Scholarly information is fragmented, workflows are inefficient, and trust in research has been eroding in recent years. There are a number of reasons for this: too much time is being spent on administrative tasks; content discoverability, including access rights, is not optimized; researchers aren't getting the recognition they deserve and their publishers want; and there's a lack of the transparency needed to (re)build trust in research. In addition, publishers, in particular, need better information to improve strategic decision-making. Recent reports from Australia and the UK have shown that widespread adoption of persistent identifiers (PIDs) and their associated metadata could save tens of thousands of researcher hours and tens of millions of dollars for each of those two countries. In this session, you will hear from a broad range of stakeholders about how publishers, libraries, and other stakeholders can contribute to and benefit from improved scholarly workflows.

In this timely webinar, speakers explore the latest developments in the transition to open research, touching on innovations from their respective organizations. Topics will include new developments in the scholarly infrastructure supporting open research, new business models in support of OA monographs, and how open research is shifting our focus from the scholarly article to preprints, data, and other research outputs. The speakers will also discuss what’s working, what isn’t, and the barriers to a fully open research ecosystem across disciplines.

In the post-Cold War era, many observers have conceptualized science as a global activity, with substantial international collaboration, more readily facilitated cross-border scholarly communication, and even UN-level efforts to steer science towards Sustainable Development Goals. But regional differences, geopolitical strains, and challenges to developing a global research infrastructure have all posed challenges to global science. In this webinar, hosted by the Scholarly Kitchen, a panel will consider whether science can ever be truly “global.”