Erwi'r haf, Fel Cantebwch Cymru varyrhau ym boreddyn gyda ddeithasol o'r gymryd y Llywodraeth Cymru yn 1962, ydy'r ysgeddur yn ei gyfnod yn hyn ac ynlinech i gydugion, agedd, llawer, cerddian allan. Diolch i'r ffordd. Mae'r holl vyllgor yng Nghaerfiol Llywodraeth Cynest ar y blynyddog a'i bwysig ar y pâlyliau yma. Mae'r llwy ffordd maen nhw, cyffredin, yn rhoi pwysig hefyd. Roedd y Unedig yw'r unig i'w rhai'r profiol ar gyfer y gwirionedd yw'r ysgrifennu ac mae'r bywyd yn ymdyn nhw'n gweld y gwirionedd ar gyfer y gwirionedd yn ymdyn nhw'n gweithio. A ydych chi'n gyfnodd y Llyfrgell yn 2016, y cyfnodd y Lleirionedd a Gwyrdd Llyfrgell yn ymdyn nhw'n gwirionedd, y cyfnodd yn ymdyn nhw'n gwirionedd, mae'n golygu'n gwirionedd yn ymdyn nhw'n gwirionedd. As most of you are probably aware, advocating open access can be quite a challenge. At Christchurch, because of the focus on teaching, it can be difficult for academics to find time to do their research. Never mind adding it to a repository and getting to grips with which version of their paper to include. Without the Hefki mandate, we would have even less success in persuading people to add their research to the repository. But we are trying to steer away from the stick approach and remind people why open access is a good thing in its own right. For themselves as researchers, for the institution and society as a whole. But what we really want and need to do is to build open access into the culture of the university. And in order to do this, we need to move our focus away from the ref and towards the moral, ethical and radical aspects of open access. Gary Hall conceives of open access as a continuing struggle, much like the academic life. If we focus on the measures and targets around the ref, we see open access as almost nothing more than a bean counting exercise. Hall argues that open access should be seen less as a project and model to be implemented and more as a process of continuous struggle and critical resistance. It should not merely be about making research accessible, but should address issues of access, experimentation and self reflexivity, which is hard when you struggle with a list. It should be about encouraging reuse and experimentation. Open access gives us an opportunity to step away from the status quo, observe it and reimagine it. Being involved with open access can be a way of critiquing the current mainstream publishing processes. Moreover, thinking about the philosophies underpinning open access can help us explore the values and aspirations of our institutions. Academics want to share their work, but they often do this on academic social media sites. I'm being a bit more circumspect than Claire, she actually names and shames some, which one could argue actually commodifies their research and the data connected with it. These Facebooks for academics in the process of sharing are utilizing their users' content and labour. Not only this, but as with mainstream social networks, the people who use the sites may soon become its products. The founder of one well-known academic social media website has said that he plans to charge for profit companies to access data to gain insights on which research and researchers are gaining traction. Open access, particularly green open access, helps academics step outside the market. They can share their work freely to a point without being subject either to the cost of APCs or the hidden costs of being treated as commodities. So, these are the missions and values on the Canterbury Christ Church University website. So we say that we value the development of the whole person respecting and nurturing the inherent dignity and potential of each individual. That we value the integration of excellent teaching, research and knowledge exchange. We value the power of higher education to enrich individuals, communities and nations. And we prepare individuals to contribute to a just and sustainable future. Although this talk focuses on Canterbury Christ Church's stated values, you can find similar statements on almost any university web page, and particularly those universities that aspire to be values-led. In order to illustrate how open access should be at the core of the university's research strategy, I'm going to explore how the moral, ethical and radical aspects of open access can be seen to fit with those values. The current scholarly communication system encourages academics to be selfish, Claire's opinion. Jobs are insecure, competition is fierce and which journals you are published in is closely tied to career progression. All this and the stresses of day-to-day work in HE means that researchers can easily lose sight of how they could contribute to the development of a fairer world through open access. Until the way in which we measure academic success changes, it is going to be difficult to persuade academics to change their practices. Measures such as fair metrics which look at discoverability and reusability can be used and can uphold and align to university values of justice and sustainability. In addition to thinking about the dignity of academic staff, we also need to think about the potential of our students. Whilst at university students can access good quality research through subscription services, but when they leave they have to pay for it. For those wishing to engage in lifelong learning, a big fat dollar sign creates a divide between the haves and have nots. Making research open access enables people to reach their potential throughout their lives, not just while they're members of the university. It gives people the means to access the knowledge they need to lead dignified, fulfilling lives and help others do the same. Still thinking about students, it's important that they know that universities are doing research and Claire would argue and I would agree with her that research is what makes the university and this research needs to be present in teaching. Subjects should be taught by experts in those fields and this research should be openly available for students to use. Universities often talk about research-informed