The Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) issued its original declaration in February 2002 and UMass Amherst was a signatory. It gave us a working definition of open access we still use:
By “open access” to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.
Budapest Open Access Initiative Declaration, February 14, 2002
The original goal of BOAI was open access to peer reviewed journal literature. In the ensuing 20 years, that goal has broadened in several respects. The BOAI 20th Anniversary Recommendations recognize the growth of OA published research, repositories, new journals and greater consideration of policies, funding models, peer review, infrastructure and barriers placed on authors on the basis of financial limitations. Upon review of its history BOAI realized “…that OA is not an end in itself, but a means to other ends, above all, to the equity, quality, usability, and sustainability of research.”
In clarifying these other goals, BOAI 20 issued 4 new recommendations, succinctly put:
1. Host OA research on open infrastructure. Host and publish OA texts, data, metadata, code, and other digital research outputs on open, community-controlled infrastructure. Use infrastructure that minimizes the risk of future access restrictions or control by commercial organizations. Where open infrastructure is not yet adequate for current needs, develop it further.
2. Reform research assessment and rewards to improve incentives. Adjust research assessment practices for funding decisions and university hiring, promotion, and tenure decisions. Eliminate disincentives for OA and create positive new incentives for OA.
3. Favor inclusive publishing and distribution channels that never exclude authors on economic grounds. Take full advantage of OA repositories and no-APC journals (“green” and “diamond” OA). Move away from article processing charges (APCs).
4. When we spend money to publish OA research, remember the goals to which OA is the means. Favor models which benefit all regions of the world, which are controlled by academic-led and nonprofit organizations, which avoid concentrating new OA literature in commercially dominant journals, and which avoid entrenching models in conflict with these goals. Move away from read-and-publish agreements.
Below each of these recommendations are several suggestions for further consideration, along with references to other useful guidelines and tools. BOAI 20 readily acknowledges unintended consequences of the original OA movement, specifically the consolidated control of scholarly research among existing for-profit publishers according to Global North norms, and seeks to remedy them. Its new emphasis on open infrastructure and shared governance is welcomed. BOAI 20 remains focused on research articles and pre-prints, though it gives a nod to other OA research outputs, e.g. data, metadata, protocols, books, code, courseware, standards, peer review, etc. These recommendations are a welcomed update and guide.
