ArticlePDF Available

Where are the results? Open access for research coordination projects financed by the EU

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Open access to the results of publicly funded research is one of the European Commission's avowed goals. Yet how far is open access actually realised in practice? This article explores the issue based on a subsection of the projects financed by the EU: research coordination projects. The results of these projects rarely appear in international journals that implement peer review processes; instead, they are mainly published as grey literature and therefore pose a special challenge in terms of open access. Following explanation of the theoretical conditions for open access applying to EU-funded research projects, 26 international research coordination projects with Asian participation that constitute part of the 7th Framework Programme for Research (FP7) are analysed. The difficulties encountered when implementing open access for these projects are outlined. Finally, the authors describe a possible solution which could guarantee straightforward access to the results of research coordination projects in the long run.
Content may be subject to copyright.
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2
70 Gerold Heinrichs, Apollonia Pane
Open access to the results of publicly funded research is one of
the European Commission’s avowed goals. Yet how far is open
access actually realised in practice? This article explores the issue
based on a subsection of the projects financed by the EU: research
coordination projects. The results of these projects rarely appear
in international journals that implement peer review processes;
instead, they are mainly published as grey literature and there-
fore pose a special challenge in terms of open access. Following
explanation of the theoretical conditions for open access apply-
ing to EU-funded research projects, 26 international research co-
ordination projects with Asian participation that constitute part
of the 7th Framework Programme for Research (FP7) are analysed.
The difficulties encountered when implementing open access for
these projects are outlined. Finally, the authors describe a possi-
ble solution which could guarantee straightforward access to the
results of research coordination projects in the long run.
Freier Zugang zu den Ergebnissen von öffentlich finanzierter
Forschung ist erklärtes Ziel der Europäischen Kommission. Doch
inwieweit wird Open Access in die Praxis umgesetzt? Dieser Arti-
kel geht der Frage am Beispiel eines Teilbereichs EU-finanzierter
Projekte nach: Projekte der Forschungskoordination. Ergebnisse
solcher Projekte werden selten in internationalen Zeitschriften
mit peer-review Verfahren veröffentlicht, sondern hauptsächlich
als Graue Literatur, und stellen daher mit Blick auf Open Access
eine besondere Herausforderung dar. Nach einer Erläuterung der
theoretischen Rahmenbedingungen für Open Access innerhalb
EU-finanzierter Forschungsprojekte, werden 26 Vorhaben der
internationalen Forschungskoordination mit asiatischer Beteili-
gung innerhalb des 7. Forschungsrahmenprogramms (FP7) analy-
siert und anhand dieser die Schwierigkeiten bei der Umsetzung
von Open Access skizziert. Anschließend zeigen die Auto ren
einen möglichen Lösungsweg auf, um einen langfristigen und
unkomplizierten Zugang zu Ergebnissen aus Projekten der For-
schungskoordination zu sichern.
Introduction
Open access, i. e. free (usually digital) access to the
results of publicly funded research, is playing an in-
creasingly important part in the dissemination of sci-
entific information. Access to information classified as
›public‹ should be made as straightforward as possi-
ble. From a research policy perspective, scientists, busi-
nesses and the general public should benefit most
from this. Numerous research sponsors, individual
EU states and also the European Commission – as the
most important funding body for research and inno-
vation in Europe – want to be sure that the results ac-
quired with the help of tax revenues can be deployed
by as many people as possible. If they are processed
by other users, they can help make research more ef-
ficient and accelerate innovations. The researchers
themselves and their employers (no matter wheth-
er they are private companies or public research in-
stitutions) are in turn keen to be able to rely on their
colleagues’ findings when doing their own work. Even
though the concept of comprehensive open access is
criticised in terms of author rights and quality assur-
ance,1 there is a general consensus that the results of
publicly funded research projects should be freely ac-
cessible in order to increase the quality and efficiency
of science. Moreover, the general increase in the trans-
parency of science guaranteed by open access leads to
stronger social participation, thus increasing the level
of acceptance for research (and its funding).2
This fundamental consensus on the topic of open
access is also reflected by the EU Commission’s flag-
ship initiatives: Open science including open access3
are described as the basis of successful innovation and
consequently of growth in the European Union by the
Digital Agenda for Europe, the Innovation Union Policy
and in the implementation of the European Research
Area (ERA).
4
The principles formulated as part of these
initiatives form the foundation of the document on
the EU Commission’s open access policy that was pre-
sented in 2012.5 Since the publication of these docu-
ments, open access can be viewed as one of the Com-
mission’s core strategies for strengthening the Euro-
pean innovation system.
