scholarly communication David Prosser and Paul Ayris ACRL/SPARC Forum explores open access models The future of scholarly publishing
ver the past seven years, SPARC (the Schol searchers (Nobelist Harold Varmus, Pat Brown, Oarly Publishing and Academic Resources and Michael Eisen) with the aim of publishing Coalition) and the ACRL Scholarly Communi journals that would rival the highest quality cations Committee have hosted a forum ex existing titles. PLoS Biology was launched in ploring scholarly communication issues at the 2003, with PLoS Medicine following a year later. ALA meetings. This June in Washington, D.C., Both quickly established themselves among the three open access publishers were invited to best journals in their fields with extensive media provide a “course check” and to discuss issues coverage of their papers and highimpact fac of sustainability. tors. The two PLoS titles effectively put to rest Alma Swan of Key Perspectives set the scene the myth that open access was incompatible and chaired the session. She reminded us that with high quality. However, quality comes at a there are just over 2,500 open access journals price, and these journals, with their high rejec currently published (approximately 10 percent tion rates and extensive front matter, are not of the total number of peerreviewed scholarly cheap to produce. titles) operating on a variety of business mod In 2005 PLoS launched a series of three els—from sponsorship to article processing “community” journals. Still high quality, these charges. journals do not have the same level of editorial content as the two flagship titles. However, they PLoS beginnings have also quickly established their importance in The first of the publishers to speak was Mark the literature, with significant impact factors. Patterson, director of publishing for the Public Finally, Patterson introduced us to PLoS One, Library of Science (PLoS). Patterson started by a new approach to journal publishing that he making the important point that open access would fit well with current Web 2.0 thinking. is not the same as free access. Open access PLoS One is inclusive in scope (covering all involves removing permission barriers as well subject areas) and has a peerreview process that as access barriers. PLoS journals publish material focuses on the technical quality of the paper, under a Creative Commons attribution license, streamline production, and an environment that which allows for unlimited reuse (for translating, encourages community discussion and annota data and text mining, copying, etc.), while ensur tion of papers ing that the authors receive acknowledgement Having introduced the publishing portfolio, for their research. This attitude is in marked Patterson addressed the issue of fi nancial sus contrast to “traditional” publishers who seek to tainability. This question has followed all new control (and, in effect, limit) the dissemination open access publishing ventures. Patterson, of research through the use of copyright and exclusive licenses. David Prosser is director of SPARC Europe, e-mail: Patterson went on to describe the founding [email protected]; Paul Ayris is director of University College London Library Services and UCL and development of PLoS. The organization copyright offi cer, e-mail: [email protected] was conceived by three leading biomedical re © 2007 David Prosser and Paul Ayris
C&RL News September 2007 518 along with all the speakers, was very open about He also highlighted the role libraries have in sustainability. He helpfully split the PLoS portfo awareness, advocacy, and education: highlight lio into three strands, to match the three types ing the value of open access journals; profi ling of publishing product offered by PLoS: PLoS scholars who are publishing in open access; One has been sustainable since birth with the helping faculty with copyright issues; and pro $1,250 per article publication charge covering moting copyright addenda, allowing scholars costs; the community journals are approaching to retain the right to deposit their papers in sustainability; the fl agship journals are not able institutional repositories. to support themselves on publication charges alone, but need additional support. Of course, BioMed Central having sponsorships and grants as part of the The second speaker was Bryan Vickery, deputy revenue stream is perfectly acceptable and publisher for BioMed Central (BMC), a commer does not mean a lack of sustainability. It will cial venture, which launched its first open access almost certainly be the case that open access journal in 2000 and is now the largest open journals will exist on mixed revenue streams access publisher. It has published more than (as “subscription” journals do at the moment) 25,000 papers, with 10,000 of them appearing in and sponsorship and grants may always be part 2007, showing, once again, tremendous growth, of that mix. with all papers appearing under a Creative Com The PLoS journals have seen a constant rise mons license. Of the almost 200 journals BMC in the number of submissions, approximately publishes, 60 are part of the BMCseries run by doubling each year, and it appears that the pub an inhouse editorial team and 100 are inde lication payments are not a major deterrent in pendent, run by external groups of scientists. the biomedical fields, with a payment rate in the Following the success of BMC, new subject areas range 80 to 90 percent for all of the journals. are being explored with the launch of Chemistry One question that always arises in discus Central and PhysMath Central. sions about open access is “With no subscription As with the PLoS journals, BMC titles are charges to pay, what is the role of the library?” publishing highquality papers, with many of PLoS has a membership program, which allows the BMC journals in the top ten of their ISI libraries to demonstrate support for open access categories, and some, like the Malaria Journal, and build collaborative relationships between are at the top of their category. the institutions and publisher. In return for mem The main revenue stream for the BMC jour bership, authors at the member institutes receive nals is article processing charges, which vary a 10 percent publishing discount. Interestingly, by journal but are typically $1,500 per paper. Patterson said that in his view membership BMC also operates two membership schemes: was not a longterm solution, but a transition an institutional (prepay) membership, where the mechanism in the move towards open access. institution covers the cost of the article processes
PERIODICALS SERVICE COMPANY are pleased to announce the agreement with Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.
