Comments on: Paying for Open Access Publication Charges

By: Horns of a Dilemma: Open Access or Academic Freedom « The Scholarly Kitchen

Horns of a Dilemma: Open Access or Academic Freedom « The Scholarly Kitchen — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:44:49 +0000

[...] the last year, many research libraries have established open access publication funds to encourage authors to select this publication route for their papers. The justification for [...]

By: Open Access on a “Level Playing Field” « The Scholarly Kitchen

Open Access on a “Level Playing Field” « The Scholarly Kitchen — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:42:10 +0000

[...] It’s not surprising, therefore, to see the phrase “level playing field” being applied to author-pays open access (OA) publishing and as a justification for the creation of author publication funds. [...]

By: Open Access Publisher Accepts Nonsense Manuscript for Dollars « The Scholarly Kitchen

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:43:10 +0000

[...] While one should be careful not to generalize these results to other Open Access journals using similar business models, it does raise the question of whether, at least in some cases, the producer-pays-to-publish model may unduly influence editorial decision-making. One may also question whether publishers like Bentham see a lucrative opportunity from the OA movement, considering that academic libraries are establishing author publication funds to pay Open Access charges. [...]

By: Cornell’s Open Access Author Fund « The Scholarly Kitchen

Cornell’s Open Access Author Fund « The Scholarly Kitchen — Tue, 26 May 2009 10:43:42 +0000

[...] The UK Research Information Report, “Paying for open access publication charges,” states that criteria for for judging between competing claims and procedures for dealing with appeals are necessary if the funds are to be run effectively, yet offers no guidance on the details. From his Cornell Faculty Senate presentation, Hermanson understands that publication is tightly coupled with the promotion and tenure of junior researchers and that denying publication funds may have serious deleterious effects on future careers. [...]

By: Dark Secrets: Open Access and Author Processing Charges « The Scholarly Kitchen

Wed, 13 May 2009 10:43:38 +0000

[...] I did was ask five librarians at institutions administrating Open Access publication charges two simple [...]

By: Paying for Open Access Publication Charges « rookie librarian

Paying for Open Access Publication Charges « rookie librarian — Sun, 10 May 2009 12:33:34 +0000

[...] for Open Access Publication Charges Jump to Comments Philip Davis writes in the scholarly kitchen about the latest report on paying for open access publication charges. The report lays out the [...]

By: Paying for Open Access Publication Charges » Open Access Press

Paying for Open Access Publication Charges » Open Access Press — Tue, 05 May 2009 22:56:12 +0000

[...] Philip Davis from Scholarly Kitchen notes: [M]any library administrators are pushing for these author funds, and in many cases, the monies are simply being skimmed off existing library collection funds or were provided as a one-time gift from a Vice Chancellor before the economy took a nosedive. As the RIN report states on page 23, there is clearly not enough money to support both author-pays and subscription-pays models. [...]

By: Guía sobre pagos Open Access « Observatorio de Martinej

Guía sobre pagos Open Access « Observatorio de Martinej — Fri, 01 May 2009 23:27:23 +0000

[...] Sobre la transcendencia de algunos detalles no abordados en la guía, posibles problemas del sistema “autor paga”, puede leerse la entrada sobre este tema del blog The scholarly kitchen. [...]

By: Michael Jubb

Michael Jubb — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:17:45 +0000

As the chair of the working group that produced the report, I am very much aware that it was written from a UK perspective, and it’s been interesting to see the amount of attention it has attracted from outside the UK.

The UK perspective explains what we say about direct and indirect costs, since there is a particular funding regime in place in the UK for the funding of research, and that will vary in other countries; so you will have to do some translation into your particular funding context, which you will know more about than me.

I’m also very much aware that the report does not provide answers to all the questions and issues that arise in relation to the policies that individual institutions will need to put in place. That’s because there has been next to no thinking on these issues in the UK. So our initial job has been to put what we see as some of the key issues on the table, so that senior managers in universities and elsewhere start to think about them. There’s clearly some follow-up work to do.

By: Philip Davis

Philip Davis — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:15:27 +0000

Thank you Richard,
This argument assumes that the model of publication flips entirely from a subscription model to a author-processing-charge (APC) model and ignores a future of both models existing simultaneously. The RIN report notes:

To date, only a small number of researchers [at the University of Nottingham] have applied and have received open access funds for their work, but demand is expected to grow significantly over the next few years when those affected by the funders’ current policies finish their research. (p.24)

But a hybrid future is not feasible. Imagine that you were an author with a choice: You can publish for free in subscription-access journal, or you could ask your institution to pay $3,000 to make your article freely available in that same journal. Wouldn’t you ask for the money?

The APC model may be a thin wedge into a system where the future is a full author-pays model. Somewhere along the way it will slam right into the academic freedom issue. When it does, the accident will not be pretty.