Crisis? What Crisis? Understanding the “Crisis in Scholarly Communication”

John Barnett, University of PittsburghTom Reinsfelder, Penn State Mont Alto

October 21, 2013 1

Defining the CrisisThe Library Perspective

◦Growth rate of scholarly output More government funding for research More scholarship More Journals

◦Increases in subscriptions rates

◦An Unsustainable Environment No library can afford all the journals it

needs 2

Growth in scholarly publishing

≈50 million research articles published 1665-2009

≈1.35 million scientific journal articles published per year (2006 est.)

Average number of science articles per journal increased from 185 to 273 from 1990 to 2009

Number of scientific articles indexed by ISI was <600,000 in 1990 & >1 million in 2009 – a rise of 72%

Sources: Jinha, (2010), Bjork, et al. (2009), & Jump (2010).

3

What do serial subscriptions cost?Columbia University

◦ 111,774 titles◦ $14,870,587 ◦ $133 per title avg

Penn State ◦ 67,202 titles◦ $12,527,142 ◦ $186 per title avg

Median ◦ 61,566 titles◦ $7,192,136◦ $117 per title avg

Georgia Tech◦ 12,369 titles◦ $4,470,959 ◦ $361 per title avg

Source: 2010/11 Association of Research Statistics 4

5

Concentration of ownership

6

“Reed Elsevier (RUK) is the world's largest publisher of academic journals, with more than 1,200 scholarly titles.

The publishing division operates at a 36% profit margin - an outstanding margin for any business”

thestreet.com - 5/30/12

7

Reaching a Breaking Point

Libraries are forced to make some difficult decisions◦ACS Journals cancelled by SUNY Pottsdam (2012)

◦Univ of CA system threatened to drop Nature journals  (2010)

8

One possible solution . . .

Open Access Week October 21-27, 2013

openaccessweek.org9

Open access literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.

Peter Suber, Open Access. MIT Press. 2012

10

Open Access is Compatible with…Peer reviewPromotion and tenure criteriaCopyright lawRevenue and profitsAny genre or format

Open Access does not …Mean low qualityViolate copyrightReduce author choice or academic freedom

11

Maintaining Peer Review & QualityJust as with traditional journals,

Open Access journal quality varies widely

Some are simply looking to profit from author fees

Must watch Out for “Predatory OA Publishers”

12

scholarlyoa.com/publishers

13

In the news: OA “sting” operationBohannon, J. (2013, Oct.).

Who’s Afraid of Peer Review? Science 342(6154).

Submitted fake/poorly conceived science manuscripts to 304 OA journals

157 journals accepted paper, many “with no sign of peer review”

Criticized for no control group of non-OA journals

14

15

Reinsfelder (2012). Open access publishing practices in a complex environment. Journal of Librarianship & Scholarly Communication

What influence do library directors perceive each stakeholder group as holding in the transition toward open access?

Librarians .7056Faculty Researchers .3792Academic Administrators .1881Publishers -.3684

Source: Reinsfelder & Anderson (2013)16

Scholarly PublishingEach key stakeholder group relies

on the others.  Let’s look at scholarly publishing

from the perspective of:◦Librarians◦Authors◦Publishers◦Administrators

17

LibrariansAccess providers & preservers of knowledgeWant greater access & lower costsSome are very involved, while others remain

less aware of scholarly publishing issuesMust constantly evolve and adapt (new

services)Depend on services of publishers

◦Some examples of new initiatives: Library as Publisher (repositories/journals/digital collections) Initiatives to raise awareness about:

Open access Authors rights / copyright

18

Academic AuthorsProducers of scholarly knowledgeNot in it for financial gain

◦Rewarded by exposure / recognitionInterested in journal prestige/qualityPrefer to access journals electronically Increasingly aware of pricing issues &

new publishing opportunities, but overall awareness is still low

Many do not perceive a need for change

19

What are Authors Doing?

