Green Open Access – Free for Authors But at a Cost for Readers
Pursuit of Green open access rather than Gold not only preserves the subscription system but also imposes hidden costs on readers.
Pursuit of Green open access rather than Gold not only preserves the subscription system but also imposes hidden costs on readers.
The American Chemical Society is offering a new approach to funding open-access articles; Rick Anderson interviews Sarah Tegen about it.
A recent opinion paper by Richard Poynder @rickypo offers analysis and prognostication with regard to the current state and future prospects of #openaccess and the open access movement.
Famed detective Sherlock Holmes does his best to help his friend Dr. Watson figure out how best to comply with the requirements of Plan S.
Plan S implementation guidance has not provided reassurance to anxious society publishers
Thanks to a major new international research study, it’s no longer possible to pretend that predatory journals are not a serious problem that needs serious attention. The question is: do we have the will to confront it?
Green OA has not had a significant effect on subscriptions. What does — and doesn’t — that mean for subscriptions in the future?
An interview with MacKenzie Smith and Ivy Anderson, discussing the recent Pay It Forward report on the economic impact of a shift to Gold open access for scholarly journals.
Revisiting Michael Clarke’s 2014 post on the two drivers of growth in STM and scholarly publishing: site licensing and global expansion. As successful as these activities have been, however, we appear to be nearing, if not a peak, at least a plateau. Institutional library budgets have not kept pace with the growth in global research output. At the same time, institutional market penetration is nearing saturation for many publishers.
So the question is, where is the growth going to come from?
Last week, the news broke about a new service called DOAI that is designed to support open access. It is not a publishing model or a repository but rather a type of infrastructure. When a user inputs a DOI, DOAI connects […]
[Editor’s note: This is the edited text of a presentation that Joe Esposito gave as a keynote at the PSP conference in Washington, D.C. on Feb. 3, 2016. The slides for the presentation are embedded at the end of the text. […]
Gold open access for monographs is based on the notion that provosts will pay for what librarians will not. This seems like an improbable model for scholarly publishing. Publishing that is not based on end-user demand is not likely to have strong support in lean times.
Scholarly publishing is virtually unique in that it has significant representation by both for-profit and not-for-profit publishers. This alters the very nature of this segment of publishing, making the not-for-profits more business-like and forcing the for-profits to behave at times like mission-based organizations.
As we drift into a scholarly economy with centralized payment mechanisms and greater dependence on government funding, are we truly setting ourselves up for long-term independence and success?
Since the late 1990s there have been two drivers of growth in STM and scholarly publishing: site licensing and global expansion. As successful as these activities have been, however, we appear to be nearing, if not a peak, at least a plateau. Institutional library budgets have not kept pace with the growth in global research output. At the same time, institutional market penetration is nearing saturation for many publishers.
So the question is, where is the growth going to come from?