SPARC, the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, is an alliance of universities, research libraries, and organizations built as a constructive response to market dysfunctions in the scholarly communication system. These dysfunctions have reduced dissemination of scholarship and crippled libraries. SPARC serves as a catalyst for action, helping to create systems that expand information dissemination and use in a networked digital environment while responding to the needs of academe

Crow, Raym

E-LIS repository

1w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Scholarly Publishing & Academic Resources Coalition
An initiative of the Association of Research Libraries
Half Full: 
The Improving State of 
Scholarly Publishing
3rd Workshop on the Open Archives Initiative 
February 12-14, 2004 
Raym Crow • Senior Consultant
SPARC Consulting Group
2w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Our goal . . .
Provide some evidence for evaluating: 
? Is the state of scholarly publishing 
improving—or getting worse?
3w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Our goal . . .
Provide some context for evaluating: 
? Is the state of scholarly publishing 
improving—or getting worse?
In other words:
? Are Open Access initiatives having any 
impact on scholarly publishing?
4w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
A Matter of Perspective
Is the glass half empty?
? The pace of change in scholarly 
publishing is agonizingly slow & 
relatively slight.
5w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
A Matter of Perspective  
The glass half full—
? The various initiatives are having a 
cumulative effect & are gaining 
momentum.
6w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Half Empty
But first, the bad news—
7w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Half Empty
? Commercial consolidation
8w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Half Empty
? Commercial consolidation
? Commercial earnings
9w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Half Empty
? Commercial consolidation
? Commercial earnings
? Bundling & price increases
10
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Half Empty
? Commercial consolidation
? Commercial earnings
? Bundling & price increases
Open Access threat to Science Direct: 
“. . . a lot of noise”
11
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Even Bad News May Be Good
? Couldn’t ask for a better environment for 
change: 
? Library budget situation getting worse—
renders current situation untenable
? Higher education in financial straits—forces 
university administrators to confront systemic 
issues
? Large STM publishers continue to merge—
waving flags at regulators
12
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Preconditions for Change
Sine quibus non for change—
13
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Preconditions for Change
Sine quibus non for change—
? Demonstrate benefits of Open Access to 
authors & other stakeholders
? Gated models narrow access
? Open access increases visibility & impact
14
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Preconditions for Change
Sine quibus non for change—
? Demonstrate benefits of Open Access to 
authors & other stakeholders
? Establish viable business models capable 
of sustaining Open Access 
15
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Visibility Beyond Library
Researcher awareness & activism—
? Faculty reaction to “Big Deals”—Cornell, 
Harvard, TRLN all rejected Elsevier bundles
? Growth in OA journals—launch of PLOS; 
growth of BMC
“ [‘Big Deal’] is not sustainable at all. 
Nobody can pay for it.”
Biology Professor
University of North Carolina
16
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Visibility Beyond Library
Open Access in the News—
? Wall Street Journal cites Open Access as one 
of top 10 health stories of 2003 (30/12/03)
? Nature includes the rise of Open Access 
among 5 major science stories of 2003 (18/12/03)
? Science Magazine lists Open Access among 7 
“breakthroughs” of 2003 (19/12/03)
? The Scientist includes Open Access among 5 
major science stories of 2003 (15/12/03)
17
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Indicators of Market Impact
Outsell—
“ . . . The Open Access movement is 
consolidating into a serious force…. It’s 
here to stay.”
18
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Indicators of Market Impact
Outsell—
“ . . . The Open Access movement is 
consolidating into a serious force…. It’s 
here to stay.”
“…gaining legitimacy.”
19
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Indicators of Market Impact
Outsell—
“ . . . The Open Access movement is 
consolidating into a serious force…. It’s 
here to stay.”
“…gaining legitimacy.”
“…it may already be too late”—for 
commercial STM publishers
20
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Indicators of Market Impact
Financial Analyst Warnings—
? WSJ cites the threat posed by Open 
Access to RE’s pricing power 
? Stock decline also attributed to 
competition from BMC
? Goldman, Citigroup Smith Barney & BNP 
Paribas downgrade Reed Elsevier due to 
concerns over long-term pricing power
21
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Government Attention
