scholarly journals Reason, Risk, and Reward: Models for Libraries and Other Stakeholders in an Evolving Scholarly Publishing Ecosystem

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Mangiafico ◽  
Kevin L. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Academic Libraries ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Core Values ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Scholarly Literature ◽  
The Past ◽  
Changing Practices

Scholarly publishing, and scholarly communication more generally, are based on patterns established over many decades and even centuries. Some of these patterns are clearly valuable and intimately related to core values of the academy, but others were based on the exigencies of the past, and new opportunities have brought into question whether it makes sense to persist in supporting old models. New technologies and new publishing models raise the question of how we should fund and operate scholarly publishing and scholarly communication in the future, moving away from a scarcity model based on the exchange of physical goods that restricts access to scholarly literature unless a market-based exchange takes place. This essay describes emerging models that attempt to shift scholarly communication to a more open-access and mission-based approach and that try to retain control of scholarship by academics and the institutions and scholarly societies that support them. It explores changing practices for funding scholarly journals and changing services provided by academic libraries, changes instituted with the end goal of providing more access to more readers, stimulating new scholarship, and removing inefficiencies from a system ready for change.

The future of open access and library publishing

2014 ◽  
Vol 115 (5/6) ◽  
pp. 225-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faye Chadwell ◽  
Shan C. Sutton
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Communication System ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Academic Librarians ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Dramatic Shift ◽  
Scholarly Communication System

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to provide a vision for how academic libraries can assume a more central role in a future where open access (OA) publishing has become the predominant model for disseminating scholarly research articles. Design/methodology/approach – The authors analyze existing trends related to OA policies and publishing, with an emphasis on the development of repositories managed by libraries to publish and disseminate articles. They speculate that these trends, coupled with emerging economic realities, will create an environment where libraries will assume a major role in the OA publishing environment. The authors provide some suggestions for how this major role might be funded. Findings – The trends and economic realities discussed will lead to new roles for academic librarians and will change the existing roles. Originality/value – This article provides insights for academic libraries and their institutions to consider a dramatic shift in the deployment of subscription dollars from a dysfunctional and largely closed scholarly communication system to one that provides open, unfettered access to research results.

scholarly journals The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review

F1000Research ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan P. Tennant ◽  
François Waldner ◽  
Damien C. Jacques ◽  
Paola Masuzzo ◽  
Lauren B. Collister ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Scholarly Literature ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
Academic Communities ◽  
Global Issue ◽  
Multiple Challenges

Ongoing debates surrounding Open Access to the scholarly literature are multifaceted and complicated by disparate and often polarised viewpoints from engaged stakeholders. At the current stage, Open Access has become such a global issue that it is critical for all involved in scholarly publishing, including policymakers, publishers, research funders, governments, learned societies, librarians, and academic communities, to be well-informed on the history, benefits, and pitfalls of Open Access. In spite of this, there is a general lack of consensus regarding the potential pros and cons of Open Access at multiple levels. This review aims to be a resource for current knowledge on the impacts of Open Access by synthesizing important research in three major areas: academic, economic and societal. While there is clearly much scope for additional research, several key trends are identified, including a broad citation advantage for researchers who publish openly, as well as additional benefits to the non-academic dissemination of their work. The economic impact of Open Access is less well-understood, although it is clear that access to the research literature is key for innovative enterprises, and a range of governmental and non-governmental services. Furthermore, Open Access has the potential to save both publishers and research funders considerable amounts of financial resources, and can provide some economic benefits to traditionally subscription-based journals. The societal impact of Open Access is strong, in particular for advancing citizen science initiatives, and leveling the playing field for researchers in developing countries. Open Access supersedes all potential alternative modes of access to the scholarly literature through enabling unrestricted re-use, and long-term stability independent of financial constraints of traditional publishers that impede knowledge sharing. However, Open Access has the potential to become unsustainable for research communities if high-cost options are allowed to continue to prevail in a widely unregulated scholarly publishing market. Open Access remains only one of the multiple challenges that the scholarly publishing system is currently facing. Yet, it provides one foundation for increasing engagement with researchers regarding ethical standards of publishing and the broader implications of 'Open Research'.

