Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

UKSG Conference 2017 Breakout - How publishers can thrive in an open access marketplace - Marcus A Banks

465 views

Published on

It appears highly probable that immediate open access publishing
will become the default mode for scholarly publishing – for the
biosciences first, other sectors later. ‘Immediate’ open access
means unfettered publication as soon as a scholarly work is
ready, with no embargo period. The costs of making a scholarly
artefact available can be reduced without sacrificing quality. This
interactive session will sketch the argument for these claims and
will present several value-added services that publishers could
develop to thrive in an open access world.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

UKSG Conference 2017 Breakout - How publishers can thrive in an open access marketplace - Marcus A Banks

  1. 1. How Publishers Can Thrive in an Open Access Marketplace Marcus A. Banks @marcusabanks UKSG 2017, Harrogate
  2. 2. Agenda • Brief Biography • What Will Happen • What Could Happen • What Should Happen • What Would Happen If What Should Happen Does Happen • Conversation and/or Debate 2
  3. 3. Brief Biography 3
  4. 4. What Will Happen Firm Prediction Immediate, non-embargoed open access will become the default mode in scholarly publishing – first in the biosciences, eventually in all fields. 4
  5. 5. In dramatic statement, European leaders call for “immediate” open access to all scientific papers by 2020. In dramatic statement, European leaders call for “immediate” open access to all scientific papers by 2020. The Competitiveness Council meeting in Brussels in May 2016. Source: http://bit.ly/25oQp6F5
  6. 6. Now requires all grant recipients to make their published peer-reviewed work immediately available to the public. Source: http://bit.ly/2j7i2yF 6
  7. 7. Open Access 2020 Initiative Source: https://oa2020.org/about/ 7
  8. 8. Open access is the future for academic publishing: Finch report (Guardian, 2012) “Making all the UK's publicly funded scientific research free for anyone to read could cost up to £60m per year, according to an independent study commissioned by the government. “Professor Dame Janet Finch, who led the work, said "open access" was the future for academic publishing and that the short-term transition costs she had identified should reduce over time as more articles became freely available and the journal subscription costs currently paid by university libraries fell.” “In the longer term, the future lies with open access publishing," said Finch at the launch of her report on Monday. "The UK should recognise this change, should embrace it and should find ways of managing it in a measured way.” Source: http://bit.ly/2kuCPQQ 8
  9. 9. Open Access Is Now Mainstream Source: https://www.elsevier.com/about/open-science/open-access/open-access-journals 9
  10. 10. What Will Happen Firm Prediction Immediate, non-embargoed open access will become the default mode in scholarly publishing – first in the biosciences, eventually in all fields. 10
  11. 11. What Could Happen Reasonably Certain Predictions • Article Processing Charges (APCs) rise at rates greater than inflation, particularly for marquee journals • The “paper” remains central deep into the online age 11
  12. 12. The True Cost of Scientific Publishing A paper that costs US$5,000 for an author to publish in Cell Reports, for example, might cost just $1,350 to publish in PLoS ONE — whereas PeerJ offers to publish an unlimited number of papers per author for a one-time fee of $299. “For the first time, the author can evaluate the service that they're getting for the fee they're paying,” says Heather Joseph, executive director of the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition in Washington DC. The variance in prices is leading everyone involved to question the academic publishing establishment as never before. For researchers and funders, the issue is how much of their scant resources need to be spent on publishing, and what form that publishing will take. For publishers, it is whether their current business models are sustainable — and whether highly selective, expensive journals can survive and prosper in an open-access world. 12Source: http://www.nature.com/news/open-access-the-true-cost-of-science-publishing-1.12676
  13. 13. Gates Foundation – AAAS Agreement 13Source: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/gates-foundation-strikes-deal-allow-its-researchers-publish-science-journals
  14. 14. Evolving Scholarly Record 14Source: OCLC Research, The Evolving Scholarly Record (2014)
  15. 15. Traditional Roles Author Writes Publisher Assembles Librarian Obtains 15
  16. 16. What Could Happen Reasonably Certain Predictions • Article Processing Charges (APCs) rise at rates greater than inflation, particularly for marquee journals • The “paper” remains central deep into the online age 16
  17. 17. What Should Happen Preferred Outcomes • Cost of producing articles declines • Openness and transparency rewarded • Scholarship as process, not product, incentivized 17
  18. 18. Source: Odlyzko, “Open access, library and publisher competition” (2013) Publishing Costs Can Be Lower 18
  19. 19. 19
  20. 20. 20
  21. 21. Evolving Scholarly Record Emphasizes Process, Not Product 21
  22. 22. What Should Happen Preferred Outcomes • Cost of producing articles declines • Openness and transparency rewarded • Scholarship as process, not product, incentivized 22
  23. 23. What Would Happen If What Should Happen Does Happen The Best of All Possible Worlds • Funders manage publication of articles, or authors post pre-prints that count for publication • Publishers develop and license services that assist researchers in the act of making their ideas and insights public. Peer review evolves to be continuous and not at a fixed point in time. • Librarians collectively curate and preserve the best of the world’s online content 23
  24. 24. Wellcome Open Research 24Source: https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/
  25. 25. Source: https://www.protocols.io/ 25
  26. 26. 26 Source: https://figshare.com/
  27. 27. Source: https://academic.oup.com/gigascience 27
  28. 28. Publishers: Still Necessary For Peer Review “Authors would publish un-reviewed papers on pre-print servers that screen them to remove spam and papers that fail to meet technical and ethical specifications, before making them freely available online. At this point peer review begins, proceeding along two parallel tracks. “Track 1: Organized review in which groups, such as scientific societies or self-assembling sets of researchers, representing fields or areas of interest arrange for the review of papers they believe to be relevant to researchers in their field. They could either directly solicit reviewers or invite members of their group to submit reviews, and would publish the results of these reviews in a standardized format. These groups would be evaluated by a coalition of funding agencies, libraries, universities, and other parties according to a set of commonly agreed upon standards, akin to the screening that is done for traditional journals at PubMed. “Track 2: Individually submitted reviews from anyone who has read the paper. These reviews would use the same format as organized reviews, and would, like organized reviews become part of the permanent record of the paper. Ideally, we want everyone who reads a paper carefully to offer their view of its validity, audience, and impact. To ensure that the system is not corrupted, individually submitted reviews would be screened for appropriateness, conflicts of interest, and other problems, and there would be mechanisms to adjudicate complaints about submitted reviews.” 28 Source: http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1820 (“Coupling Pre-Prints and Post-Publication Peer Review”)
  29. 29. Source: Stewardship of the Evolving Scholarly Record, OCLC (2015) 29
  30. 30. What Would Happen If What Should Happen Does Happen The Best of All Possible Worlds • Funders manage publication of articles, or authors post pre-prints that count for publication • Publishers develop and license services that assist researchers in the act of making their ideas and insights public. Peer review evolves to be continuous and not at a fixed point in time. • Librarians collectively curate and preserve the best of the world’s online content 30
  31. 31. Thank You! Let’s talk, now and afterwards. @marcusabanks | marcusabanks.com 31

×