Increased Governmental Attention—
? U.K. Science & Technology Committee 
Inquiry into Scientific Publications
? “Public Access to Science” Act 
introduced to U.S. Congress 
22
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Institutional Repositories
? Increasing number of implementations 
? National initiatives in support of 
repositories also growing—
? DARE in the Netherlands
? SHERPA in the U.K.
? Australian Department of Education, Science 
& Training
23
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Increased Visibility & Benefits
1) Demonstrate benefits of Open Access to 
authors & other stakeholders 
? Increased faculty awareness
? Growing public awareness
? Mounting financial impact
? Beginnings of government attention
? Spread of institutional repositories
24
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Second Precondition for Change
Sine qua non for change—
2) Establish viable business models 
capable of sustaining Open Access
25
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Second Precondition for Change
Sine qua non for change—
2) Establish viable business models 
capable of sustaining Open Access
? Professional advancement for authors
? Access to knowledge for researchers
? Informs promotion decisions for institutions
? Allows societies to serve their members
26
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
? Input-side fees—article publication fees 
— publication funded by grant or 
institutional support
27
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
? Input-side fees—article publication fees 
— publication funded by grant or 
institutional support
? Sponsorships & advertising
28
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
? Input-side fees—article publication fees 
— publication funded by grant or 
institutional support
? Sponsorships & advertising
? Differentiated print & online versions —
open access online & fee-based print 
version
29
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
? Input-side fees—article publication fees 
— publication funded by grant or 
institutional support
? Sponsorships & advertising
? Differentiated print & online versions —
open access online & fee-based print 
version
? Convenience format licenses, data re-
purposing
30
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
? Input-side fees—article publication fees —
publication funded by grant or institutional 
support
? Sponsorships & advertising
? Differentiated print & online versions — open 
access online & fee-based print version
? Convenience format licenses, data re-purposing
? Subsidies from member dues allocations, grants, 
donations, in-kind contributions 
31
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Impediments to new models—
32
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Impediments to new models—
? Innate conservatism
33
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models 
Impediments to new models—
? Innate conservatism
? Need for active vs passive model
34
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Impediments to new models—
? Innate conservatism
? Need for active vs passive model
? Lack of resources for change
35
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Impediments to new models—
? Innate conservatism
? Need for active vs passive model
? Lack of resources
? Complex variety in practice
36
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Increase in input-side funding
37
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Increase in input-side funding:
? Howard Hughes Medical Institute
38
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Increase in input-side funding:
? Howard Hughes Medical Institute
? Wellcome Trust
39
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Increase in input-side funding:
? Howard Hughes Medical Institute
? Wellcome Trust
? Berlin Declaration on Open Access
40
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Increase in input-side funding:
? Howard Hughes Medical Institute
? Wellcome Trust
? Berlin Declaration on Open Access
? JISC funding
41
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Increase in input-side funding:
? Howard Hughes Medical Institute
? Wellcome Trust
? Berlin Declaration on Open Access
? JISC funding
? OECD Policy Declaration
42
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
Open Access transitions include:
? American Physiological Society
? Company of Biologists
? Oxford University Press
? National Institutes of Health
43
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Open Access Business Models
OSI Business Planning Guides
SPARC supporting transition planning
? Institute of Mathematical Statistics
? Online Journal of Issues in Nursing
? Water Quality Research Journal
? “Next Steps” program
44
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Take the Long View
45
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
Take the Long View
Herbert Von de Sompel
Carl Lagoze
OAI
46
w
w
w
.
a
r
l
.
o
r
g
/
s
p
a
r
c
For an ongoing chronicle—
The SPARC Open Access Newsletter
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/
&
Open Access News
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html
By Peter Suber


