Washington, DC (July 6, 2023) – JSPG CEO Adriana Bankston was recently named to the National Small Business Association (NSBA) Leadership Council. In addition to her role with JSPG, Bankston is Founder & CEO of Bankston Policy Consulting, a consulting firm based in Washington, D.C. that empowers students and early career researchers to impact policy at all levels of government. 

NSBA is the nation’s oldest small business advocacy organization, and operates on a staunchly nonpartisan basis. As a recognized leader in science policy and advocacy, and more recently among the small business community, Bankston joins the NSBA Leadership Council alongside other advocates from across the country to promote the interests of small businesses to policymakers in Washington, D.C.

The NSBA Leadership Council engages with Congress, the administration, state and local government and the media, and provides valuable networking opportunities. “I look forward to showcasing the role that small businesses play in fostering future scientific and technological innovations driven by the next generation and building a robust workforce to help maintain our nation’s economic growth and competitiveness,” said Bankston.

Bankston joined the NSBA Leadership Council as part of her efforts to tackle critical issues facing small businesses. These include the need for improving workforce access, training and skills development, addressing the labor shortage and reforming the U.S. immigration system to enable small businesses nationwide to continue innovating across sectors. 

“I am proud to have Adriana Bankston as part of our Leadership Council,” NSBA President and CEO Todd McCracken said. “She came to us highly recommended and I look forward to our coordinated efforts for years to come.”

Bankston Policy Consulting provides a variety of services to stakeholders and individuals invested in and working towards building the next generation STEM workforce through policy change across a number of industries within the science, technology and innovation ecosystem. Click here to learn more about the firm.

For more on the NSBA, please visit www.nsba.biz.

“We hope this special issue highlights the brand of inclusive and collaborative leadership being nurtured in Latin America and the Caribbean that will help articulate a vision of how our hemisphere can assume greater leadership in the international decision-making space and more forcefully articulate its priorities and needs. The recommendations and insights from the early-career authors published in this issue, as leaders and agents of change, should be shared with local, national and international organizations as positive examples of how to achieve a vision of a sustainable Americas,” said Marcos Regis Da Silva, Executive Director, Inter-American Institute for Global Change. 

In the 7 published articles, authors in this special issue of JSPG highlight several themes that include science diplomacy, sustainability, ocean pollution, youth centered climate solutions,  public policy for plastic pollution regulation, and stakeholder engagement in the measurement and best practices necessary to ensure a sustainable supply chain for lithium electric vehicle batteries. 

Authors published in the Special Topics Issue will present in two hybrid panels during the Sustainability Research + Innovation 2023 conference in South Africa. On Monday, June 26, the panel will discuss how to foster dialogue on the mechanisms, barriers, and changes needed to strengthen youth voices from the Americas in global climate change fora and negotiations. On Friday, June 30, the panel will describe policy research published in this special issue, facilitate broader conversations around development policy and global change science, and build the next generation of policy leaders.​

Washington, DC (June 12, 2023) – JSPG CEO Dr. Adriana Bankston provided remarks during the 4th listening session of The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) on Open Science Possibilities for Training and Capacity Building: Perspectives from the Early Career Researcher-Supporting Community. This session was part of a series of events exploring perspectives on the challenges and opportunities for advancing open science in the U.S. and solutions that might be implemented by the government. View more details about the series from the OSTP Year of Open Science.

During this session, Dr. Bankston addressed the following points:

• Discussed the background and goals of JSPG to support the next generation in science policy for over a decade;
• Offered the journal as a resource for this community as an open access and peer reviewed publication managed by and for students, policy fellows and young scholars in science, technology and innovation policy;
• Emphasized how the journal can help overcome barriers for the next generation to engage in open science;
• Described JSPG's role in supporting professional development through trainings for research and writing credentials in science policy; and
  
• Highlighted how trainees have used their JSPG publications and other journal opportunities when applying for science policy fellowships and as a way to jumpstart their policy careers.
  

During her remarks, Dr. Bankston highlighted the special issue on open science policy with UNESCO published last year, as an example of how trainees are driving the future of open science. The special issue addressed multiple facets of this topic, including open science practices, incentives, data, infrastructure, international cooperation and citizen science. She urged the audience to read this special issue to learn what the next generation is saying about this topic.

To conclude, Dr. Bankston expressed her hopes that JSPG can be a mechanism by which to help overcome systemic barriers for trainees within universities by providing them with opportunities to publish and have training resources from outside the university. In the light of this session, Dr. Bankston's hope is that the federal government can support nonprofit journals and publications that develop capacity for the next generation, encourage academic systemic change and foster cross-sector collaborations to ensure their success but also train the next generation in this area. 

