This document discusses the future of digital-only journal publishing and some of the possibilities and challenges involved. It notes that scholars prefer journals that are easy to skim, portable, searchable, annotatable, ingestible, and printable. However, current journal production workflows focus on PDFs, which do not support interactivity or portability well. Emerging pressures from scholars' usage patterns, production challenges, and market forces will likely lead to journals that are produced using automated HTML workflows, available in multiple formats, and put the needs of scholars first across different stages of research. HTML may become the canonical format over PDF as it allows for more flexible options.

1. Brian Cody, Scholastica
New Frontiers in
Digital-Only Journal
Publishing:
Possibilities and Challenges
Brian Cody, Scholastica

2. Pressures shaping future journals
Scholar
usage
Production
pressures
Market
pressures
Journals

3. OK, first some
BACKGROUND

4. How do scholars use journals?

5. •$200k in year 1
•30k articles submitted in 2013
•100+ journal clients (100% retention)
How do scholars use journals?

6. •$200k in year 1
•30k articles submitted in 2013
•100+ journal clients (100% retention)
How do scholars use journals?
Skim
Search
Portable
Annotate
Print
Ingest Interact

7. Consumer demands
• Skimmable - easy initial read
• Portable - collecting files
• Searchable - within and across articles
• Ingestible - bibliography software
• Annotatable - notes and analysis
• Interactive - links to trace sources
• Printable - close reading

8. Why printable?
• Long-form monographs (like books) often
preferred in physical form
• BUT journal articles are shorter
• So article printing should be outsourced from
publisher to consumer - hence printable

9. Ithaka S+R survey, 2012
http://www.sr.ithaka.org/sites/default/files/files/SR_BriefingPaper_Presses_120913.pdf
~5k respondents

10. UChicago library study (2013)
“Periodicals only in electronic form;
books in print form. I find it very hard to
read books on the computer. However, I
like reading books on Kindle and citation
issues are being corrected, so if Kindle-
compatible electronic books become
available, life would be beautiful.”
– Faculty, Social Sciences Division.
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/surveys/2013/2013-faculty-survey-final-report.pdf

11. Paper going away?
Mangen http://bit.ly/1sYiH4t, Benedetto http://bit.ly/1MZ6vht, Cohen http://bit.ly/1FFnBwB
• E-ink might reduce visual fatigue -
Benedetto et al, 2013
• Tactile experience of reading
important, annotation (Mangen 2013)
• Hybrid digital/printed future seems
likely in short term
• Digital in long term (Dan Cohen,
March 2015)

12. Challenges for journal PRODUCERS
• Time consuming to make different versions
• Workflow is not automated
• Print concerns dominate workflow (PDF)
• Interactivity and portability are in opposition
• Metadata not always clear => discoverability
problems
• Metrics not always tracked

13. “While these files in particular are great HTML files,
they take quite a bit of time to create as I learned
one Friday afternoon last month when the editor
and I sat down to try to create them ourselves!”
Jennifer Laherty, Digital Publishing Librarian for IUScholarWorks
https://blogs.libraries.iub.edu/scholcomm/2012/04/16/16-beyond-the-pdf/
“trying to get by and do good work without
spending a lot of time and money on the format
of the output and so we resort to what seems
good enough and people like: the PDF."
Challenges for journal PRODUCERS

14. Journals of the future will be…
• Easy to make different (compliant) versions
• Publishing workflow automated
• HTML version is canonical, print concerns are
secondary (or tertiary)
• Interactivity and portability are in harmony
• Metadata is clean => better discoverability
• Metrics automatically tracked

15. The (journal) Article
• Journal ARTICLE is the primary research unit,
not journal volume
• Publishing a single article is less onerous
than volume (or multiple journal volumes)
• Rolling publication has many advantages
• Institutional adoption hurdle: major process
change (less so for individual journals)

16. Market pressures
• Open Access growth
• Alternatives: libraries, platforms
• Canceling subscriptions: UNLV,
UParis V, UMontreal
• Mission of university and societies
• Price transparency

17. Material collected from a blog post by Timothy Gowers
http://gowers.wordpress.com/2014/04/24/elsevier-journals-some-facts/
http://blog.scholasticahq.com/post/84136359198/an-infographic-view-of-gowerss-elsevier-expose

19. University Cost Enrollment
http://blog.scholasticahq.com/post/84136359198/an-infographic-view-of-gowerss-elsevier-expose

20. Consequence: HTML
• Less $$ —> intense pressure for
efficiencies
• More noise —> pressure to boost signal
• Digital WILL reduce costs as seen in
other industries: books, music, news
• HTML development environment more
active than XML

21. XML vs HTML

22. XML vs HTML
• 35,562 vs 23,855
• 49% more HTML5 repositories

23. XML vs HTML

24. XML vs HTML
• 142 vs 869
• 500% more HTML5 to PDF repositories

25. Examples from real life
JOURNALS

26. Technical implementation
• Work across devices, available in
multiple formats
• Saveable and printable
• Linked data
• Ingestible and discoverable
• Easy to make