Publishing articles in OA journals Serving as editors/reviewers for OA

journalsSelf Archiving (making their non-OA

articles available in repositories)Adopting OA PoliciesProducing scholarly work in non-

traditional formats (images, audio, data) Applying Creative Commons licenses to

works

20

Faculty Adopted Open Access Policies

Institution-wide policesCollege or departmental policies

Bucknell UniversityDuke UniversityEmory UniversityLafayette CollegeMassachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)Oberlin CollegePrinceton UniversityRollins CollegeTrinity UniversityUniversity of California, San FranciscoUniversity of Hawaii-ManoaUniversity of KansasUniversity of Massachusetts Medical SchoolUniversity of North TexasUtah State University

Arizona State University LibrariesBrigham Young University: Department of Instructional Psychology and Technology; University LibraryColumbia University: Lamont -Doherty Earth Observatory; University LibrariesGustavus Adolphus College LibraryHarvard University: Business School, Divinity School, Law School, Graduate School of Design, Graduate School of Education, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, John F. Kennedy School of GovernmentIndiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) LibraryMiami University of Ohio, LibrariesOregon State University: Library FacultyStanford University: School of EducationUniversity of Northern Colorado Library FacultyUniversity of Oregon: Department of Romance Languages; Library FacultyUniversity of Puerto Rico School Of LawWake Forest University: Z. Smith Reynolds Library Faculty

Source: http://roarmap.eprints.org 21

Faculty OA Policy Features University is granted non-exclusive right to post online for

open access all scholarly work written by the researcher.

Faculty members retain the copyright to these articles and can turn copyright over to a third party, such as a publisher.

Faculty are discouraged from signing publishing contracts that forbid open access posting but usually receive an exception from the policy if needed.

A single institutional repository service is designated as the official distribution site for the faculty works.

Green OA – refers to faculty sharing their work online (pre- or post-print). An alternative to Gold OA (oa journals)

22

What about Students?

Student JournalsElectronic theses and

dissertations (including honors theses)

PortfoliosJoint research with faculty

23

Publishers (distributors)

Motivated to produce revenue and/or profit Need a sustainable business model   Very aware of current publishing

environment, including OA Experimentation with new services &

business models New relationships with authors & librarians Many traditional (subscription-based)

publishers offer hybrid OA options (author pays)

Some OA journals charge a fee

24

Administrators (funders, policy makers) Want to share knowledge produced at their

institution & raise institution’s reputation/status Not opposed to new forms of scholarship, as

long as quality is maintained Feel librarians must compete for resources

along with others on campus Have a general awareness of issues facing

libraries, but library problems are often not the top priority

Can support more open scholarly publishing by Providing policy support Offering $$ for OA initiatives publication fees / repositories / staff

25

Open Access Funds for Researchers

University of CalgaryUniversity of California, BerkeleyColumbia UniversityCornell UniversityDartmouth UniversityDuke UniversityUniversity of FloridaGrand Valley State UniversityHarvard UniversityMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterMichigan State UniversityUniversity of Michigan

University of North Carolina, Chapel HillOntario Genomics InstituteUniversity of OregonUniversity of OttawaSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of PittsburghUniversity of Tennessee, KnoxvilleTexas A&M UniversityUniversity of TorontoTufts UniversityUniversity of UtahWake Forest UniversityUniversity of Wisconsin

Help pay author publishing charges for peer-reviewed OA journals

Some institutions with OA funds:

26

Federal Policies & Laws

National Institutes of Health Public Access Policy (2008)“all investigators funded by the NIH submit ...to the National

Library of Medicine’s PubMed Central an electronic version of their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication”

Fair Access to Science & Technology Research Act H.R. 708 (Introduced Feb. 2013)

would require federal agencies with annual extramural research budgets of $100 million or more to provide the public with online access to research manuscripts stemming from funded research no later than six months after publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

27

White House Directive Mandating OA – Feb 22, 2013

• Directs federal agencies to develop OA policies within the next 6 months.  

• Covers the same agencies covered in FASTR and about a dozen more.

• Takes effect immediately.

28

“The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) hereby directs each Federal agency with over $100 million in annual conduct of research and development expenditures to develop a plan to support increased public access to the results of research funded by the Federal Government.

