On this page
- 1. Executive Summary
- 2. Summary of feedback on the draft revised OA Policy
- 3. Next steps
- 4. Contact us
1. Executive Summary
In July 2023, the presidents of Canada’s federal granting agencies—the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) (“the Agencies”)—announced the review of the Tri-Agency Open Access (OA) Policy on Publications with the goal of requiring any peer-reviewed journal publication arising from agency-supported research to be freely available, without subscription or fee, at the time of publication (i.e., immediate open access [OA]).
To inform the revisions to the Policy, the Agencies consulted the Canadian research community and a range of partners (Canadian and international) through an online survey, thematic engagement sessions, and meetings. The findings from these engagements were published in a What We Heard Report released on August 7, 2024.
Based on these findings and additional feedback received during discussions with policy experts and partners, the Agencies released a draft revised Policy for public feedback (via email and an online form between February 25 and March 31, 2025).
This document summarizes the feedback received on the draft revised OA Policy.
The Agencies wish to thank members of the research community and partners for taking the time to comment on the draft revised policy. This feedback is much appreciated and will help to inform the final version of the Policy.
2. Summary of feedback on the draft revised OA Policy
2.1 Policy scope
Respondents expressed a range of questions and concerns regarding the scope of the Policy, including to whom it applies (e.g., postdoctoral outputs), the need to clarify what qualifies as an article, and the Agencies’ stance on review platforms that are not journals, but offer peer review.
2.2 Policy components
2.2.1 Mandatory deposit
Respondents expressed concerns related to the perceived lack of support for Diamond OA,Footnote 1 the duplication of efforts for articles already published in OA journals, and the compliance and/or acceptance of repositories other than institutional ones.
2.2.2 Licensing
Respondents proposed clarifications about licensing requirements (i.e., mandating specific Creative Commons licenses versus supporting flexibility of licenses) and called on the Agencies to support secondary publishing rights.
2.2.3 Preprint exception
Respondents had mixed views on the exception allowing preprints deposited in Canadian institutional repositories to be considered compliant with the Policy as a “last resort.” Some noted that this would enable authors to be compliant with the Policy, but others thought the exception would weaken the Policy. Some suggested preprints be updated with the Version of Record and include a brief description of the changes between the preprint and final version. Several respondents sought clarification about which preprint servers would be considered acceptable.
2.3 Policy enablers
2.3.1 Infrastructure
Respondents suggested:
- a centralized article repository to streamline the workflow and reduce administrative burden
- investing in Research Support Funds to support libraries and their repositories
- providing more support for Diamond OA journals and infrastructure
2.3.2 Deposit process
Respondents suggested:
- clarifying the definition of “Canadian institutional repository”
- elaborating a process for article retractions
- having the Agencies work directly with publishers to facilitate both direct deposit and rights retention
- leveraging persistent identifiers and ScholarisFootnote 2 to improve the user experience and efficiency of the article deposit process
- clarifying institutional responsibilities and expectations
2.4 Article processing charges
Respondents suggested:
- clarifying the guidelines around allowable article processing charge (APC) expenditures
- increasing transparency around APC costs and return on investment
- defining OA models to clarify which ones do not require APCs
- having Agencies work with publishers to reduce APCs or provide additional or dedicated funding towards APC costs
2.5 Compliance monitoring
Respondents suggested:
- implementing standardized language for funding acknowledgments
- introducing a requirement for authors to demonstrate compliance with the Policy in end-of-grant reports
- monitoring deposits in repositories
- withholding funds from those who do not comply with the Policy
2.6 Indigenous rights
Respondents suggested that the Agencies continue to consult with Indigenous experts to provide guidance on Indigenous research considerations and strengthen the language around Indigenous intellectual sovereignty and the ability to opt-out of publishing.
2.7 Accessibility and availability of research publications
Respondents commented on the diverse ways Canadians read, the barriers to accessing self-archived articles, the need to recognize the specifics of minority language French publishing and to provide additional supports to researchers publishing in languages other than English. There were also suggestions to mandate bilingual publishing.
3. Next steps
The Agencies will consider all the feedback received to develop the final OA Policy, anticipated to be released in the coming months.
4. Contact us
- CIHR: openaccess-libreacces@cihr-irsc.gc.ca
- NSERC: openaccess@nserc-crsng.gc.ca
- SSHRC: openaccess@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca
For information on the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications (2015), please visit: