General cost analysis for scholarly communication in Germany : results of the "Houghton Report" for Germany

Management Summary: Conducted within the project “Economic Implications of New Models for Information Supply for Science and Research in Germany”, the Houghton Report for Germany provides a general cost and benefit analysis for scientific communication in Germany comparing different scenarios according to their specific costs and explicitly including the German National License Program (NLP). Basing on the scholarly lifecycle process model outlined by Björk (2007), the study compared the following scenarios according to their accounted costs: - Traditional subscription publishing, - Open access publishing (Gold Open Access; refers primarily to journal publishing where access is free of charge to readers, while the authors or funding organisations pay for publication) - Open Access self-archiving (authors deposit their work in online open access institutional or subject-based repositories, making it freely available to anyone with Internet access; further divided into (i) CGreen Open Access’ self-archiving operating in parallel with subscription publishing; and (ii) the ‘overlay services’ model in which self-archiving provides the foundation for overlay services (e.g. peer review, branding and quality control services)) - the NLP. Within all scenarios, five core activity elements (Fund research and research communication; perform research and communicate the results; publish scientific and scholarly works; facilitate dissemination, retrieval and preservation; study publications and apply the knowledge) were modeled and priced with all their including activities. Modelling the impacts of an increase in accessibility and efficiency resulting from more open access on returns to R&D over a 20 year period and then comparing costs and benefits, we find that the benefits of open access publishing models are likely to substantially outweigh the costs and, while smaller, the benefits of the German NLP also exceed the costs. This analysis of the potential benefits of more open access to research findings suggests that different publishing models can make a material difference to the benefits realised, as well as the costs faced. It seems likely that more Open Access would have substantial net benefits in the longer term and, while net benefits may be lower during a transitional period, they are likely to be positive for both ‘author-pays’ Open Access publishing and the ‘over-lay journals’ alternatives (‘Gold Open Access’), and for parallel subscription publishing and self-archiving (‘Green Open Access’). The NLP returns substantial benefits and savings at a modest cost, returning one of the highest benefit/cost ratios available from unilateral national policies during a transitional period (second to that of ‘Green Open Access’ self-archiving). Whether ‘Green Open Access’ self-archiving in parallel with subscriptions is a sustainable model over the longer term is debateable, and what impact the NLP may have on the take up of Open Access alternatives is also an important consideration. So too is the potential for developments in Open Access or other scholarly publishing business models to significantly change the relative cost-benefit of the NLP over time. The results are comparable to those of previous studies from the UK and Netherlands. Green Open Access in parallel with the traditional model yields the best benefits/cost ratio. Beside its benefits/cost ratio, the meaningfulness of the NLP is given by its enforceability. The true costs of toll access publishing (beside the buyback” of information) is the prohibition of access to research and knowledge for society

Open Science for a shared and collaborative knowledge

The conventional model of “Scholarly communication”, based on the publication in "tall access" journals and by preference in high-Impact Factor journals, has distorted over time, if not betrayed, its original vocation, that is to "communicate" science. The year 1665 is often cited, being the year of birth of the Journal des Sçavans in France and of Philosophical Transactions in England, published by Henry Oldenburg to present advances in scientific research to members of the Royal Society. It is the founding date of the first scientific journals and marks the starting point of the privileged circuit for sharing scientific knowledge and encouraging the so-called "Great Conversation" of science. This debate among scientists should be the true essence and the raison d’être of Scholarly Communication. Since then, unfortunately, academic publishing has turned into a real business, "the most profitable obsolete technology in history", dominated by the "Big Five", a cartel of the five publishing groups (Reed Elsevier, Wiley- Blackwell, Springer, Taylor & Francis, Sage) which rank in the highest positions in the international scientific publishing market, both in terms of profit margins (38% of Reed Elsevier's net profit), and the number of articles published every year, with a price spiral in subscription costs that peaked at 402% for the period 1986-2011. Economic barriers are only one of the obstacles that restrict access to research findings. Paradoxically, although huge economic investments are made by the institutions to enable the academic community to do research, much of the scientific literature is actually inaccessible. Jon Tennant remarks: "we spend 1/3 of the total global research budget (£59/175bn) in publishing and communicating results that 99% of people cannot access"

