From: Irene Perciali <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 20:06:49 -0800
To reply to Joe:
> I don't think there is a place for libraries here, at least not over
> the long term.
Libraries are discovering quite a significant place for themselves,
and one that shows signs of sustained growth. I'm referring to
libraries that offer journal publishing services. According to the
IMLS-funded "Library Publishing Services: Strategies for Success"
report, 55% of libraries already offer or want to offer publishing
services (http://wp.sparc.arl.org/lps). Looking at Digital Commons
sites alone, there are over 400 library-published journals, and we
typically see about 10-20 new ones per month. The vast majority of
these journals are open access journals; some have (extremely
low-cost) subscriptions. Often they are published on behalf of small
societies, turning a low-circulation subscription print journal into
an open access online one.
It's early days still, but we're starting to see evidence that this
model is starting to make inroads in the commercial market, publishing
journals that would otherwise end up behind a toll wall or with a
publisher that charges commercial-level author fees. Even short of
that, I think it's already clear that library publishing services
provide a welcome home for journals that simply could not exist
otherwise: for example, those in fields that lack grant money for
author fees, or those in emerging fields where commercial publishers
can't afford to take a risk.
And, in reply to this:
> Of course, they may choose not to compete; they may choose to get the
> faculty senate to mandate that authors at their institution use the
> library's service first. This would be an enforced monopoly. The
> service level would be comparable to what you get at the Division of
> Motor Vehicles.
No mandates, but the service level of library publishing has been
extraordinary. Ask any editor who felt frustrated with slow turnaround
time and high costs, was turned away by a commercial publisher because
the journal could not prove that it could earn $50,000/year in
subscriptions or author fees (and that's on the low side), and was
able to walk to their library, get help, develop a journal site and
online peer review workflow, begin publishing, and see their
readership increase many times over, at no cost. Libraries have gotten
tremendous appreciation from their campuses -- faculty and
administration -- for offering publishing services, and word is
spreading fast.
Irene Perciali, Ph.D.
Director of Strategic Initiatives
Berkeley Electronic Press
[log in to unmask]
510-665-1200 X108
digitalcommons.bepress.com
bepress: the frontier of scholarly publishing since 1999
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:25 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 17:17:13 -0800
>
> I don't think there is a place for libraries here, at least not over
> the long term. The author-pays world is getting competitive. In
> addition to PLOS, Hindawi, and BioMed Central, we have services from
> (among others) Wiley and Sage, and odd hybrids ("cascading peer
> review") at BMJ. And let's not forget the advent of the service by
> scientists for scientists (but not assuredly by or for economists)
> eLife, which is proposing to charge no author fees--until they figure
> out a business model. So you will have downward pricing pressure
> even as the need to provide enhanced services grows. How can
> libraries compete here?
>
> Of course, they may choose not to compete; they may choose to get the
> faculty senate to mandate that authors at their institution use the
> library's service first. This would be an enforced monopoly. The
> service level would be comparable to what you get at the Division of
> Motor Vehicles.
>
> There was an earlier comment on this thread (which I lost, alas) to
> the effect that one way to build an author-pays service is with a fee
> for submission rather than for publication. This is a great idea, and
> in a world without ruinous competition (John D. Rockefeller's phrase),
> it would work beautifully, as it aligns the cost to authors with the
> actual cost of delivering the service. But what happens when your
> competitor offers a free Christmas promotion? Of if eLife takes 10
> years to figure out a business model? In a competitive market, you
> can never be smarter than your stupidest competitor, and if that
> competitor wants to give away the store, I can see your store loaded
> onto someone else's truck.
>
> Joe Esposito
>
|