Based on these facts, this article deals with the
question of how current open access requirements
are practically met in certain rather atypical instanc-
es. How does open access to the findings of EU-fund-
ed projects of research coordination, i. e. not pure re-
search projects, function in practice? Using a subsec-
tion of the projects under the EU Commission’s 7th
Framework Programme for Research (FP7) as the ba-
sis, this investigation aims to analyse the accessibili-
ty of the public results of EU-funded international re-
search coordination projects. Unlike the results of FP7
research projects, the results of research coordination
projects are rarely published in international journals
with peer review procedures; instead, they are main-
ly published as grey literature6. Research coordination
projects are horizontal measures that deal with gener-
al issues relating to innovation systems, research col-
laboration, research funding and similar matters. Pro-
jects of this type frequently contain analytical work
packages. In many cases, the papers that ensue be-
come the basis of policy consulting. In addition these
projects also often focus on analysis and methodical
approaches to research funding and evaluation. As
described below, this type of work and the resulting
Foto: Timm BourryFoto: privat
Gerold Heinrichs
Apollonia Pane
Open access Gerold Heinrichs, Apollonia Pane
Where are the results? Open access for research
coordination projects financed by the EU
7th Framework Programme
for Research (FP7)
access to research results
helps accelerate innovations
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2 Open access for research coordination projects financed by the EU 71
publications pose a special challenge in terms of open
access that cannot be compared with other research
projects producing other types of publications (par-
ticularly peer-reviewed thematic articles in scientific
journals).
As a first step, we will explore the theoretical
framework conditions for open access applying to
the results of EU-funded research projects. After-
wards, we will outline the challenges and difficulties
connected to the EU’s existing open access require-
ments by analysing 26 FP7 international research co-
ordination projects with Asian participation. Various
possible paths are examined and finally a solution is
presented.
Open access requirements within
the European Commission
While the importance of open access for a successful
innovation system was already becoming evident at
the time of FP7 (2007–2013, drafting of the above-men-
tioned documents in 2012), further important steps to-
wards implementation were taken under Horizon2020
(2014–2020). The Horizon guidelines define open ac-
cess as »the practice of providing online access to sci-
entific information that is free of charge to the end-us-
er and that is re-usable.« It further states that »scien-
tific information« refers to »(i) peer-reviewed scientific
research articles (published in scholarly journals) or (ii)
research data (data underlying publications, curated
data and/or raw data).«7
Based on this classification, Horizon comprises two
different measures that are to promote the implemen-
tation of open access: Firstly, all projects which re-
ceive EU funds under Horizon are expressly obliged to
make all peer-reviewed publications produced during
the projects, accessible free of charge through »green
open access« or »gold open access«.8 Secondly, Hori-
zon contains a pilot programme in which participat-
ing projects must also enable open access to the basic
research data. As so far there is only little experience
with this, open access to research data is not yet ob-
ligatory for all Horizon projects.9
The obligation of peer-reviewed publications to
grant open access is justified in the guidelines for Ho-
rizon as follows: »The European Commission’s vision is
that information already paid for by the public purse
should not be paid for again each time it is accessed
or used, and that it should benefit European compa-
nies and citizens to the full. This means making pub-
licly-funded scientific information available online, at
no extra cost, to European researchers, innovative in-
dustries and citizens, while ensuring long-term pres-
ervation.«10
The framework documents and handouts for FP7,
Horizon’s predecessor, include initial attempts to im-
plement open access, although less clearly formulat-
ed than under Horizon. Grant agreements concluded
under FP7 merely oblige the beneficiary to make the
results of his research classified as ›public‹, actually
available to the public; however, no details are given
as to how this should be put into practice in individu-
al cases.11 FP7 also encompassed an open access pilot
programme: The projects involved, commit themselves
to guaranteeing open access to scientific articles writ-
ten in connection with their projects. The aim was to
publish final articles (which should, if possible, have
undergone a peer review process) either through a re-
pository maintained by the institutions involved or – if
this was not possible – through a suitable thematic re-
pository. The document on the open access pilot pro-
gramme in addition states: »The European Commis-
sion encourages all grant recipients (not only those
covered by the open access pilot) to consider the ques-
tion of open access when submitting their articles for
publication. This not only provides greater visibility to
their work, thereby potentially leading to more cita-
tions and greater research impact, but also reduces
the likelihood of wasting time and public resources
on duplicative research.«12
In order to promote this approach, a FP7 project
with the name ›OpenAIRE‹ was set up. OpenAIRE aims
at creating a digital infrastructure which should facili-
tate identification, archiving, control and access to ar-
ticles funded by the EU Commission.13 The post-grant
open access pilot published in October 2015 represents
another step in this direction. This pilot will subsidise
open access publications compiled in connection with
completed FP7 projects by covering the costs of publi-
cation.14 The Commission seems to have realised that
more support is needed in this context.
