are exaggerated or not justified as a function of the services provided and funders permits to supporting such publication fee if they are transparent and in line with the services.

We do not want individual researchers to pay. There is also an assessment commitment to commitment to assess researchers on the basis of the intrinsic merit of their papers and not on the venue of publication or quantitative metrics. So those are the principles that we that we stick to going forward to once open access also reassess and global collision

as it's a global alliance of funders 28 organizations worldwide national funders from Australia to UK European Commission is on board with We have a number of charitable foundations, a number of American charitable foundations, as well from the Bill and Melinda gay Foundation Howard Hughes ASAP and Templeton.

There's a global dimension because world organization joins ambient South Africa are on board, and the total investment of the coalition in research funds is about about 35 billion euros a year, with an output of about 150,000 articles per year, just to give you

an idea of the size and of what we do. Let me now talk about part two to implementation and the integrated sets of policies and initiatives that the most important thing to know about coalition as I think is to know that we do not think that there is a single silver bullet towards open access.

We have an integrated set of policies of moving towards open access. We believe very strongly that also should have the possibility to publish in any journal of their choice, subject to certain conditions and that's why we have developed three routes. Route one is publication in full open access journal so those are gold or diamond open access journals publication in there is supported

by coalition as by a fee fee is required route to is the most complex route, I should say this is publication subscription journals, which is allowed, but only if the author deposits a copies of a copy of at least the author accepted manuscript in a repository at publication. And

this is where the publishers do not always agree and I will come to that in a minute to sit to explain to you how we tackle that tricky problem. Round three is about publication in journals that are transformative arrangement, and that is also compliant so I'll talk about transformative arrangement

immediately transformative arrangements, publishing models the way the publisher is committed to transition in subscription to end hybrid to open access. So basically that means that in exchange for the subscription and a little bit more in exchange for money. The publisher will make both reading available and publishing available to the authors that fall under that publishing agreement of the publishing

consortium, or the library consortium that concludes such a deal. You've certainly heard about these there's various models of this we didn't publish deals. There's also subtractive open which is a similar system. And we have also set up ourselves to transformative journals. So as I said this is a library consortia concluding this

is not us doing it, but we endorse it, we approve of transformative agreements, at least until the end of 2024. Some of our funders financially contribute to this, this, these initiatives directly or indirectly, or they are very much involved in

the negotiations leading to this agreement because we believe that when in a specific country libraries and funders collaborate on reaching these agreements, more fair agreements are reached with the publishers. Now, transformative agreements as I have led to a great increase in open access papers published.

This is the data from, from the eSAC registry. So it's definitely something that has played a big role in the transition towards open access. We also support smaller publishers in that transition to open access we've developed a toolkit for smaller

publishers to negotiate deals, leading towards open access. And there's some evidence that society publishing, I'm making this transition American Astronomical Society International Water Association Royal Society microbiology society are examples on smaller societies that have successfully transitioned their journals to open access, and we have worked with some of them to reach that goal, of course.

Finally, there's also equity, more equitable we also pursue more equitable solutions to open access more specifically diamond open access. As you know, diamond open access is community owned publishing that does not charge authors or readers for reading of a publication.

It is therefore equitable by design because everybody in the world can publish in those journals if they get accepted in the journal. And we have developed an action plan, together with INA French the French founder, and the science Europe and operators to align and develop common

resources for the entire ecosystem. ecosystem. This was presented in February, and over 160 organizations have now signed this. It is also taken forward the ideas that are presented in his diamond open action plan. I know taken forward by two major EC grants of three and 5 million.

And those are projects that run from 22 to 27, in order to federate and align the various diamond open access initiatives, which we have found are very much fragmented across the academic landscape.

And so this is something that we want to federate going forward. Finally, something about the right to attention strategy this is round two that I was talking about a minute ago, right to attention strategy is the strategy that is needed to make articles open access when you want to publish in a subscription journal. We believe very strongly that the peer reviewed author accepted manuscript is elected intellectual creation of the authors belongs to them,

and that the author to assert to assert ownership should apply a CC by license to the am arising from their submission. We believe that submission publication services should be paid for, but that that doesn't entitle the publisher to ownership of the of that

a, that should remain intellectual property of the author comparison I always make is with a painter who comes to paint your house, your house is your house if the painter painted after painting it, you do not handle the keys to the painter house remains yours. It's the same for an article, it's not because that article has

received services of peer review and been nicely copy edited and typeset that suddenly that paper belongs to the publisher. So, publishers can have rights to and be paid for the version of record that is not a problem. So how do we do this well authors who want to publish in subscription journals must deposit a copy of the am.

