This document discusses the ongoing debate around open access to scholarly publications. It outlines different open access models such as green OA, which involves self-archiving articles in repositories, and gold OA, which charges publication fees. While gold OA aims to make all content immediately available, it is more costly and lacks infrastructure support compared to green OA which builds on existing repository systems. The debate examines perspectives from libraries, universities, and publishers regarding the financial and ethical implications of transitioning to more open models of scholarly communication.

1. Sarah Kennedy, Siobhan McGuinness,
Caroline Rowan & Amelie Serres.

2. Costs involved in all libraries:
▪ Medical
▪ Public
▪ Academic
You may be involved in buying or budgets!

3. Hulda Nelson Image
Retrieved from UC Berkeley

4.  European Commission: Supporting Open
Access since 2006
 Ireland: National Open Access Statement –
October 2012
 US: FASTR – February 2013
NIH since 2008

5. “per capita expenditure and use of e-journals is
strongly and positively correlated with papers
published, numbers of PhD awards and
research.”
2011

6. Non-library resources took on average 17 mins
longer and cost an average of $2.10 per item
of information.

7.  http://prezi.com/so-na2e8cslj/scholarly-
publishing-model/

8. Illustration by Daniel Pudles
“Academic journals generally get their
articles for nothing and may pay little to
editors and peer reviewers.They sell to the
very universities that provide the cheap
labour”
2011

9. SCONUL: Libraries spent £682 million on
resources in 2010/2011
Average budget of a library is £4.6 million
Trinity College’s Library budget was cut by
€792,645 in 2012 according to their University
Times.
In TheJournal of Academic Librarianship in
September 2010, nearly 42 percent of U.S.
university libraries reported budget cuts

10. Elsevier: £724 million profit on revenues of £2
billion, that’s 36% profit in 2010
Springer: €250 million profit in 2010 and was for
sale for 2.5 billion in 2011

11. Journals now consume 65% of library budgets.
So if the library budget is the average 4.6
million, then almost 3 million of that
expenditure is on journals.

12. Karlsruhe Institute ofTechnology in Germany
 Biochimica & Biophysica Acta: 20,019.70 – Elsevier
 Chemical Physical Letters: 16,507.96 – Elsevier
 Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry:
14,116.85 – Springer
 Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry:
14,116.85 – Springer
 Journal of Organometallic Chemistry: 13,966.71 –
Elsevier
Elsevier, Springer &Wiley = 42% of journal articles

13.  What is happening to change this situation?
 How are libraries dealing with the cost of
journal subscriptions?

14. Image from www.simoncotter.com

15. • Staff
• Technology
• Special Collections
• Materials
• Self-publishing

16. Infographic taken from EBSCO Library
Collections and BudgetingTrends Survey

17.  Self-service circulation
desks/kiosks
– reduce staff costs
- extend opening hours
- facilitate staff deployment to
other roles
 PC hardware
-Maintenance costs
-Equipment
replacement/upgrades
 E-journals and e-books
- supporting remote access
Image from www.techpraveen.com

18. Image from NUI Galway/AbbeyTheatre archive Image from Book of Kells,TrinityCollege

19. • Physical space
• Time
• Staff
• Value AddedTax

22. = subscription model (by libraries,
academia and/or individuals)
 Large profit for the publishers

23. •Increasing presence of
technology
•Library purchasing consortia
=> « Broadened access to, and
usage of, journal articles »
(Morgan, Campbell &Teleen,
2012)

24.  « pay-to-publish » model
 Article openly accessible to all
 Used by PLoS, Hindawi, BioMed
Central...
 Waving fees for authors in developing
countries

25.  Subscription + author pays for open
access
 Rights transaction
 Quite popular especially in fields like
bioinformatics and molecular
microbiology

26.  Conference gathering members from the
publishing industry, academia, higher
education, scholarly societies & libraries
 Gold Open Access encouraged
 Publisher-friendly report

27.  Long-term sustainability
 Equitable, free, public access to readers
= universality
 Emphasis on QUALITY

28.  Ethical dilemmas on the author’s side –
notion of imbalance
 Pressure on institutions
 Not representative of the real distribution of
scholarly talent
 According to Price, decrease in competitivity

29.  Far from being unilaterally open access
 Green open access as the « standard route in
the EU »

30. Developing and
implementing the
UCL Research
Strategy
UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE
LONDON

31.  “Accessibility, sustainability, excellence:
how to expand access to research
publications.”
 Outcome: even though both sides where
representedGold has been favourite within
these conclusions!
WHY??

32.  It has opened up a dialogue
 A conclusion was considered too early in the
conversation.
 Green OA is a method of self-archiving, it
allows an author to deposit the final peer-
reviewed paper in a repository
 The above has been implement within UCL
Discovery & is the largest institutional
repository in UK.

33. Houghton & Swan took both sides and
focused on the financial aspects of OA
Green OA self- archiving represents
“costing the sample institutions around one-
fifth the amount that Gold OA might cost”
(2013)

34.  GREENOA: already has existing foundations
like UCL’s repositories to build upon so they
will grow evenly at a global, national and
institutional level.
 GOLD OA: does not have these foundations
at a national or institutional level, as it asks
for up front costs.

35.  Mounier 2011 describes the topic of OA as a quote
from Ghandi “first they ignore you, then they laugh at
you, then they fight you, then you win”
 The debate surrounding OA is very unclear with
various different countries establishing various way to
achieve open access.
 Embedded in this geographical view is the many
different disciplines and how their outlook on OA
 MikeTaylor (2013) illustrates that by engaging in this
Green and Gold we are dividing researchers into an
upper and lower class, and states “a two-class system
to retain a notion that they are ‘in’ when others are
‘out’”.

36.  Converting the scientists to OA has
been effective if not slow
 Cause: a 2 way incentive
 First is economic (science- publishing industry
generated $9.4 billion in revenue in 2011,Van
Noorden, 2013)
 Second the paper they are
submitting to has high –
prestige (Bio-Med)

37.  Split into two teams
 One group will look at Green OpenAccess
and one group will look at Gold Open Access
 Write up points for your choice and against
the opposite group.
 Choose someone to present for you. (2 mins)
 Then we’ll vote!