Open access to results of
FP7 INCO projects with Asian
participation
Projects investigated
The projects investigated in this article belong to the
INCO programme, which itself is a building block for
the Capacities component of the 7th Framework Pro-
gramme for Research. All the INCO projects are hori-
zontal measures for the promotion of international
cooperation in the field of research coordination. The
INCO projects encompass a total funding volume of
EUR 180 million.15 In the following investigation, all
26 INCO projects with Asian participation (excluding
projects solely with central Asian participation) are ex-
grey literature poses
special challenge in terms
of open access
the Horizon guidelines
INCO programme
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2
72 Gerold Heinrichs, Apollonia Pane
amined in detail. As of the time this article was be-
ing researched (April 2015), 15 of the projects had been
concluded and 11 were still running. The total fund-
ing for this group of projects amounted to more than
EUR 41 million.16
With regard to the projects chosen for this article,
special reference should again be made to the peculi-
arity mentioned above: As the projects are horizontal
measures, the project results – unlike more themati-
cally oriented programme components – rarely include
any publications that take the form of scientific arti-
cles in peer-reviewed journals. This means the results
do not usually come under the FP7 or Horizon defini-
tion of articles for which open access is recommend-
ed – or even obligatory under Horizon. Nevertheless,
the results obtained and documented during these
projects were financed with public funds and should
therefore be freely accessible: All the above-men-
tioned advantages of granting open access to peer-re-
viewed scientific articles, i. e. increased quality, effi-
ciency and public acceptance, also apply to these pro-
ject results. In the case of the projects investigated,
the publications usually comprise information papers,
data collections, evaluations or (political) recommen-
dations compiled in English that could be beneficial
for cooperative projects in the respective areas both
at the level of research management and for the ac-
tual research.17 Even though the Commission, neither
under FP7 nor under Horzion2020, has stipulated the
granting of open access to these kinds of documents,
it seems only consistent to do so.
Investigation and results
Which possibilities currently exist for retrieving the
results of FP7 INCO projects with Asian participation
which are classified as public and only available as
grey literature, e. g. project reports, brochures, method-
ical approaches, handbooks, best practice collections
and conference reports? At first glance, three obvious
ways can be identified:
a) direct access through publication by the projects
themselves (normally using project websites);
b) direct access through an EU Commission platform
on which all results are made available in a struc-
tured format (Cordis);
c) indirect search via general internet search engines.
As the following investigation shows, all three ways
are of limited suitability at best for finding the doc-
uments required. However, while carrying out the
research for this article, another way was identified
which, in the long term, would guarantee structured
access to the results with little outlay.
a) Access through publication on (project) websites by
the projects themselves or the institutions involved
The regulations for publishing results specified by FP7
and Horizon allow the project coordinators a certain
scope when choosing the place of publication. As one
frequently used method is to make the information
available on a website set up by the project, we start-
ed by investigating the availability of project results on
corresponding websites. For this, we searched for the
websites of the projects concerned or – if no such web
-
site could be found – for alternative websites with ac-
cess to the project results (e. g. the websites of the in-
stitutions involved). The internet URL usually includes
the project acronym which can easily be found on the
websites of the EU programmes. 20 of the 26 projects
investigated had their own project websites. Four pro-
jects published information on other websites. For the
remaining two projects no relevant website could be
found (see Fig. 1(a)).
The next step was to examine the content avail-
able on the websites found – usually the results de-
fined in the project plan, otherwise known as ›deliver-
ables‹. The first question was whether the work pack-
ages for the respective project actually contained any
deliverables that could be depicted appropriately on a
website.
18
The majority of the deliverables for 23 of the
projects can be meaningfully published on websites;
only three projects have varying goals that at best can
only be partly published on the internet. These three
projects are therefore not considered in the following
evaluation. Three more projects were also excluded
from the following evaluation because their websites
are identical to those of the respective follow-up pro-
jects. Projects and follow-up projects that share a web-
site are only considered once when investigating the
deliverables available.