English

Half full: the improving state of scholarly publishing

E-LIS

1www.arl.org/sparcScholarly Publishing & Academic Resources CoalitionAn initiative of the Association of Research LibrariesHalf Full: The Improving State of Scholarly Publishing3rd Workshop on the Open Archives Initiative February 12-14, 2004 Raym Crow • Senior ConsultantSPARC Consulting Group2www.arl.org/sparcOur goal . . .Provide some evidence for evaluating: ? Is the state of scholarly publishing improving—or getting worse?3www.arl.org/sparcOur goal . . .Provide some context for evaluating: ? Is the state of scholarly publishing improving—or getting worse?In other words:? Are Open Access initiatives having any impact on scholarly publishing?4www.arl.org/sparcA Matter of PerspectiveIs the glass half empty?? The pace of change in scholarly publishing is agonizingly slow & relatively slight.5www.arl.org/sparcA Matter of Perspective  The glass half full—? The various initiatives are having a cumulative effect & are gaining momentum.6www.arl.org/sparcHalf EmptyBut first, the bad news—7www.arl.org/sparcHalf Empty? Commercial consolidation8www.arl.org/sparcHalf Empty? Commercial consolidation? Commercial earnings9www.arl.org/sparcHalf Empty? Commercial consolidation? Commercial earnings? Bundling & price increases10www.arl.org/sparcHalf Empty? Commercial consolidation? Commercial earnings? Bundling & price increasesOpen Access threat to Science Direct: “. . . a lot of noise”11www.arl.org/sparcEven Bad News May Be Good? Couldn’t ask for a better environment for change: ? Library budget situation getting worse—renders current situation untenable? Higher education in financial straits—forces university administrators to confront systemic issues? Large STM publishers continue to merge—waving flags at regulators12www.arl.org/sparcPreconditions for ChangeSine quibus non for change—13www.arl.org/sparcPreconditions for ChangeSine quibus non for change—? Demonstrate benefits of Open Access to authors & other stakeholders? Gated models narrow access? Open access increases visibility & impact14www.arl.org/sparcPreconditions for ChangeSine quibus non for change—? Demonstrate benefits of Open Access to authors & other stakeholders? Establish viable business models capable of sustaining Open Access 15www.arl.org/sparcVisibility Beyond LibraryResearcher awareness & activism—? Faculty reaction to “Big Deals”—Cornell, Harvard, TRLN all rejected Elsevier bundles? Growth in OA journals—launch of PLOS; growth of BMC“ [‘Big Deal’] is not sustainable at all. Nobody can pay for it.”Biology ProfessorUniversity of North Carolina16www.arl.org/sparcVisibility Beyond LibraryOpen Access in the News—? Wall Street Journal cites Open Access as one of top 10 health stories of 2003 (30/12/03)? Nature includes the rise of Open Access among 5 major science stories of 2003 (18/12/03)? Science Magazine lists Open Access among 7 “breakthroughs” of 2003 (19/12/03)? The Scientist includes Open Access among 5 major science stories of 2003 (15/12/03)17www.arl.org/sparcIndicators of Market ImpactOutsell—“ . . . The Open Access movement is consolidating into a serious force…. It’s here to stay.”18www.arl.org/sparcIndicators of Market ImpactOutsell—“ . . . The Open Access movement is consolidating into a serious force…. It’s here to stay.”“…gaining legitimacy.”19www.arl.org/sparcIndicators of Market ImpactOutsell—“ . . . The Open Access movement is consolidating into a serious force…. It’s here to stay.”“…gaining legitimacy.”“…it may already be too late”—for commercial STM publishers20www.arl.org/sparcIndicators of Market ImpactFinancial Analyst Warnings—? WSJ cites the threat posed by Open Access to RE’s pricing power ? Stock decline also attributed to competition from BMC? Goldman, Citigroup Smith Barney & BNP Paribas downgrade Reed Elsevier due to concerns over long-term pricing power21www.arl.org/sparcGovernment AttentionIncreased Governmental Attention—? U.K. Science & Technology Committee Inquiry into Scientific Publications? “Public Access to Science” Act introduced to U.S. Congress 22www.arl.org/sparcInstitutional Repositories? Increasing number of implementations ? National initiatives in support of repositories also growing—? DARE in the Netherlands? SHERPA in the U.K.? Australian Department of Education, Science & Training23www.arl.org/sparcIncreased Visibility & Benefits1) Demonstrate benefits of Open Access to authors & other stakeholders ? Increased faculty awareness? Growing public awareness? Mounting financial impact? Beginnings of government attention? Spread of institutional repositories24www.arl.org/sparcSecond Precondition for ChangeSine qua non for change—2) Establish viable business models capable of sustaining Open Access25www.arl.org/sparcSecond Precondition for ChangeSine qua non for change—2) Establish viable business models capable of sustaining Open Access? Professional advancement for authors? Access to knowledge for researchers? Informs promotion decisions for institutions? Allows societies to serve their members26www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business Models? Input-side fees—article publication fees — publication funded by grant or institutional support27www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business Models? Input-side fees—article publication fees — publication funded by grant or institutional support? Sponsorships & advertising28www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business Models? Input-side fees—article publication fees — publication funded by grant or institutional support? Sponsorships & advertising? Differentiated print & online versions —open access online & fee-based print version29www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business Models? Input-side fees—article publication fees — publication funded by grant or institutional support? Sponsorships & advertising? Differentiated print & online versions —open access online & fee-based print version? Convenience format licenses, data re-purposing30www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business Models? Input-side fees—article publication fees —publication funded by grant or institutional support? Sponsorships & advertising? Differentiated print & online versions — open access online & fee-based print version? Convenience format licenses, data re-purposing? Subsidies from member dues allocations, grants, donations, in-kind contributions 31www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsImpediments to new models—32www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsImpediments to new models—? Innate conservatism33www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business Models Impediments to new models—? Innate conservatism? Need for active vs passive model34www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsImpediments to new models—? Innate conservatism? Need for active vs passive model? Lack of resources for change35www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsImpediments to new models—? Innate conservatism? Need for active vs passive model? Lack of resources? Complex variety in practice36www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsIncrease in input-side funding37www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsIncrease in input-side funding:? Howard Hughes Medical Institute38www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsIncrease in input-side funding:? Howard Hughes Medical Institute? Wellcome Trust39www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsIncrease in input-side funding:? Howard Hughes Medical Institute? Wellcome Trust? Berlin Declaration on Open Access40www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsIncrease in input-side funding:? Howard Hughes Medical Institute? Wellcome Trust? Berlin Declaration on Open Access? JISC funding41www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsIncrease in input-side funding:? Howard Hughes Medical Institute? Wellcome Trust? Berlin Declaration on Open Access? JISC funding? OECD Policy Declaration42www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsOpen Access transitions include:? American Physiological Society? Company of Biologists? Oxford University Press? National Institutes of Health43www.arl.org/sparcOpen Access Business ModelsOSI Business Planning GuidesSPARC supporting transition planning? Institute of Mathematical Statistics? Online Journal of Issues in Nursing? Water Quality Research Journal? “Next Steps” program44www.arl.org/sparcTake the Long View45www.arl.org/sparcTake the Long ViewHerbert Von de SompelCarl LagozeOAI46www.arl.org/sparcFor an ongoing chronicle—The SPARC Open Access Newsletterhttp://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/&Open Access Newshttp://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.htmlBy Peter Suber

http://eprints.rclis.org/4589/1/Crow1302.pdf

Half full: the improving state of scholarly publishing

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

E-LIS repository

E-LIS