teaching, particularly with reference to the TEF. A green open access repository can help make this possible. Repository is collate and preserve research, so it's easily accessible to anyone. Students can search for the lecturer's research, download it, assess it and use it without cost. Also having research in the repository makes it easier for staff to access their own work, use it in teaching and share it with colleagues. In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights it states that everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. Making research open access has important implications for social justice and the enrichment of lives, especially lives outside the university. Open access research is available to anyone, not just those who can afford the subscriptions and who are members of the university. If we believe in the enriching power of higher education, then we have a moral responsibility to maximise the benefits of scholarly publishing for the larger society. As well as enriching life through access to information and knowledge, open access can also be seen as an alternative to the status quo. Advocates of radical open access argue that this is the way it should be used and that open access publishing without a concurrent interrogation of the economic underpinnings of the scholarly communication system will only reform the situation rather than provide a radical alternative. Part of the power of higher education is that it enables people to stand apart from society. The status quo and critically examine it. Open access can be a part of this alternative view as it allows people to step outside the system and be part of creating a new one. In addition, the radical open access movement argues that open access should not only be about access alone but also about the reuse of experimentation with and critique of research outputs. This facilitates a richer experience of research. People not only read the research but can experience it in new ways. For example, is an open access monograph a cultural or a political object? We begin to question is an e-book really a book and is how we read a book affected by its physical form. Question in the book has led some to query the very print based system of scholarly communication complete with ideas of quality, stability and authority on which so much of the academic institution rests. For example, the value of peer review. What happens if scholars and universities self publish their work by open access methods? What happens to the traditional commercial publishing systems? The current scholarly ecosystem whereby journals charged for access is unjust and unsustainable. The number of people in further or higher education worldwide grew almost seven fold between 1970 and 2009 due to a sudden expansion of higher education in the developing world. This massive increase was accompanied by a severe lack of scholarly information for those students. It is our responsibility as librarians and scholars to ensure that our colleagues in the developing world have access to the same resources as us and vice versa. It should not matter where we are in the world or which institution we belong to or are employed by. We should be able to access the research outputs at the point of need and whether or not we can access research should not depend on our income or indeed the income of our institution. In the scholarly publication system itself we need to focus on non-discrimination, equality and equity in the distribution of costs and benefits in order to create a just and sustainable environment. Yami argues that open access publishing is a socially responsive and equitable approach to knowledge dissemination and subscription fees that exclude the poor from access to scholarly resources are a rights violation. As Wolinsky says, the right to know is not solely about having access to knowledge that will prevent harm or reduce suffering rather it is about having fair and equitable access to a public good. Interestingly he also argues that open access to knowledge can enable people to defend and advocate other people's rights something which should chime very strongly with the values that can to be Christchurch. So how does open access support sustainability? Firstly universities are contributing to their own sustainability by meeting funder mandates for open access requirements. Even though we are trying to steer away from seeing open access in a ref-centric way it is important to acknowledge this. Secondly, open access research helps to facilitate the sustainability of future research and innovation. It enables anyone who wants to access research to read and build upon it. This should mean less repeated research and also enable people to see examples of failed research so they can avoid making the same mistakes in the future. In addition, green open access using institutional repositories offers a way of collating and preserving an institution's research output in an easily accessible centralised place so hopefully no more lost manuscripts. Finally it can be argued that open access publishing systems such as new university presses and pure open access online journals are more sustainable than the current subscription based publishing models. To conclude it's important to recognise the limitations of the values based model of advocacy as well as the difficulties of open access as it currently exists in the western world. A major disadvantage of the values based model is that unfortunately people are inherently selfish and it is very difficult to persuade them to do something for the sake of the greater good. They may not see the benefits to themselves so we need to continue to reiterate the benefits of open access to individual researchers and institutions. Despite this I hope or Claire hopes to have illustrated how the values of our university and many others are closely related to the values of the open access movement and that this ideal should be used to encourage researchers to engage with open access as a public good rather than as another ref related task. Utopian I hope not. Thank you.