Of the 20 projects that we examined more closely,
no deliverables whatsoever were found for three pro-
jects. For the other 17 projects, results could in principle
be retrieved via the websites found (see Fig. 1 (b)). The
three projects for which no deliverables were available
included the two projects for which no website could
be found and another project for which only an alter-
native website was found.
The next step was comprised of the investiga-
tion and evaluation of the publicly accessible content
found. Even though the individual texts could not be
read in their entirety and there was no specific quali-
ty standard, a review of the texts still allowed a classi-
fication in three categories: 1) clearly comprehensible,
structured, transparent content, 2) content of varying
quality and 3) missing content or content that could
only be understood with difficulty. Particular attention
project results available
on corresponding websites
possibilities for retrieving
results of FP7 INCO projects
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2 Open access for research coordination projects financed by the EU 73
possible to a limited extent. The result is satisfacto-
ry in less than a quarter of cases. There turned out to
be three fundamental problems: Firstly, a compari-
son of the work package descriptions and the deliv-
erables actually found, led us to the conclusion that
the project results published on the websites are of-
ten incomplete. This means that the project partners
themselves do not make extensive use of this publica-
tion channel. Secondly, access is difficult for interest-
ed searchers. The limited duration of the projects and
the websites’ pre-programmed expiration dates both
play a role in this context: With regard to the projects
whose results could not be found through this inves-
tigation (there was no (longer a) website) two had al-
ready expired before February 2012. Finally, the gener-
al complexity of this type of access is a fundamental
problem: Anyone who is not familiar with the project
(and consequently also with the website and actual
titles of possible publications) has hardly any chance
of finding the corresponding results by performing a
keyword search if they were only published on the pro-
ject website. Even if the project is generally known, our
research shows that it is not always easy to find the
corresponding website and then to find the published
texts on this website.19
To conclude, the first alternative investigated
proved to be unsuitable for long-term access and for
backing up results on the long run. This option yield-
ed no results at all for three of the projects, which had
received a total amount of funding of more than EUR
3 million. In the case of the deliverables from projects
with a total funding volume of more than EUR 11 mil-
lion, this method only allows incomplete access to the
Fig. 1: (a) Existing relevant (project) websites and (b) fundamental availability of deliverables via these websites
(source: own investigation, see annex separately uploaded online; address at the end of the article)
Fig. 2: Evaluation of the results available (source: own investigation,
see annex)
was paid to quantity (number of deliverables com-
pared to the results originally mentioned in the pro-
ject description) and quality (scope of the individual
texts, topicality, language used, formal depiction). The
deliverables for seven of the projects analysed made a
very good impression, while the impression was mixed
for the deliverables of another ten projects. In the lat-
ter cases, some of the results mentioned in the work
packages could not be found at all, were only avail-
able in Asian languages, had no formal structure and/
or were difficult to understand.
From the research results described above, it is
clear that access to the results of the projects inves-
tigated by means of a specific project website is only
project website
available; 20
mixed
impression; 10
very good
impression; 7
not rated; 6
not considered; 6
deliverables
available; 17
no website
available; 2
no deliverables
available; 3
not available,
very poor; 3
alternative
website available;
4
fundamental problems
access to results only possible
to a limited extent
unsuitable for long-term
access
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2
74 Gerold Heinrichs, Apollonia Pane
results and this also only after some considerable ef-
for t.
b) Access via EU Commission platforms
The main eligible EU Commission platform identified
is the Cordis database. Cordis allows targeted research
regarding the basic data of the projects funded (part-
ners, budget, goals etc.) and in most cases also grants
access to the final report. According to its website,
Cordis is »the European Commission’s primary pub-
lic repository and portal to disseminate information
on all EU-funded research projects and their results in
the broadest sense«20 – it is therefore an obvious place
to search for project results. However, for the projects
investigated, just one reference to a publication com-
piled as part of one of the projects was found: For the
NEW INDIGO project, below the links to various report
documents available for download on Cordis there is
a link to an article compiled as part of the project and
published in an open access journal. Cordis marks this
link with an open access symbol and a reference to the
OpenAIRE project mentioned above.21 OpenAIRE itself
does not offer any direct repository options for publi-
cations; instead, it acts as a hub for information about
projects and their results. This means that project re-
sults in the form of articles, reports etc. that were up-
loaded to open access journals (gold access) or ap-
propriate open access repositories (green access) can
be matched with the respective funding programme
and consequently the project through OpenAIRE. This
allotment by OpenAIRE in turn creates a link on the
Cordis website that links to the respective open ac-
cess publication.
