REF and Open Research

Journal articles and conference proceedings that are available in a publication that has an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN).

It is important to note that REF consider the “true” publication date of an article to be the first time it is made available to the public. In practice, this means that in most cases the date of the “early online” version of an article is taken as the publication date. This is important as this date determines by when the article should be openly accessible.

No other items types are required to be openly accessible (i.e. book, chapters, datasets, compositions, etc., do not have to be available on an open access basis).

Your articles must be made available on an open access basis. There are various conditions that depend on when the article was published and to which main REF panel it would be submitted. The simplest message to hold on to is this:

To be sure that your articles are meeting REF open access requirements, upload an author accepted manuscript version of your paper to Elements as soon as possible after the journal or conference proceedings has published it online.

If you do this one thing you can be confident of meeting REF requirements. There are other ways of making your work openly accessible – see How to make your work open access for more details – but the most straightforward way of making sure you have met requirements is to upload an author accepted manuscript.

Yes. The requirements for main panels A & B are slightly different to those for main panels C & D. These differences relate to the allowable embargo period between first publication and the availability of an open access version.

There are separate deposit requirements (when the item must be in the Repository) and access requirements (when the item must be openly accessible).

Here we address some common misunderstandings about the REF open access policy

Myth 1: the belief that you have to publish on a paid-for “gold” open access basis to be REF-eligible. This is incorrect. As stated above, the open access requirements can be met by uploading an author accepted manuscript to Elements, from where it will be fed into, and made available from, the University Repository. Indeed, at its heart the REF policy is a mandate for free “green” open access.

Myth 2: the belief that if an author accepted manuscript is used to meet open access requirements, that is the version that will be read by REF panellists. This is incorrect – no matter which version of an article is used to meet open access requirements, the version that will be read and reviewed by REF panellists will be the version of record.

Elements is the university’s current research information system. It is fed data from other systems including Core HR and external publication databases like of Web of Science and Scopus. Data can also be entered directly into Elements. Information in Elements is then used to feed other systems, such as your web profile via TULIP, and the University Repository.

The Repository is an online open access database containing either the full text of files uploaded by staff and PGR students or links to open access versions available elsewhere. The only reason to upload a file to a publications record in Elements is to have it made openly accessible through the Repository.

For the purpose of sharing outputs with reviewers as part of the Outputs Evaluation Programme, unless these outputs are openly accessible, please do not upload files for those outputs to Elements. They cannot be shared with reviewers through Elements itself. Instead, contact your local OEP co-ordinator for guidance on how to share the content of outputs with OEP reviewers.

REF policy allows for certain deposit, access and technical exceptions. Please seek guidance from the Open Access team regarding exceptions to the policy.

Exceptions to the open access requirements 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2025

Deposit exceptions

• You could not secure use of a repository at point of acceptance.
• There was a delay in securing the final peer-reviewed text (for instance, where a paper has multiple authors).
• You were not employed by a UK HEI at the time of submission for publication.
• It would be unlawful to deposit, or request the deposit of, the output.
• Depositing the output would present a security risk. 

Access exceptions

• The output depends on the reproduction of third-party content for which open access rights could not be granted (either within the specified timescales, or at all).
• The publication concerned requires an embargo period that exceeds the stated maxima and was the most appropriate publication for the output.
• The publication concerned actively disallows open-access deposit in a repository and was the most appropriate publication for the output.

Technical exceptions

• At the point of acceptance, the staff member to whom the output is attributed was employed at a different UK HEI, and it has not been possible to determine compliance with the criteria.
• The repository experienced a short-term or transient technical failure that prevented compliance with the criteria.
• An external service provider failure prevented compliance (for instance, a subject repository did not enable open access at the end of the embargo period, or a subject repository ceased to operate).

Other exceptions

Extenuating personal circumstances of the author (such as periods of extended leave), industrial action, closure days, and software problems beyond those listed in the technical exceptions.

The output was not deposited within three months of acceptance date, but was deposited within three months of the earliest date of publication. In this instance, the output will need to meet all other policy requirements.

Exceptions from 1 January 2026 to 31 December 2028

Deposit exceptions

• Subject to delay in securing the final peer-reviewed text for deposit – for instance, where a paper has multiple authors.
• It would be unlawful to deposit, or request the deposit of, the output or to otherwise make this available.
• The publication actively disallows open access deposit in a repository and was the most appropriate publication for the output.

Access exceptions

• The publication requires an embargo period that exceeds the stated maxima and was the most appropriate publication for the output.
• Third-party content was included for which licences could not be obtained at a reasonable cost.

Technical exceptions

• Output has a demonstrable and substantive connection to the submitting institution but was published following the end of the author’s period of employment, and it has not been possible to determine compliance with the criteria.
• Outputs were authored in whole by one or more staff who are or were ineligible to be included in the volume measure for REF 2029. The funding bodies have agreed this exception across the publication period for REF 2029 in order to support submission of a wide range of eligible outputs.

Other exceptions

Personal circumstances of the author, industrial action, closure days and software issues) prevent compliance.