Open access scholarly publishing and the problem of networks and intermediaries in the academic commons

Der Vortrag wurde am 5th Frankfurt Scientific Symposium gehalten (22-23 Oktober 2005)

Competition and cooperation: Libraries and publishers in the transition to electronic scholarly journals

The conversion of scholarly journals to digital format is proceeding rapidly, especially for those from large commercial and learned society publishers. This conversion offers the best hope for survival for such publishers. The infamous "journal crisis" is more of a library cost crisis than a publisher pricing problem, with internal library costs much higher than the amount spent on purchasing books and journals. Therefore publishers may be able to retain or even increase their revenues and profits, while at the same time providing a superior service. To do this, they will have to take over many of the function of libraries, and they can do that only in the digital domain. This paper examines publishers' strategies, how they are likely to evolve, and how they will affect libraries

ISC/OSI Journal Authors Survey Report

On behalf of the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and the Open Society Institute (OSI) a survey of journal authors has been carried out by Key Perspectives Ltd. The terms of reference were to poll a cohort of authors who had published on an open access basis and another cohort of authors who had published their work in conventional journals without making the article available on open access. The survey’s aims were to investigate the authors’ awareness of new open access possibilities, the ease of identification of and submission to open access outlets, their experiences of publishing their work in this way, their concerns about any implications open access publishing may have upon their careers, and the reasons why (or not) they chose to publish through an open access outlet

Conference Proceedings at Publishing Cross-Roads

The potential intrinsic to electronic publishing provides conference conveners with the opportunity to position the papers presented to greater advantage of both authors and readers. Unfortunately, conference papers are being increasingly published in the most expensive vehicle, the formal peer-reviewed journal. This circumstance is counter-productive to the legitimate role of conference papers in scholarly communication. The experience at Caltech in electronically publishing the proceedings of an international conference shows that conference papers can be more effectively published online at significantly less cost thus increasing dissemination and acces

Creating Digital Art History: Library, Student, and Faculty Collaboration

Over the last two decades, teaching, learning, and research in higher education have developed a growing digital presence. Digital development in the humanities has been slow relative to most other areas in academia, and with some exceptions, art and art history have enjoyed slow digital growth within the humanities. Within this environment, the article here presents one collaborative model for digital art history, rare in its exclusive focus on undergraduate “junior scholars”. Undergraduate senior-level art history and studio art students at Providence College collaborate annually with art history and studio art faculty to publish their senior theses in print format as the Art Journal. In the last few years, students, faculty, and digital library staff have enhanced this collaboration to include the publishing from process to product of the Art Journal as a complementary digital Art Journal. They collaborate in creating digital art history and digital studio art in order to bring exponentially greater meaning, significance and visibility to the students’ senior culminating works through real-world digital publishing, including quality control, copyright issues, and ideas related to persistent access and ongoing global visibility for the scholarly and creative works, and for the student scholars. These students function as real-world collaborative scholarly partners in publishing their culminating academic and artistic work globally, and persistently accessible in Providence College’s digital repositories. This case study evidences engagement in meaningful digital knowledge creation focused on the intellectual and creative output of student-scholars and student-artists (art historians and studio artists) as a model for other student-faculty-digital library professional collaborations. Note: Full text document is a pre-print version of article due to publisher rights. Publisher\u27s version available at the following citation: Bailey, D. Russell. Creating Digital Art History: Library, Student and Faculty Collaboration . The International Journal of New Media, Technology, and the Arts. Volume 10. Issue 2. 2015. pp. 1-10. Ninth International Conference on the Arts in Society website: http://artsinsociety.com/the-conference-201

Moving beyond e-journals

Paul Ayris explains to Elspeth Hyams why scholarly communication has moved beyond the debate on e-journals pricing and open access