Dr. Bankston then spoke with Dr. Fanuel Muindi, Chief Resident at STEM Advocacy Institute, about her takeaways from this listening session, as well as how JSPG strategically engages in partnerships for special issues such as with UNESCO. She also mentioned the newly released call for papers for a special issue on Civic Science for Transformative Policy Solutions to Societal Challenges co-sponsored by Sigma Xi and the Rita Allen Foundation. This call for papers is relevant to the topic at hand given the importance of open access to scientific knowledge and data in order for the next generation to participate in effective public engagement and bridge the gap between science and society through their publications.

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC—Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Honor Society, in partnership with the Rita Allen Foundation, welcomes Adriana Bankston, PhD in the position of senior fellow, civic science & public policy. In the new role, Bankston will lead a project that examines science policy engagement at the state level and determines the skills, knowledge, and resources required by scientists to successfully influence public policy.

The Civic Science Fellowship program seeks to broaden engagement with science and research to inform policies and develop solutions for societal challenges. Bankston will work closely with Sigma Xi leadership to develop, launch, and manage an online platform to connect current policy players, showcase policy-engaged organizations, and empower individuals from diverse backgrounds to successfully engage and achieve societal change through policy impact at the state level.

Since 2021, Bankston has served as CEO and managing publisher of The Journal of Science Policy and Governance (JSPG), an internationally recognized non-profit organization and peer-reviewed publication dedicated to empowering early career scientists, engineers, and policy professionals in international science policy debate. She is also a biomedical workforce & policy research investigator at the STEM Advocacy Institute (SAi), where she works to cultivate the next generation workforce through science policy. Finally, Bankston is a fellow with Advancing Research Impact in Society (ARIS), where she also received the inaugural ARIS Emerging Broader Impacts Leader Award in 2022. She holds a PhD in Biochemistry, Cell, and Developmental Biology from Emory University.

"I am honored to work with Sigma Xi in this new role and contribute to enhancing the connection between science and society through public policy,” said Bankston. “Local engagement of scientists with the policymaking process is critical to developing the next generation of leaders in the field and empowering them to improve society through policy change.”

“We are thrilled to welcome Dr. Bankston to the Sigma Xi team,” said Jamie Vernon, executive director and CEO of Sigma Xi. “Her expertise will advance Sigma Xi’s efforts to identify synergies within the science policy training ecosystem and increase efficiency and capacity for creating evidence-informed policy at the state level.”

As the senior fellow for civic science & public policy at Sigma Xi, Bankston will be connected to a national network of Fellows from diverse backgrounds working on a variety of multidisciplinary projects. The Civic Science Fellowship program led by the Rita Allen Foundation promotes a culture of civic science in which scientists engage with local communities through a variety of projects, including fostering connections with policymakers.

More About Sigma Xi: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Honor Society is the world’s largest multidisciplinary honor society for scientists and engineers. Its mission is to enhance the health of the research enterprise, foster integrity in science and engineering, and promote the public understanding of science for the purpose of improving the human condition. Sigma Xi chapters can be found at colleges and universities, government laboratories, and industry research centers around the world. More than 200 Nobel Prize winners have been members. The Society is based in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. www.sigmaxi.org. On Twitter: @SigmaXiSociety.

On March 6, 2023, The Journal of Science Policy & Governance (JSPG) and the National Science Policy Network (NSPN) released Volume 22, Issue 01, the 2022 Standard Winter Issue of the journal.

Published in the standard issue was an Op-Ed, "Publish, Don't Perish: Recommendations for Mitigating Impacts of the New Federal Open Access Policy," authored by Alexander B. Belles, Karen E. Beatty, Claire H. Rodman, and Charles J. Connolly, which included recommendations for stakeholders to address that provides both short-term and long-term solutions to address open access policies. ​

​In response, readers committed to open science submitted a letter to the editor, which JSPG has published in a blog post.

The Authors of the Op-Ed have, in turn, submitted a response to the commentary. That response is provided in full below. 

In response to Peter Suber and Heather Joseph,

We are grateful to be having this conversation regarding the future of academic publishing. With the planned changes described in the Nelson memo, we believe it is important that all researchers be aware of how they will be affected. The Letter to the Editor by Suber and Joseph highlighted two aspects of our original article and provided additional context that we would like to address.

First, our original article implied that the only way to comply with the changes would be to publish in an open access (OA) journal. We apologize for any misunderstanding; the Nelson memo specifies that all federally funded research must be “freely available and publicly accessible by default in agency-designated repositories without any embargo or delay after publication.” While this does not necessarily require publishing in an OA journal, publishing in a traditional subscription journal and being compliant with the new public access rules requires researchers to be informed of the requirements of the funding agency as well as the rules dictated by the journal. For example, traditional journals may allow self-archiving of the accepted manuscript in a repository, but rules may vary from journal to journal. Additionally, multiple versions of the same manuscript in different locations can lead to version control issues, where changes due to copy-editing and post-publication errata would not be reflected in the repository automatically. Publishing OA avoids these pitfalls as the final published version can be archived.