27. American Journal of Sociological Research 2014, 4(5): 127-131
DOI: 10.5923/j.sociology.20140405.01
Public Participation in the Policy Formulation of
Environment-Friendly City Planning in Tulungagung
Heru Tjahjono1,2,*
, Mohammad Bisri3
, Soemarno4
, Eko Ganis5
1
Environmental Sciences and Technology Graduate Program, University of Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia
2
Department of Fisheries and Marine of East Java, Indonesia
3
Department of Water Resources Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia
4
Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia
5
Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia
Abstract The purpose of this study is to determine the forms of public participation in policy formulation of
environment-friendly city planning in Tulungagung. Forms of public participation are as listener, inputs/suggestions
contribution, information/data contribution, and assistance in clarifying the right of space, objections to the draft plan, as well
as other combination of the mentioned forms. This study used descriptive qualitative and quantitative methods, using
frequency distribution tables and graphs of circle graph (pie chart). The results based on the frequency distribution shows that
the forms of public participation in policy formulation of environment-friendly city planning in Tulungagung are mostly in
the form of inputs/suggestions contribution by 43%. It is followed by the listener of 25%, information/data contribution of
17%, and other forms of 15%. No respondents participated as assistance in clarifying the right of space.
Keywords Direct Participation, Eco-friendly City, Forms of Public Participation, Indirect Participation
1. Introduction
For four decades, climate-related disasters such as floods,
droughts, storms, landslides and forest fires have caused a lot
of loss on human lives and livelihoods. It also causes the
destruction of economic and social infrastructure, as well as
damage to the environment with the frequency and intensity
of disasters that are likely increasing [1]. According to the
Ministry of Environment in 2009, households in Java
contribute carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from energy use
of more than 100 million tons per year. The industries in Java
are also a major contribution to CO2 emissions, about 24
million tons per year.
Along with the growth rate of development, Satterthwite
[2] explained in an effort to provide comfort and a healthy
environment for the citizens of the city. The concept of
Eco-friendly City Policy can be a solution for urban
development actors with environmentally friendly base. The
concept of Eco-friendly City Policy is a concept that aimed
each city in the world contributes to decline the global
carbon emissions based on community participation.
Eco-friendly city policy is also a symbol of closeness to
nature and without exception the support of community will
further strengthen and reinforce environmental-friendly
* Corresponding author:
heru_tjahjono@yahoo.com (Heru Tjahjono)
Published online at http://journal.sapub.org/sociology
Copyright © 2014 Scientific & Academic Publishing. All Rights Reserved
urban development. In realizing the eco-friendly city policy,
there are eight aspects that must be considered in terms of the
process, namely: green planning and design, green
community, green building, green energy, green water, green
transportation, green waste and green open space.
Rukmana [3] stated that in the context of spatial planning,
there are two types of needs underlying community
participation, which are control function and the need of
social information and data. Public participation in spatial
planning becomes crucial as being responsive. The efforts to
realize Eco-friendly City Policy in the region of East Java
refers to the East Java Provincial Regulation No. 2 of 2006
on Spatial Planning and Regional Governance in East Java
province. Article 1 Paragraph 34 states that
environmental-friendly in industrial, services, and trade
activity in which the production or the output process
prioritizes the method or technology that does not pollute the
environment and not harmful the living things. In realizing
an Eco-friendly City Policy that is based on community
participation refers to the funding from the regional budget.
The referral becomes a very strong base in integrating
community participation to success the improvement of the
carrying capacity of Eco-friendly City.
Community participation in city development includes
participating in the development activities, and participating
in utilizing and enjoying the results of such development [4].
There are several forms of community participation in the
development program, i.e. the participation of money,
possessions, labor, skills, ideas, social, decision-making and
Normal article

28. WP, great metadata

30. Potential for
different devices

32. Responsive HTML

33. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0123690

36. Citations off to one side

37. PDF: citations interrupt flow

38. Portable

39. EPUB version

40. Examples from
POPULAR PUBLISHING

43. Article on Medium

45. “popular eReader
formats such as EPUB
and MOBI are HTML and
CSS under the hood.”
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2015/01/07/
designing-for-print-with-css/?
utm_source=html5weekly&utm_medium=email

46. •Be available in different formats
•Have interactive elements, online
and offline
•Address scholars’ needs across
the research lifecycle
•Be eminently readable
•Be digital-first
Future journals will…

47. False dichotomies
1.Portable vs interactive
2.Digital vs print
3.HTML vs PDF
4.Publisher vs consumer
5.Streamlined vs options

48. And now: some
CONCLUSIONS

49. Forces affecting journals
• Skimmable
• Portable
• Annotable
• Searchable
• Printable
• Automated
workflow
• Different
formats
• Good metadata
• Print concerns
secondary
• OA trends
• Library
consortia
• Publishing
alternatives
• Price
transparency
ScholarsProduction Market

50. Pressures shaping future journals
Scholar
usage
Production
pressures
Market
pressures
Journals

51. Pressures shaping future articles
Scholar
usage
Production
pressures
Market
pressures
Articles

52. • Pressures lead to HTML automation tools
• Software competition will reduce cost of tools
• Article-level workflows will abound
• Platforms reduce silos and churn, will
emphasize standardized inputs (metadata)
• Greater incentive to in-source journal work,
easier to bootstrap (libraries!)
Extrapolations

53. Journal Management Best
Practices: Tales from the Trenches
Link at https://scholasticahq.com and @scholasticahq