Unlocking Research

Open Research at the University of Cambridge

  • Open Research
  • research data
  • Open Acccess
  • Open Research
  • research data
  • Open Acccess
Open Research
Open Access
Research Data
  • Uncategorized

    Where are we now? Cambridge theses deposits one year in

    25 October 2018 /

    As the nights draw in and the academic year 2018/19 begins, we are preparing to enter our second year of compulsory e-theses deposits. Our university repository, Apollo, is close to holding 6000 digital PhD theses and it is the intention of the University that this valuable research asset continues to grow into the future. The Apollo repository will play a large part in making this happen. Until recently only hardbound copies of theses were collected and catalogued by the University Library. Users could read theses on-site in Cambridge or order a digitisation of the thesis, but the introduction of e-thesis deposit to Apollo has meant that University of Cambridge theses are more…

    read more
    Office of Scholarly Communication 0 Comments

    You May Also Like

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022
  • Uncategorized

    What do you want, and why do you want it? An update on Request a Copy

    24 October 2018 /

     As part of Open Access Week 2018, the Office of Scholarly Communication is publishing a series of blog posts on open access and open research. In this post Dr Mélodie Garnier provides some new insights into our Request a Copy service. 4,416. This is the number of requests for copies of material in our repository we’ve received over the past 12 months. Daunting, isn’t it? And definitely on the rise, with a 33% increase from the previous year. Two years and a half after its implementation in June 2016, our Request a Copy service is now more popular than ever. Our institutional repository Apollo hosts thousands of freely available research…

    read more
    Office of Scholarly Communication 0 Comments

    You May Also Like

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022
  • Uncategorized

    Cambridge Open Access spend 2013-2018

    22 October 2018 /

    Since 2013, the Open Access Team has been helping Cambridge researchers, funded by Research Councils UK (RCUK) and the consortium of biomedical funders which make up the Charity Open Access Fund (COAF), to meet their Open Access obligations. Both RCUK (now part of UKRI) and COAF have Open Access policies which have a preference for ‘gold’, i.e. the published work should be Open Access immediately at the time of publication. Implementing these policies has come at a significant cost. In this time, Cambridge has been awarded just over £10 million from RCUK and COAF to implement their Open Access policies, and the Open Access Team has diligently used this funding…

    read more
    Arthur Smith 3 Comments

    You May Also Like

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022
  • Uncategorized

    Lessons learned from Jisc Research Data Champions

    2 October 2018 /

    In 2017 four Cambridge researchers received grants from Jisc to develop and share their research data management practices. In this blog, the four awardees each highlight one aspect of their work as a Jisc Data Champion. The project All four Champions embarked on a range of activities throughout the year including creating local communities interested in RDM practices, delivering training, running surveys to understand their department better, creating ‘how-to’ guides for would-be RDM mentors and testing Samvera as part of RDSS. They were excited by the freedom that the grant gave them to try out whatever RDM related activities they wanted, which meant they could develop their skills and see…

    read more
    Office of Scholarly Communication 0 Comments

    You May Also Like

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022
  • Uncategorized

    The Plan S conversation continues

    24 September 2018 /

    Last week, the 10th Conference of the Open Access Publishing Association was held in Vienna (see the blog about the event). On the Tuesday afternoon Robert-Jan Smits spoke as part of a panel about Plan S [this link to a video of his talk was added 3 October 2018]. It was a calm measured discussion where he thanked many people who had worked with them to develop the plan. He noted that  things went ‘wild’ after releasing the plan, with over 70,000 tweets on the first day. The comments, he said, were mostly positive but there are some negative comments from publishers and some academics – which not surprising  because the…

    read more
    Office of Scholarly Communication 7 Comments

    You May Also Like

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022
  • Uncategorized

    New to OA? Top tips from the experts

    20 August 2018 /

    We have a fantastic community in the Scholarly Communication space. And this is one of the clear themes that emerged from a recent exchange on the UKCORR discussion list. The grandly named UK Council of Research Repositories is a self-organised, volunteer, independent body for repository managers, administrators and staff in the UK. The main activity for UKCORR is a closed email list which has 570 members and is very active. Questions and discussions range from queries about how to interpret specific points of OA policy through to technical advice about repositories. Recently, the OSC’s Arthur Smith (the current Secretary of UKCORR), posed the first ‘monthly discussion’ point, asking the group…

