From: "Armbruster, Chris" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 04:42:02 -0800

Some reflections on the meaning of usage-based pricing, how it could
work, what some benefits/risks might be and on why the libraries are
the key agent if it is to happen.

1. Usage-based pricing (or payment) would make scholarly publishing
more similar to trade publishing (i.e. number of purchases of any
title). Also, usage based-pricing could be seen as subscription
equivalent to article processing charges (making it interesting for
publishers who have SB and OA offerings, allowing for the development
of an integrated pricing model). Moreover, it would move scholarly
publishing closer to higher education publishing (i.e. course packs,
textbooks etc.), for which usage is key. In fact, HEI have lots of
experience with usage-based purchasing, not just digital, but also
historically, e.g. the university bookshop saw lots of 'usage-based'
purchasing when students queued up for the recommended literature.

2. It is often said that scholarly publishing is (so very) different,
but usage-based pricing does not preclude access to the whole body of
literature (in fact, it might make it easier, as contracts can be had
with all and any publishers, based on usage, with a cap imposed by the
library budget). Also, usage-based pricing does not need to be at the
dis/advantage of certain fields, because a field normalized (usage)
metric can be developed, which weighs usage according to the size of
the field (and usage habits) - akin to the weighing of citation
metrics. Indeed, it should be easy to commission researchers to
developed a such a field normalized usage metrics (and the libraries
should be doing the commissioning if a broad alliance is not
possible).

3. Libraries are probably the stakeholder that would benefit most
clearly from usage-based pricing because it can now offer scholars and
students access to all the literature (instead of selected bundles).
Also, it re-establishes libraries as serious partners in scholarly
communication (instead of as paymaster) because usage measurements
will facilitate innovation (e.g. within research fields, unused
journals will cease to exist and new ones emerge). Most publishers
will need to adapt to usage-based pricing, but some are doing it
already and all but the very largest ones (the top-two SB publishers
with their own platform) will probably benefit because it helps them
to restructure their portfolio. Even the two largest SB publishers
(who benefit from big deals) can probably adjust their business model,
and have the capacity to buy or add highly-used journals. There will
be losers, of course: societies and scholars (editors) that have been
able to hide low-usage journals in big deals. Also, intermediaries
that sell bundles will have adjustment costs.

4. I am amazed somewhat that libraries have not been able to sit down
together and develop a national or international usage-based pricing
model. Of all the actions that libraries might take to serve their
patrons and improve their position (finances, standing, influence) the
pursuit of usage-based pricing would seem the most rewarding and also
the easiest to achieve (compared, for example, to building and
populating thousands of repositories).

Chris Armbruster