This includes any results published in peer-reviewed scholarly publications that are based on research that directly arises from Federal funds”

White House Directive Mandating OA – Feb 22, 2013

29

State LegislationIllinois

“Open Access to Research Articles Act”Passed August 9, 2013

“By January 1, 2014, each public university shall establish an Open Access to Research Task Force.”

“The task force shall review current practices and design a proposed policy regarding open access to research articles, based on criteria that are specific to each public university's needs.”

30

On or before January 1, 2015, each task force shall adopt a report setting forth its findings and recommendations. These recommendations shall include a detailed description of any open access policy the task force recommends that the public university or State adopt, as well as, in the case of the public university, a plan for implementation.

31

DiscussionWhat can we do?

◦As individuals?

◦At our institutions?

◦Collectively within our state or region?

32

OA Week at PittLibrary kickoff event in early-mid

October1-3 programs related to

OA/scholarly communication featuring outside speakers◦Copyright◦OA policies◦Altmetrics◦Journal publishing

33

Cookies and Swag

34

Recommended Reading

“Open Access should be required reading for everyone involved in the publishing cycle – from authors to publishers…and general readers.

Everyone who reads this volume will gain a better understanding and appreciation of OA”

(Choice Reviews, Feb 2013)

35

The Real Crisis…

We have the ability to provide greater access to scholarly work, but much of what academics produce remains available only to subscribers, due primarily to author unawareness or apathy.

36

Key References Beall, J. (2013). Beall’s list: Potential, possible, or probable, predatory open-access

scholarly publishers. http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers   Bjork, B., Roos, A., and Lauri, M. (2009). Scientific journal publishing: Yearly

volume and open access availability. Information Research 14(1), paper 391. http://InformationR.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html

  Bohannon, J. (2013, Oct.). Who’s Afraid of Peer Review? Science 342(6154). 60-65.

doi: 10.1126/science.342.6154.60  Howard, J. (2010, June 8). U. of California tries just saying no to rising journal costs.

Chronicle of Higher Education. https://chronicle.com/article/U-of-California-Tries-Just/65823/

Jinha, A. (2010). Article 50 million: an estimate of the number of scholarly articles in existence. Learned Publishing 23(2), 258-263. doi:10.1087/20100308 

Jump, P. (2010). The expanding universe of scientific authorship. Times Higher Education Supplement (8 July 2010), 10.

Kyrillidou, M., Morris, S., & Roebuck, G. (2012) ARL Statistics 2010-2011. Washington: Association of Research Libraries. http://publications.arl.org/ARL-Statistics-2010-2011

37

Key References (cont.) OA Journal Funds. (2013). http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/OA_journal_funds

Reinsfelder. (2012). Open access publishing practices in a complex environment. Journal of Librarianship & Scholarly Communication. , 1(1):eP1029. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1029

Reinsfelder, T.L, & Anderson, J. A. (2013). “Observations and Perceptions of Academic Administrator Influence on Open Access Initiatives.” Journal of Academic Librarianship (2013).  doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2013.08.014 https://scholarsphere.psu.edu/files/r781wj485

Rogers, J. (2012). Walking away from the American Chemical Society. http://www.attemptingelegance.com/?p=1765

  Suber, P. (2012). Open access. MIT Press. http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/open-access

Tenopir, C., & King, D.E. (2000).Towards electronic journals: Realities for scientists, librarians, and publishers. Washington, DC: Special Libraries Association.

University of California at Berkeley (2008). Hot Topics: Publisher Mergers. http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/scholarlycommunication/publisher_mergers.html

38

Other Resources

• Creative Commonscreativecommons.org• Flexible licensing for authors

• Open Access Weekwww.openaccessweek.org• A Very Brief Introduction to Open Access• What Faculty/Librarians, Research

Funders/Universities & Administrators can do to promote Open Access

• Right to Researchwww.righttoresearch.org• Open Publishing Guide for Students

• SHERPA RoMEO www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo• Publisher copyright policies & self-archiving

• SPARC sparc.arl.org• Guides on OA publishing, institutional repositories• Open Access Explained video

39