to manage backstock and supply originals or reprints of out-of-print journals older than the current and previous two years. For a list:
www.periodicals.com/palgravemac.html
To contact us: 11, Main Street, Germantown, NY 12526 Phone: 518 537 4700 Fax: 518 537 5899 E-mail: [email protected]
September 2007 519 C&RL News charges (at a reduced rate) and a supporter created to pay for open access (out of grant membership that gives authors a discount on overheads and specific publishing fees) and the cost. For BMC the payment rate is about 80 should the library play any part in the manage percent and with current growth rates they hope ment of such funds? Vickery was sure that the to break even this year. funds should be created, but left the role of Vickery compared these costs to publish the library in their management open. He did, in a BMC journal with some evidence from however, make the point that one advantage Oxford University Press (OUP) that showed of such a central fund would be that it could that for one of their subscription titles OUP be used to pay publication charges on behalf was receiving $3,000 to $4,000 per article. (The of authors. title in question, Nucleic Acids Research, has One example presented where this has hap since gone open access.) Vickery’s contention pened is Nottingham University in the United is that the lack of a true market in scholarly Kingdom. This year, a central fund of £20,000 communications under the subscription mod ($40,000) has been created from indirect grant els results in the community overpaying. Lack costs to pay publication charges, with the fund of a functioning market may also mean that being open to all potential authors, whether publishers have less pressure to keep costs funded or not. Nottingham hopes that this will down. BMC, like PLoS, is a new publisher with allow for better management of open access no legacy systems or procedures. Therefore, costs by the institution. Obviously £20,000 they have been able to look at the process of ($40,000) is not a huge sum of money, but the online publishing afresh and use technology to intention is that it will grow as more authors ensure that costs are low. As more publishers move towards open access and future subscrip move to article processing charges, it may be tions may be cancelled to help the growth of that the costs per paper will become increasingly the fund. important, and a true market will develop. In Vickery left us with a number of important that case, the publishers who can contain costs takehome messages. The first was that open will have an advantage. access is not smallscale anymore, proved by In describing the library’s role in the open ac the shear number of papers published by BMC cess future, Vickery suggested that there would and its imminent move to profitability. There will be a move from acquisition to dissemination. be an increasing demand for funding and the The library would no longer act as a “fi lter” of need to work with administrators and funders information, based party on finances, but would to ensure readiness. Vickery believes that the manage the dissemination of an institution’s library community has an important role to play research output, perhaps through the manage in the creation of central publishing funds and ment of an institutional repository. a level playing field for open access journals As open access and article processing and a strategy is needed for the migration from charges become more widespread, a question subscriptions. for the library is whether it should become, or wants to become, involved in the management Hindawi Publishing Corporation of central funds to pay for processing charges. The last speaker was Paul Peters (head of busi Is this something that is only the concern of vice ness development at the Hindawi Publishing presidents of research? Should central funds be Corporation). Hindawi was launched in 1997 as a subscription publisher, but it quickly found Learn more . . . that although it excelled at attracting authors, it Visit the SPARC/ACRL forum podcast, was not attracting subscribers. In 2004 Hindawi “Course check: A conversation with three decided to experiment with open access with a open access publishers about the challeng move to total open access in 2007. Its portfolio es of sustainability,” at www.arl.org/sparc of journals receives approximately 500 submis /meetings/ala07/. sions a month (a figure that is growing by about
C&RL News September 2007 520 60 percent per year) and reject, on average, portant as the market becomes more functional. 57 percent of papers. Hindawi charges $700 All three publishers have also seen tremendous to $800 per article on average and has already increases in the number of papers submitted broken even. – far above the 3 percent annual growth seen in Peterson made clear that existing models, the scholarly literature in general. And all three such as “the big deal,” favor the existing play publishers are marching steadily and fi rmly ers. A new journal included by a large publisher towards sustainability. in a big deal will immediately get a signifi cant audience. In this environment, a new journal The role of the library from a small publisher will find it much harder The final, unanswered question remains the role to gain that audience. He observed that this of the library within an open access journal envi anticompetitive model does no service to the ronment. It is unclear what role the library wants academic community. Peterson’s contention is to take or will be able to take. Librarians can that any new model must match the person certainly promote open access journals to our who pays with the service provided (so that “he faculty (for example, by including records from who pays the piper calls the tune”), must have the Directory of Open Access Journals (www. visible costs (at the moment most researchers doaj.org) in local catalogs) and help faculty to do not have any idea of the costs of the journals launch open access journals. Librarians can they submit their work to or read), and must work with administrators, funding bodies, and allow smaller publishers to compete equally. politicians to put in place robust open access He sees a role for libraries in developing new policies that help us to meet the information models that facilitate pricebased competition need of our researcher. They can host and man and in providing funds for authors with limited age institutional repositories to showcase the resources. For a competitive and effi cient mar intellectual wealth of institutions to the world. ket will give better services, lower prices, and However, the role in terms of article processing greater sustainability. charge funding is up for grabs. The similarities between all three publish There is a danger that if the library com ers were striking. There was a strong focus on munity shuns this responsibility, then it will quality and author services. There was a real become sidelined in future debates regarding ization that technology must be used to reduce open access journals. If it accepts it (as with Not costs and to strip away legacy systems. One of tingham University and others) the library could the great challenges for traditional publishers, cement its position as a central and integral part especially society publishers, will be to take a of the scholarly communication process. The long, hard look at what they do and why they environment is evolving, as Alma Swan noted, do it, and to see what the market really needs and the role of the library must evolve with it from them. Costs will become increasingly im to stay relevant.
PERIODICALS SERVICE COMPANY & SPRINGER
We are pleased to announce our journal stock management agreement with Springer. For a list of Springer journals for which we now reprint all out-of-print volumes and back issues please visit:
www.periodicals.com/springer.html
11, Main Street, Germantown, NY 12526 Phone: 518 537 4700 Fax: 518 537 5899 E-mail: [email protected]
September 2007 521 C&RL News