At the same time we know of course that traditionally they sign a copyright transfer agreements with the publisher that prevent depositing such a copy immediately. That's why we developed the right to attention strategy so coalition as grantees are required by the contracts to inform the publisher that a prior CC by license has been applied to any future author accepted manuscript devices from their submission,

and by asserting that CC by license authors retain sufficient rights to deposit that copy of the am in an open access repository application. This CC by assertion is extremely powerful. Because, since it is in place before the public the agreement with the publisher that CC by license will take

legal precedence over conflicting language in the later publication agreement, and there is really nothing to publishers can do about it. I mean we have received many complaints about the rights retention strategy, but not a single publisher has been has

taken us to court, because this is simply legally solid CC by it has been asserted before the later copyright agreement. Now of course, how do we do this well be informed the publisher that to inform the publishers that they are using your eyes, we ask our authors to inform the publishers with the following statement on publication authors can make the am open access in the repository.

And they can contact their founder is in case of disagreement. Now the beauty of this rights retention strategy is that you can do it independently of whether you are funded by a funder or know anybody can do this. The only thing that the publisher can do is to decline the paper, and they're also this

is something that they have not regularly done, they have done other things, which I will talk about. So publishers, put very often also is in a difficult situation, asking also to sign a contract that enforces embargoes and non compliant licenses. These then contradicts the contact with the, with the thunder.

They will also use their workflows to force authors down the path towards a gold open access journal, or to pay an APC that's another tactic that we've seen. So, and our position is that authors that publishes that the right to this

project articles but not to confuse mislead or trick authors into violating their agreement. We've written a letter about that to the publishers which has remained without an answer, but we see in fact that the right to attention strategy is receiving a lot of support. There's been UNESCO declaration the G6 declaration that you a agenda and

European Council so these are strong organizations that have endorsed rights prevention strategy. We also see that universities are now increasingly adopting the rights of retention strategy. Actually, I think tomorrow, the University of Bergen is going to launch one the University of Aberdeen has launched one recently, beginning of January, eight universities

universities in UK will launch a rights retention policy. And this is of course. Sorry, this is of course very important because university rights retention policies are much more much stronger than the other thunder can thunder only has an indirect

contract with the publisher. But if a university and doors adopts a rights retention policy, then right to attention simply becomes a condition of labor at the university. And if the publisher then interferes with that, that constitutes on behalf of the publisher.

procurement of a breach of contract so the publisher is basically then intervening in a previous contract that the author has with their institution, and that is not allowed, then they are, then they can be sued in court. So, by adopting rights retention policies at the institutional level, authors are much more protected and

universities help their authors, we came down right and we came by it's also for the university. We also have a policy on open access of books. There we have said that there we have launched five recommendations we are a little bit less stringent there. We think that all books should be made open access that also should retain sufficient rights that academic

books should be under CC license not necessarily CC by but preferably, preferably. So the world of travel is clear. And we also still allow embargoes for books that should not exceed 12 months, and we are of course working with the community to make this possible

to make progress on books. Finally, something about our tools and services and then I will stop there. We have two major tools and services. First of all, the journal checker to journal checker to helps authors navigate the complexity of our three rounds. So basically this is a search engine that allows the author to type in their favorite journal, the thunder that has given them money, and the university

that they work for, and then the recommendation follows some recommendation to pay the open access fee or to inform them that they are under a transformative agreement, or, or that they should use the rights retention strategy.

So, this is a very useful tool that is now used by by 3000 authors, a month, and it's very useful because it helps authors, identifying the role that they should adopt to make their papers, open access. We also have developed a journal comparison service, which allows which allows libraries Library Consortium founders to

better understand the prices publishers to, and it also allows publishers to better to build better build understanding and trust with customers about standard and granular price and service information. So, the publishers build provide information in

standard format, including information about publication frequency and how these prices or prices are a lot of over these various services, and we believe that this price and service comparison may exert pressure on prices and create a more open market. Right now, the service is secure.

So, this means that publishers cannot see each other price, each other's prices, and we have individual agreements with libraries and library consortia and funders who want to have an account on that service to be able to make the comparison, but of course we hope that that will not be necessary going forward, publishers are a little bit afraid of competition of

being accused of unfair competition and that's why they asked for the service to be closed and not entirely open. And this is where I will stop my presentation and allow for some questions.