In theory, central Commission platforms can be
used to access the results of the projects investigat-
ed, i. e. via Cordis and the OpenAIRE website. In reality,
however, this option is not used by the projects ana-
lysed here except for the case mentioned.22 The con-
tent of the projects investigated is therefore not made
publicly available via the Commission websites. There
is accordingly no improvement of the poor availability
of information on the projects as described under a).
c) Indirect search using general internet search
engines
Nowadays, the most common method is to search for
content on the internet by using search engines. De-
pending on the search term, these list results that are
normally ordered by visit frequency. If this method is
chosen, the most common word combinations (e. g.
»research cooperation India«) mostly lead to the pro-
ject websites with the limitations described above –
that is, if the projects are still under way. Complet-
ed projects whose websites are no longer visited fre-
quently are only found a long way down in the list of
results. The fundamental problem of websites that
cease their activity when the project ends, is also rel-
evant here. Our investigation showed that this open
search form did not yield any additional content or re-
sults (e. g. on the websites of participating partners)
for the projects analysed.
Currently the best way: publication in open access
journals or repositories and additional link to Com-
mission platforms
The basic requirement for access to the results through
Cordis (or OpenAIRE) is that the corresponding texts
have been uploaded in a structured manner to open
access journals or corresponding open access reposito-
ries and did not end up – frequently with no structure
or quality requirements – on project websites with an
expiry date. Numerous such journals and repositories
have been established since the open access move-
ment got under way more than a decade ago. For the
projects analysed here, the themes and formats of the
project results frequently preclude publication in an
open access journal (i. e. by gold open access). In con-
trast, green open access publication with the aid of re-
positories is both possible and logical.
Repositories can be either open or theme-based.
The OpenAIRE-website includes a list of so called
»compliant repositories« which can be used to up-
load relevant results of EU-projects and thereby not
only guarantee open access to these data but also
establish a linkage to the corresponding EU-funded
projects. Many of the repositories listed on OpenAIRE
are institutional or subject-specific repositories that
do not usually come into question for grey literature,
such as the literature analysed in our context. From
those open repositories which are suitable for the kind
of literature investigated here, we identified Zenodo
as a repository which fitted our needs: Zenodo is an
open access repository created as part of the Open-
AIRE project23 that is primarily intended for storing
articles compiled during FP7 or Horizon2020 projects
which cannot be published meaningfully through an
institutional or thematic repository.
24
This means that
Zenodo meets all the criteria for the archiving of re-
sults from the INCO projects analysed here with the
aim of guaranteeing long-term accessibility.25 More-
over, Open AIRE classifies Zenodo as compliant, i. e. in-
formation on possible project origin of the documents
is requested when collecting the data for the docu-
ment to be uploaded (grant agreement number of
the project). If the grant agreement number is quoted
when uploading a publication to Zenodo, OpenAIRE
Cordis database
green open access
publication with the aid
of repositories is both
possible and logical
open access repository
Zenodo
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2 Open access for research coordination projects financed by the EU 75
Fig. 3: Outline of investigation and results (source: own illustration)
creates a link to the corresponding EU project that is
then mirrored in Cordis in the form described above.26
The diagram above (Fig. 3) shows the considerations so
far and also the solution described.
The fact that the results of the projects researched
here have not yet been stored on Zenodo (or any oth-
er suitable and ideally compliant repository) – and can
therefore not be retrieved through OpenAIRE or Cord-
is – can in part be explained by insufficient awareness
of this possibility. Without a doubt, another reason for
this is that the Commission did and does not make
it obligatory to grant open access to FP7 and Hori-
zon2020 project results that are not based on scien-
tific articles in peer-reviewed journals. If project par-
ticipants do make their results available through re-
positories such as Zenodo, this is largely intrinsically
motivated. The lack of external pressure to guarantee
long-term open access to grey literature of this type
is reinforced by a lack of information on the topic. On
the basis of their own experience, the authors assume
that many parties involved in the projects investigated
here are not aware of Zenodo and its possibilities. The
authors themselves had no knowledge of the exist-
ence of Zenodo or the link between Zenodo, OpenAIRE
and Cordis when they commenced their investigations.
Conclusion
With a view to the EU Commission’s long-term objec-
tive of open access and open science, the investiga-
tions outlined above show that although simple solu-
tions exist for achieving this target on a larger scale,
there is still a need for action.