    read more
    Office of Scholarly Communication 4 Comments

    You May Also Like

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022
  • Uncategorized

    Compliance is not the whole story

    14 June 2018 /

    Today, Research England released Monitoring sector progress towards compliance with funder open access policies the results of a survey they ran in August last year in conjunction with RCUK, Wellcome Trust and Jisc. Cambridge University was one of the 113 institutions that answered a significant number of questions about how we were managing compliance with various open access policies, what systems we were using and our decision making processes. Reading the collective responses has been illuminating. The rather celebratory commentary from UKRI has focused on the compliance aspect – see the Research England’s press release: Over 80% of research outputs meet requirements of REF 2021 open access policy and the…

    read more
    Office of Scholarly Communication 1 Comment

    You May Also Like

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022
  • Uncategorized

    Manuscript detectives – submitted, accepted or published?

    27 March 2018 /

    In the blog post “It’s hard getting a date (of publication)”, Maria Angelaki discussed how a seemingly straightforward task may turn into a complicated and time-consuming affair for our Open Access Team. As it turns out, it isn’t the only one. The process of identifying the version of a manuscript (whether it is the submitted, accepted or published version) can also require observation and deduction skills on par with Sherlock Holmes’. Unfortunately, it is something we need to do all the time. We need to make sure that the manuscript we’re processing isn’t the submitted version, as only published or accepted versions are deposited in Apollo. And we need to…

    read more
    Arthur Smith 2 Comments

    You May Also Like

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025
  • Uncategorized

    How open is Cambridge? 2017 edition

    23 October 2017 /

    Welcome to Open Access Week 2017. The Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge is celebrating with a series of blog posts, announcements and events. In today’s blog post we revisit the question about the openness of Cambridge.  For Open Access week last year I looked at how open Cambridge was using the extremely useful Lantern tool, developed by Cottage Labs, and which is the basis of the Wellcome Trust’s compliance tool. If you haven’t used it before, Lantern takes a list of DOIs, PMIDs, or PMCIDs and runs these through a variety of sources to try and determine the Open Access status of the publication. I found that, for publications in 2015, 51.8% of all of…

    read more
    Arthur Smith 1 Comment

    You May Also Like

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022
  • Uncategorized

    Open Access policy, procedure & process at Cambridge

    18 September 2017 /

     The Open Access policies developed and applied by the UK’s major research funders (HEFCE, RCUK and COAF) all aim to achieve one thing: freedom of knowledge for all. However, the specific mechanisms these funders have taken to achieve this goal varies considerably and requires careful implementation from higher education institutions (HEIs). In this blog post, I’ll describe the different workflows required to meet each funder’s expectations and then look at how these policies intersect with each other to form a tangled web of policy nightmare. Some of the decisions and processes will be peculiar to the University of Cambridge, especially when it comes to decisions around funding for article processing…

    read more
    Arthur Smith 3 Comments

    You May Also Like

    Enriching the institutional scholarly record: Octopus outputs in repositories via Publications Router

    20 January 2025

    Thoughts on the new White House OSTP open access memo

    31 August 2022

    Rights retention: publisher responses to the University’s pilot

    4 October 2022
 Older Posts
Newer Posts 
  • Open Minded #1 – Dr Peter Murray-Rust
  • Data Diversity Podcast #5 – Abdulwahab Alshallal
  • Data Diversity Podcast (#4) – Dr Stefania Merlo (2/2)
  • The Research Data Sustainability Workshop – November 2024
  • Data Diversity Podcast (#4) – Dr Stefania Merlo (1/2) 
  • June 2026
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • February 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • February 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • April 2022
  • January 2022
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • June 2021
  • January 2021
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • April 2020
  • February 2020
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015

APC Apollo article processing charges COAF compliance copyright data data champions Elsevier funder funders HEFCE Humanities hybrid institutional repository Jisc journals librarians Libraries library metadata Open Acccess open access open data Open Research peer review Plan S policy professional development publishers publishing RCUK RDM REF repository reproducibility research research data research data management research integrity Research Support scholarly communication theses Training Wellcome Trust

  • June 2026
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • February 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • February 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • April 2022
  • January 2022
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • June 2021
  • January 2021
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • April 2020
  • February 2020
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
Ashe Theme by WP Royal.