The second point raised was that not all OA journals charge article processing charges (APCs). Suber and Joseph state that 68% of journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) charge no APCs. We recognize that there are many options for publishing OA with no APC. However, 68% does not tell the entire story. The DOAJ gives a seal to journals that meet their best practice criteria. Only ~8% of the almost 20,000 OA journals they track meet these criteria. However, fewer than 3% of OA journals they track follow the best practices and are free, meaning it is exceedingly rare for a journal to adhere to the highest OA standards and be free of charge. Further, Suber and Joseph state that works published OA are overwhelmingly in journals that charge APCs. Many of the most prestigious journals charge heavily to have articles freely available upon publication. We would argue that the sheer number of free OA journals is not important when federally funded researchers are constrained by universities that continue to weigh publication prestige heavily during hiring, promotion, and tenure reviews.

Dissemination of results is vital to science, and journals play an important role. These policy changes are an important step in making scientific research open and equitable. Researchers at all career levels will be affected, so this continued discourse is valuable. We are grateful to JSPG for publishing this work and to the authors of the Letter to the Editor for their thoughtful input.

Signed,
Alexander B. Belles, Pennsylvania State University
Karen E. Beatty, Pennsylvania State University
Claire H. Rodman, Pennsylvania State University
Charles J. Connolly, Pennsylvania State University

On March 6, 2023, The Journal of Science Policy & Governance (JSPG) and the National Science Policy Network (NSPN) released Volume 22, Issue 01, the 2022 Standard Winter Issue of the journal.

The 2022 standard winter issue addressed topics that included open science, climate literacy, workforce development for careers in STEM, data transparency, knowledge infrastructure, space policy, social media, and governmental programs to better evaluate research funding outcomes. 

The Op-Ed, "Publish, Don't Perish: Recommendations for Mitigating Impacts of the New Federal Open Access Policy," authored by Alexander B. Belles, Karen E. Beatty, Claire H. Rodman, and Charles J. Connolly, included recommendations for stakeholders to address that provides both short-term and long-term solutions to address open access policies. ​

​In response, readers committed to open science submitted a letter to the editor. The response to the published Op-Ed is provided in full below. 

To the editor,
​
While it calls welcome attention to an important new policy development in access to publicly-funded research, the March 6 article by Rodman et al. leaves a few false impressions about the 2022 Nelson memo from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). 

The authors support open access (OA) and want to facilitate grantee compliance with the forthcoming federal OA policies. So do we. But their analysis is undermined by two false assumptions. First, they assume that the only way for grantee-authors to comply with the new policies is to publish in OA journals. Second, they assume that all or most OA journals levy article processing charges (APCs). Building on these two assumptions, they focus their recommendations on ways to raise money to pay APCs. 

However, the Nelson memo is explicit in §3.a that agency policies should ensure “that all peer-reviewed scholarly publications authored or coauthored by individuals or institutions resulting from federally funded research are made freely available and publicly accessible by default in agency-designated repositories.” 

Grantees can fully comply with the policies by depositing the right version of their work in the right repository. That is entirely compatible with publishing in OA journals. But depositing in the right repository is necessary, and publishing in an OA journal is not.  

It’s possible that some agencies will create a second compliance channel for those who do publish in OA journals. But it’s too early to say. In any case, depositing in the right repository will suffice, and as far as we know today publishing in OA journals will not suffice. And even if some agencies will count publishing in OA journals as compliance, grantee-authors may still comply by depositing in a repository without paying an APC. 

The authors are right to point out that researchers, especially those early in their careers, are in a difficult position given the pressure to “publish or perish” in certain journals. The Nelson Memo provides universities with a new opportunity to re-think those pressures, focusing more on the research itself, and its quality and impact, than on the journal in which it was published.

Apart from charging no APCs, the repository method of compliance has other advantages for authors and addresses this concern. It preserves author freedom to submit new work to the journals of their choice, for example OA or non-OA journals. This is especially important for early-career researchers, who often face pressure to publish in non-OA journals. The repository method of compliance allows them to satisfy their funder and their promotion-and-tenure committee at the same time.

It has been well-known for more than 15 years that the majority of peer-reviewed OA journals do not charge APCs, even if the majority of articles in OA journals are currently published in the APC-based variety. Using data from today (March 28, 2023), the Directory of Open Access Journals lists 19,150 peer-reviewed OA journals, 68% of which charge no APCs. There is a wide variety of models in use to support OA journal publishing that do not require author-side fees, but rather draw on individual and collective funding from libraries, research institutions, and funders and which provide more equitable and sustainable operating models. 

The most important message for grantee-authors is that paying an APC is not necessary to comply with the new federal OA policies. If a particular journal charges an APC to publish an author’s federally funded research, authors should not draw the wrong conclusion. The fee is not to comply with the federal funder policy; it is to publish in that particular journal. There is no charge for compliance with the federal funder policies.

Signed,
Peter Suber, Senior Advisor on Open Access, Harvard Library
Heather Joseph, Executive Director, SPARC