A major step forward has been taken by compelling
Horizon projects to guarantee open access to peer-re-
viewed publications (and in part to research data). The
technical conditions for a relatively structured archive
the EU Commission’s
long-term objective of
open access and open
science
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2
76 Gerold Heinrichs, Apollonia Pane
are also met using the system described above with
the corresponding links through Cordis, OpenAIRE
and a repository or open access journal of choice. This
method of publication entails little extra expense for
the project participants and is also attractive, as stor-
age in a repository means that a larger target group
is addressed and informed of the results of their work.
From the viewpoint of interested searchers, storage in
an open access medium allows the easiest way of ac-
cessing project results as key words can be searched
for without needing to know the name of the project,
the project website or the title of the publication.
This publication method also guarantees straight-
forward, long-term access to content and results fund-
ed by FP7 and Horizon2020 that do not constitute re-
search results per se but which are nevertheless practi-
cally relevant in the context of research management
and coordination. The benefits obtained by these
types of project results do not end when the project is
completed or the project website is no longer available
online. The long-term availability of results therefore
appears highly desirable. In order to guarantee long-
term open access, projects must be strongly recom-
mended or compelled to prepare their results accord-
ingly and store them appropriately, and project par-
ticipants must be given more information about the
publication options available.
ANNEX
The annex to this article including a detailed list of
the projects researched and a comprehensive pro-
cess description for the possible solution found, can
be downloaded from the internet using the following
URL: http://internationales-buero.de/media/content/
OpenAccess_Annex.pdf
SOURCES
Papers, Documents and Guidelines
European Commission (2012): Communication from
the Commission to the European Parliament, the
Council, the European Economic and Social Com-
mittee and the Committee of the Regions – Towards
better access to scientific information: Boosting the
benefits of public investments in research. Avail able
here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUri
Serv.do?uri=COM:2012:0401:FIN:EN:PDF [last access
02.01.2016].
European Commission (2012b): Commission Recom-
mendation of 17 July 2012 on access to and preserva-
tion of scientific information. Available here: http://
ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_li
brary/pdf_06/recommendation-access-and-pres
ervation-scientific-information_en.pdf [last access
02.01.2016].
Fig. 4: Various open access routes to EU project results from two perspectives: Alternatives to the publication of and search for results by interested external parties
(source: own illustration)
long-term access to
c ontent and results funded
by FP7 and Horizon2020
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2 Open access for research coordination projects financed by the EU 77
European Commission (2012c): FP 7 Grant Agreement –
Annex II General Conditions, Version 7, 14/12/2012, es-
pecially »Part C, II.30. Intellectual property rights, use
and dissemination – Dissemination«. Available here:
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/
fp7/93289/fp7-ga-annex2_en.pdf [last access 02. 01.
2016].
European Commission (2013): HORIZON 2020 – Guide-
lines on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Re-
search Data in Horizon 2020. Available here: http://
ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/
grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_
en.pdf [last access 02.01.2016].
European Commission (2015): Annotated Model Grant
Agreement: H2020 General MGA: V2.0.1 – 12. 05. 2015,
especially article 29 on dissemination of results. Avail-
able here: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/
data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/amga/h2020-amga_
en.pdf#page=209 [last access 02. 01. 2016].
European Commission (publication date unknown):
Open Access Pilot in FP7. Available here: ftp://ftp.cord
is.europa.eu/pub/fp7/docs/open-access-pilot_en.pdf
[last access 02. 01. 2016].
OECD Working Party on Innovation and Technology
Policy (2014): Making Open Science a Reality – Final
Report.
Other Sources
European Commission: CORDIS Community Research
and Development Information Service, FP7-INCO FP7
Specific Programme ›Capacities‹ – Horizontal actions
and measures in support of international cooperation.
Available here: http://cordis.europa.eu/programme/
rcn/865_en.html [last access 02.01.2016].
European Commission: CORDIS Community Research
and Development Information Service, About Cord-
is. Available here: http://cordis.europa.eu/guidance/
home_en.html [last access 02.01.2016].
European Commission: CORDIS Community Research
and Development Information Service, OpenAIRE en-
tr y. Available here: http://cordis.europa.eu/project/
rcn/93855_en.html [last access 02.01.2016].
European Commission: CORDIS Community Research
and Development Information Service, NEW INDIGO
entry. Available here: http://cordis.europa.eu/project/
rcn/90360_en.html [last access 02.01.2016].
