Number of open access works whose referencs are also all open access (idea credit: John Dove). Source: iterate over open citation data at CrossRef and merge with Unpaywall data.

Number of academic entities publishing their subscription spending. Possible source: fund OpenAIRE to do it. Current sources: see e.g. http://stuartlawson.org/2016/0...

The greatest omission here is that it doesn't look in to basic Open Science rights: I want to see metrics that allow reuse and redistribution. Metrics should be added to distinguish between "allow reuse, modification, and redistribution" and "does not allow reuse, modification, and redistribution".

Access from developping countries for OA publications vs. non-OA publications. There is a chance this can only be evaluated through contact with the individual publishers, or through online surveys.

Maybe worth contacting universities that need to produce this data too (most of them have contracts to be above 60% OA in 2020 and are finding ways to monitor that).

Survey addressed to scientists on reception of OA across scientific fields: Do you trust OA more or less than non-OA? Do you benefit from accessing OA publications? Do you benefit from publishing OA?

Survey addressed to scientific journalists, patient organisations, or in general citizens concerned with scientific topics, on the role that OA plays for them in order to evaluate whether OA contributes to making scientific findings available to the society at large.

I not quite sure how are "open access" being defined here, but is arxiv.org taken into account ? In my fields of research this is the main source of information nowadays (not the publications in journals).

How about a breakdown of the cost associated with meeting OA in all of the above indicators. This could include by country, by publisher, by journal etc.

Institutional OA repositories are very useful to monitor Gold, Green, Platinum and hybrid OA. Today, many more researchers have an ORCID and some institutions also have ORCID. What about pushing for ORCID and Unpaywall combination for OA monitoring? They are both non-profit raising organizations.

2/3 In fact, non profit tools should be used as the ground of OA monitoring calculation: ORCID, Unpaywall, Zenodo (non-profit EU supported OA and ORD database), institutional databases, and the huge thematic medical PMC and EuropePMC databases. Commercial Scopus and WoS databasesshould may be used to "check" the results at the end.

3/3 By doing so - OA monitoring would *motivate* researchers to create ORCID, and fill in their institutional/thematic databases. - It would weak IF and h-index for carrier assessment and be compatible with DORA signatories - it would allow raise of OA without mandatory national or university laws - The calculation at the beginning maybe not so accurate, but with *time* it will improve, without any *dependance* to commercial Scopus and WoS. They would be only other tools among others for a fair competitive market.

1) ORCID and Unpaywall association is a good suggestion 2) DOAB for monographs 3) DOAJ to include also SSH journals 4) preprints servers 5) tracking the costs, e.g. via OpenAPC https://treemaps.intact-projec...

I agree with the comments above regarding preprints. Consideration of preprints is important and it is not clear how they are included. In addition, only 4 sources of preprints are used, which is quite limiting. OSF preprints and Preprints.org (disclosure - I am director of the latter) are not included.

It's disappointing to see that the only outlets mentioned, at least as far as I could discern, are journals. In many disciplines the or a main form of publication is the book - whether single-authored, a collection of related papers on a given theme, or a specialist catalogue or textual edition and commentary. It would be good to see this form of publication included here. I speak both in a personal capacity and as a member of the UUK OA monograph working group.

I'd echo Nigel's comment (also as a member of the UUK OA monographs working group), particularly given that significant funders are signalling intent to develop OA policy in the direction of long form publications.

Publications with open licenses; publications for which a preprint is available; publications with open peer review reports; publication with open peer review identities; publications with open peer review editor/reviewer/author communication

Publications of which the citation data are fully open and complete (Crossref)

OA availability of sources cited in the papers

researchers attitude towards open access

researchers attitudes towards types of open licenses

share of institutions having a repository

countries having scholarly open access rights in their copyright law

Number of fully open access and openly licensed scholarly books

Number of registered and open peer reviews (publons)

Number of institutions with an established open science community

Number of institutions having signed DORA

Number of published having signed DORA

number of funders having signed DORA

share of institutions having a strong repository mandate (roarmap)

Number of journals flipped to full OA