PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Simon Wakeling
AU  - Danny Kingsley
AU  - Hamid Jamali
AU  - Mary Anne Kennan
AU  - Maryam Sarrafzadeh
TI  - Free for all, or free-for-all? A content analysis of Australian university open access policies
AID  - 10.1101/2021.08.20.457045
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - bioRxiv
PG  - 2021.08.20.457045
4099  - http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2021/08/20/2021.08.20.457045.short
4100  - http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2021/08/20/2021.08.20.457045.full
AB  - Recent research demonstrates that Australia lags in providing open access to research outputs. In Australia, while the two major research funding bodies require open access of outputs from projects they fund, these bodies only fund a small proportion of research conducted. The major source of research and experimental development funding in Australian higher education is general university, or institutional, funding, and such funds are not subject to national funder open access policies. Thus, institutional policies and other institutional supports for open access are important in understanding Australia’s OA position. The purpose of this paper is, therefore, to understand the characteristics of Australian institutional open access policies and to explore the extent they represent a coherent and unified approach to delivering and promoting open access in Australia. Open access policies were located using a systematic web search approach and then their contents were analysed. Only half of Australian universities were found to have an open access policy. There was a wide variation in language used, expressed intent of the policy and expectations of researchers. Few policies mention monitoring or compliance and only three mention consequences for non-compliance. While it is understandable that institutions develop their own policies, when language is used which does not reflect national and international understandings, when requirements are not clear and with consequences, policies are unlikely to contribute to understanding of open access, to uptake of the policy, or to ease of transferring understanding and practices between institutions. A more unified approach to open access is recommended.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.