A new research study finds that open access monographs can generate significant revenue — both on the print side and digitally.
An interview with Nicola Ramsey of Edinburgh University Press about the Press’s new Open Access Fund.
Erich van Rijn looks at the University of California’s Luminos open access books program and reviews lessons learned and what is needed for such programs to succeed.
The AUPresses Library Relations Committee asks Peter Berkery and Mary Lee Kennedy to share their thoughts about how relations between publishers and libraries have changed.
Learn how two early career publishers are tackling the thorny issue of pay equity and inclusion in today’s interview with Rebecca Bostock (Ohio State UP) and Dominique J Moore (University of Illinois Press)
Knowledge Unlatched has announced its “transformation into a central open access platform.” What does that mean, exactly? An interview with Managing Director Sven Fund.
Use of printed books in large North American research libraries is falling even faster than we think.
Point: Counterpoint — today we revisit a pair of posts from Joe Esposito and Rick Anderson looking at partnerships and collaborations between university libraries and university presses.
As a follow-up to the chef’s best books read during 2016, I’m happy to present a selection of our favorite university press reads of 2016 (and thanks to one of our commenters for the suggestion!). We tend to think of […]
University presses bring a diversity not only of costs, scale, and business models, but also of organizational capacity, incentives, and objectives. As efforts are mounted to transition monograph publishing to open access, it is vital that we recognize the richness and complexity of this community.
University presses are not well positioned to thrive in journal publishing because they have not adopted any of the (relatively few and common) business strategies that are necessary, given market dynamics, for success. I do not put forth this thesis lightly. I have great affection and admiration for university presses, their value — craftsmanship, attention to detail, “getting it right”— and their mission. This is not admiration from afar: I served, in the formative years of my career, at the University of Chicago Press (Chicago), where I learned the tools of the trade and many of the practices and protocols of scholarly publishing still in use today. But after nearly two decades of observing university presses, from within and without, this thesis seems to be inescapable.
An interview with Charles Watkinson, Mike Row, and Mark Edington of the newly-announced Lever Press open access book initiative.
Alison Mudditt presents a guest post from Julia Kostova and Patrick Alexander that asks questions about how information is vetted in the digital age, and what role scholarly publishers will continue to play.
Library-based publishing is growing. A recent survey in Australia shows that “increasing visibility of the university brand” is a common objective. Charlie Rapple considers some of the challenges relating to brand for this growing sector.
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.