scholarly journals Advancing scholarly publishing through open access biomedical repositories: A knowledge management perspective

IFLA Journal ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Kruesi ◽  
Kerry Tanner ◽  
Frada Burstein
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Role Model ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Pubmed Central ◽  
The Past ◽  
Management Perspective ◽  
The Us

Scholarly publishing has undergone major changes over the past 50 years. Funder mandates and organisational reporting obligations have heralded the creation of open access repositories, such as institutional and subject repositories. This research draws upon the US PubMed Central (PMC) and Europe PMC, also known as PMC International, as a role model to inform the concept and opportunity for an Australasia open access biomedical repository. PMC International is a leader in making citations and research output, which link to research data, Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR). As repositories approach two decades of development, this paper reports on the potential for an Australasia open access biomedical repository through a knowledge management lens and explores the opportunities for future open access biomedical repositories.

scholarly journals Leading by Example? ALA Division Publications, Open Access, and Sustainability

2016 ◽  
Vol 77 (5) ◽  
pp. 654-667
Author(s):  
Nathan Hall ◽  
Sara Arnold-Garza ◽  
Regina Gong ◽  
Yasmeen Shorish
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Business Models ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
American Library Association ◽  
Core Values ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Academic Journals ◽  
American Library

This investigation explores scholarly communication business models in American Library Association (ALA) division peer-reviewed academic journals. Previous studies reveal the numerous issues organizations and publishers face in the academic publishing environment. Through an analysis of documented procedures, policies, and finances of five ALA division journals, we compare business and access models. We conclude that some ALA divisions prioritize the costs associated with changing business models, including hard-to-estimate costs such as the labor of volunteers. For other divisions, the financial aspects are less important than maintaining core values, such as those defined in ALA’s Core Values in Librarianship.

scholarly journals The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review

F1000Research ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan P. Tennant ◽  
François Waldner ◽  
Damien C. Jacques ◽  
Paola Masuzzo ◽  
Lauren B. Collister ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Scholarly Literature ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
Academic Communities ◽  
Global Issue ◽  
Multiple Challenges

Ongoing debates surrounding Open Access to the scholarly literature are multifaceted and complicated by disparate and often polarised viewpoints from engaged stakeholders. At the current stage, Open Access has become such a global issue that it is critical for all involved in scholarly publishing, including policymakers, publishers, research funders, governments, learned societies, librarians, and academic communities, to be well-informed on the history, benefits, and pitfalls of Open Access. In spite of this, there is a general lack of consensus regarding the advantages or disadvantages of Open Access at multiple levels. This review aims to to be a resource for current knowledge on the impacts of Open Access by synthesizing important research in three major areas of impact: academic, economic and societal. While there is clearly much scope for additional research, several key trends are identified, including a broad citation advantage for researchers who publish openly, as well as additional benefits to the non-academic dissemination of their work. The economic case for Open Access is less well-understood, although it is clear that access to the research literature is key for innovative enterprises, and a range of governmental and non-governmental services. Furthermore, Open Access has the potential to save publishers and research funders considerable amounts of financial resources. The social case for Open Access is strong, in particular for advancing citizen science initiatives, and leveling the playing field for researchers in developing countries. Open Access supersedes all potential alternative modes of access to the scholarly literature through enabling unrestricted re-use, and long-term stability independent of financial constraints of traditional publishers that impede knowledge sharing. Open Access remains only one of the multiple challenges that the scholarly publishing system is currently facing. Yet, it provides one foundation for increasing engagement with researchers regarding ethical standards of publishing. We recommend that Open Access supporters focus their efforts on working to establish viable new models and systems of scholarly communication, rather than trying to undermine the existing ones as part of the natural evolution of the scholarly ecosystem. Based on this, future research should investigate the wider impacts of an ecosystem-wide transformation to a system of Open Research.

scholarly journals Librarian in the underground: What academic libraries can learn from DIY culture

2017 ◽  
Vol 78 (6) ◽  
pp. 312
Author(s):  
Solomon Blaylock ◽  
Declan Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
Information Storage And Retrieval ◽  
Daily Basis ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Information Storage ◽  
Storage And Retrieval ◽  
The Past ◽  
Library Professionals