European Commission: Research & Innovation, Open
Science (Open Access) Policy; website (including chro-
nology on Open Access in the European Commission):
http://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/index.cfm?pg=
policy&lib=science [last access 02.01.2016].
European Commission: Digital Agenda for Europe:
Open Access to scientific information. Available here:
http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/open-access-
scientific-knowledge-0 [last access 02.01.2016].
European Commission: European Research Area: Op-
timal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific
knowledge. Available here: http://ec.europa.eu/re
search/era/optimal-circulation_en.htm [last access
02. 01. 2016].
European Commission Library and e-Resources Cen-
tre: Open Access to Research. Available here: http://
www.netvibes.com/open-access#Home [last access
02.01.2016].
Glossar Informationskompetenz (Vermittlung von In-
formationskompetenz an deutschen Bibliotheken):
Definition Graue Literatur. Available here (only avail-
able in German): www.informationskompetenz.de/
glossar/?term=418 [last access 02.01.2016].
OpenAIRE website: FP7 post-grant Open Access pub-
lishing funds pilot. Available here: https://www.open
aire.eu/postgrantoapilot [last access 02.01.2016].
OpenAIRE Website: General Information. Available
here: https://www.openaire.eu/about/general-infor
mation/openairefactsheet-40 [last access 02.01.2016].
Suber, Peter: Open Access Overview. Available here:
http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm
[last access 02.01.2016].
Zenodo: FAQs Website. Available here: www.zenodo.
org/faq [last access 02.01.2016].
1 The advantages and disadvantages of open access and the un-
derlying debate are not subject to this investigation and are therefore
not discussed in further detail.
2 The advantages of open access mentioned here are based on the
Horizon2020 Open Access Guidelines (European Commission, 2013).
3 Open access is one of several components of open science:
»Open science is more than open access to publications or data; it
includes many aspects and stages of research processes. […] [O]pen
science is a broader concept that also includes the inter-operability
of scientific infrastructure, open and shared research methodologies
[…], and machine-friendly tools allowing, for example, text and data
mining.« (OECD Working Party on Innovation and Technology Policy,
2014). The documents that accompany the Framework Programmes for
Research usually refer to open access and not to open science.
4 Cf. for example the European Commission’s website on the
»Digital Agenda for Europe« or on the »European Research Area«.
5 Communication »Towards better access to scientific informa-
tion: Boosting the benefits of public investments in research« (Euro-
pean Commission, 2012) and the Recommendation to the EU member
states titled »Commission Recommendation on access to and preser-
vation of scientific information« (European Commission, 2012b). Ac-
cording to the Commission’s recommendations, political measures to
guarantee open access to the results of scientific investigation should
at least be implemented in instances where the research was funded
by public money (European Commission, 2012b, section L 194/39).
6 Grey literature defined as »a collective term for any publication
not connected with publishing companies. Grey literature is frequent-
ly published by institutions and organisations such as government
bodies, authorities, research institutions, universities, museums, com-
panies, associations, parties etc.« (Glossar Informationskompetenz,
translation by the authors).
7 European Commission, 2013.
8 Green open access refers to freely accessible parallel publication
or self-archiving on websites or document servers (known as ›reposito-
ries‹); while gold open access implies that the article is made available
directly in an open access journal. While these journals usually imple-
ment a peer review process, this is not the case with many repositories.
(Peter Suber »Open Access Overview«).
ZfBB 63 (2016) 2
78 Gerold Heinrichs, Apollonia Pane
9 Please also refer to Article 29 of the »H2020 Annotated Model
Grant Agreement« (European Commission, 2015) for information con-
cerning the regulations on publishing project results.
10 European Commission, 2013.
11 European Commission, 2012c, Annex II.30.
12 European Commission, publication date unknown.
13 Cf. OpenAIRE entry on Cordis. The original FP7 OpenAIRE gave
rise firstly to OpenAIREplus (under FP7) and later (under Horizon) to
the current OpenAIRE2020 project (»General Information« on Open-
AIRE website).
14 Cf. OpenAIRE page on »FP7 post-grant Open Access publishing
funds pilot«.
15 Cf. FP7 INCO entry on Cordis.
16 A detailed list of the projects investigated is provided in the
annex (separately uploaded online, address at the end of the article).
17 Cf. additional examples of FP7 INCO project results in the annex
separately uploaded online.
18 In order to verify this, the projects’ most important goals were
examined with the assistance of the project summaries retrievable
via the Cordis database (see below). We wanted to find out about
possible dissemination methods for the project results (e. g. in writing
on websites, orally at events, etc.).
