scholarly journals Case for Open Access and the Current Situation with the University of California and Elsevier

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 717-718
Author(s):  
John Renaud
Author(s):  
Arthur Jason Boston

In March 2021, the University of California and Elsevier announced a new transformative deal which included slightly-discounted article processing fees as UC's route to open access in Elsevier journals. Librarians and researchers expressed immediate concern that this deal upheld inequities in the research system. The UC/Elsevier transformative deal, however, is just one of many that include expensive pay-to-publish structures. This commentary proposes an alternative contract between libraries and publishers that would enable wider reading and lower costs, called Read & Let Read. The three main points of a Read & Let Read deal include a half-dollar valuation of individual journal articles, prepayment on a university’s estimated usage, and an equal payment made for usage outside of the university. If a Read & Let Read deal were implemented at UC, UC would pay a slightly higher amount of money to Elsevier than they are expected to at present, and would not flip any articles to open access. Instead, they would contribute toward a more equitably-distributed system of scholarly readership.


2004 ◽  
Vol 105 (3/4) ◽  
pp. 118-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Ann Hughes

This paper describes the history of the University of California eScholarship program, a joint effort of the University of California Libraries in collaboration with the California Digital Library. It discusses the context that gave rise to the creation of the eScholarship Repository, the logistical issues involved in setting up a multi‐campus persistent repository for scholarly output, and future issues to be addressed in developing experimental reconfigurations of the components of scholarly communication in collaboration with communities of scholars.


2019 ◽  
Vol 80 (5) ◽  
pp. 295
Author(s):  
Wendi Kaspar

March 2019 saw a gambit in the open access (OA) movement that may be as significant as Harvard’s OA policy: The University of California System declined to renew their subscriptions with a major scientific publisher. It is a gutsy move—but inspiring to see a major research university walk the talk, and, in this case, walk away from the negotiating table. Now other universities in the United States and across the world, are holding their collective breath to see what will happen—will the dominoes fall?


2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (11) ◽  
pp. 534
Author(s):  
Sherri L. Barnes

The open access (OA) movement was taking libraries by storm, and scholarly communication librarianship was trending in 2009 when I was the coordinator of the Humanities Collection Group (Huma) at the University of California-Santa Barbara (UCSB). All of the buzz centered on STEM journals and commercial publishers. The Huma librarians—subject librarians for the humanities—were curious about how the OA movement and scholarly communication issues impacted the humanities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document