Academic library professionals are now in uncharted territory. We’re hurtling through unfamiliar, rapidly shifting landscapes. Information storage and retrieval, scholarly publishing, information literacy: everything’s changing on a daily basis. Get hung up on any one thing, and you’re already working in the past. Allow yourself to be overwhelmed and you’re paralyzed.

scholarly journals Beyond Copyright and Technology: What Open Access Can Tell Us about Precarity, Authority, Innovation, and Automation in the University Today

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Kelty
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
The State ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Changing Practices ◽  
The University ◽  
The Way

In this interview, we discuss what open access can teach us about the state of the university, as well as practices in scholarly publishing. In particular the focus is on issues of labor and precarity, the question of how open access enables or blocks other innovations in scholarship, the way open access might be changing practices of scholarship, and the role of technology and automation in the creation, evaluation, and circulation of scholarly work.

scholarly journals Open-access mega-journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie Spezi ◽  
Simon Wakeling ◽  
Stephen Pinfield ◽  
Claire Creaser ◽  
Jenny Fry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Impact

Purpose Open-access mega-journals (OAMJs) represent an increasingly important part of the scholarly communication landscape. OAMJs, such as PLOS ONE, are large scale, broad scope journals that operate an open access business model (normally based on article-processing charges), and which employ a novel form of peer review, focussing on scientific “soundness” and eschewing judgement of novelty or importance. The purpose of this paper is to examine the discourses relating to OAMJs, and their place within scholarly publishing, and considers attitudes towards mega-journals within the academic community. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a review of the literature of OAMJs structured around four defining characteristics: scale, disciplinary scope, peer review policy, and economic model. The existing scholarly literature was augmented by searches of more informal outputs, such as blogs and e-mail discussion lists, to capture the debate in its entirety. Findings While the academic literature relating specifically to OAMJs is relatively sparse, discussion in other fora is detailed and animated, with debates ranging from the sustainability and ethics of the mega-journal model, to the impact of soundness-only peer review on article quality and discoverability, and the potential for OAMJs to represent a paradigm-shifting development in scholarly publishing. Originality/value This paper represents the first comprehensive review of the mega-journal phenomenon, drawing not only on the published academic literature, but also grey, professional and informal sources. The paper advances a number of ways in which the role of OAMJs in the scholarly communication environment can be conceptualised.

scholarly journals Negotiating Open Access Journal Agreements: An Academic Library Case Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-61
Author(s):  
Mihoko Hosoi
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
Scholarly Journal ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Scholarly Journals

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented an opportunity for academic libraries to advance open access (OA) to scholarly articles. Awareness among faculty on the importance of OA has increased significantly during the pandemic, as colleges and universities struggle financially and seek sustainable access to high-quality scholarly journals. Consortia have played an important role in establishing negotiation principles on OA journal agreements. While the number of OA agreements is increasing, case studies involving individual libraries are still limited. This paper reviews existing literature on publisher negotiation principles related to OA journal negotiations and reflects on recent cases at an academic library in Pennsylvania, in order to identify best practices in OA journal negotiations. It provides recommendations on roles, relationships, and processes, as well as essential terms of OA journal agreements. This study’s findings are most relevant to large academic libraries that are interested in negotiating with scholarly journal publishers independently or through consortia.

scholarly journals Enclosure and emancipation in scholarly journals publishing: Overview, critical, global and communication perspectives

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-53
Author(s):  
Heather Morrison
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Open Access Publishing ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Commercial System ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Strong Potential ◽  
Not For Profit ◽  
Current State ◽  
Open Access Journals

The current state of scholarly communication is presented as one of contest between an increasingly commercial system that is dysfunctional and incompatible with the basic aims of scholarship, and emerging alternatives, particularly open access publishing and open access archiving. Two approaches to facilitating global participation in scholarly communication are contrasted; equity is seen as a superior goal to the donor model, which requires poverty or inequity to succeed. The current state of scholarly communication within the discipline of communication is examined. A relatively healthy percentage of not-for-profit publishers and at least 76 fully open access journals suggest strong potential for emancipating scholarship in communication from commercial imperatives. Specific sites of struggle and actions for scholars, including developing open access journals and self-archiving, are presented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document