19 For the problems linked to open access from the perspectives
of the result producers and searchers also see Fig. 4.
20 Cf. Cordis website »About CORDIS«.
21 Cf. NEW INDIGO entry on Cordis.
22 Following completion of research, the authors of this article
have taken the necessary measures to create open access to the results
of INCO projects in which they participated or which they coordinated.
23 Zenodo is maintained and developed by CERN (European Or-
ganisation for Nuclear Research); however, they state that long-term
funding of Zenodo is uncertain (see »FAQ« on the Zenodo website).
24 »ZENODO builds and operate a simple and innovative service
that enables researchers, scientists, EU projects and institutions to
share and showcase multidisciplinary research results (data and publi-
cations) that are not part of the existing institutional or subject-based
repositories of the research communities.« (see European Commission
Library and e-Resources Centre).
25 Along with reports, workshop presentations and similar media
could in theory also be stored in Zenodo. This means that the essential
requirements for a comprehensive open science approach are already
met.
26 Cf. process description in the annex separately uploaded online.
The Authors
Dr. Gerold Heinrichs, Head of Division »European
and International Cooperation – America, Asia and
Oceania«, Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raum-
fahrt e. V. (DLR), Heinrich-Konen-Straße 1, 53227
Bonn, Tel.: 0228-3821-1402,
E-Mail: gerold.heinrichs@dlr.de
Apollonia Pane, Scientific Officer, Deutsches Zen-
trum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e. V. (DLR), Hein-
rich-Konen-Straße 1, 53227 Bonn, Tel.: 0228-3821-
1995, E-Mail: apollonia.pane@dlr.de
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Available here (only available in German): www.informationskompetenz.de/ glossar/?term=418 [last access 02.01.2016]. OpenAIRE website: FP7 post-grant Open Access publishing funds pilot Available here: https://www.open aire
  • Definition Graue Literatur
Definition Graue Literatur. Available here (only available in German): www.informationskompetenz.de/ glossar/?term=418 [last access 02.01.2016]. OpenAIRE website: FP7 post-grant Open Access publishing funds pilot. Available here: https://www.open aire.eu/postgrantoapilot [last access 02.01.2016]. OpenAIRE Website: General Information. Available here: https://www.openaire.eu/about/general-infor mation/openairefactsheet-40 [last access 02.01.2016].
Available here: www.zenodo. org/faq
  • Faqs Zenodo
  • Website
Zenodo: FAQs Website. Available here: www.zenodo. org/faq [last access 02.01.2016].
OpenAIRE page on »FP7 post-grant Open Access publishing funds pilot«
  • Cf
Cf. OpenAIRE page on »FP7 post-grant Open Access publishing funds pilot«.
14/12/2012, especially »Part C, II.30. Intellectual property rights, use and dissemination -Dissemination«
European Commission (2012c): FP 7 Grant Agreement -Annex II General Conditions, Version 7, 14/12/2012, especially »Part C, II.30. Intellectual property rights, use and dissemination -Dissemination«. Available here: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/ fp7/93289/fp7-ga-annex2_en.pdf [last access 02. 01.
HORIZON 2020 -Guidelines on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Research Data in Horizon 2020
European Commission (2013): HORIZON 2020 -Guidelines on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Research Data in Horizon 2020. Available here: http:// ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/ grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_ en.pdf [last access 02.01.2016].
European Research Area: Optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge
  • European Commission
European Commission: European Research Area: Optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge. Available here: http://ec.europa.eu/re search/era/optimal-circulation_en.htm [last access 02. 01. 2016].
Vermittlung von Informationskompetenz an deutschen Bibliotheken): Definition Graue Literatur
  • Glossar Informationskompetenz
Glossar Informationskompetenz (Vermittlung von Informationskompetenz an deutschen Bibliotheken): Definition Graue Literatur. Available here (only available in German): www.informationskompetenz.de/ glossar/?term=418 [last access 02.01.2016].
OpenAIRE entry on Cordis. The original FP7 OpenAIRE gave rise firstly to OpenAIREplus (under FP7) and later (under Horizon) to the current OpenAIRE2020 project
  • Cf
Cf. OpenAIRE entry on Cordis. The original FP7 OpenAIRE gave rise firstly to OpenAIREplus (under FP7) and later (under Horizon) to the current OpenAIRE2020 project (»General Information« on Open-AIRE website).
FP7 INCO entry on Cordis
  • Cf
Cf. FP7 INCO entry on Cordis.