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