RE: Institutional Journal Costs in an Open Access Environment

[Janellyn P Kleiner <jkleiner@lsu.edu>]

Springer & Elsevier are commercial publishers that must show a 
profit - at least for share-holders. There will never be 
sufficient money from author fees to support them or any other 
major journal or major publishers with national and/or 
international distribution. Information is today's product and 
until something else replaces that in the future (and it most 
likely will), there will always be costs related to it. At least, 
in any future within our lifetime, I don't see "free journals" as 
the only journals published in the future. Certainly, some will 
be free, and eventually publishing may well be replaced by 
something else: computer chips implanted in our brains maybe? 
But, you'd still have to buy the chips.

Faculty in the sciences have paid and many still pay page charges 
or charges for special editorial services. These charges have 
been supported by their departments or their grants for decades 
as have their travel expenses to present papers. Yes, we have 
Arxiv and some other similar activities, but in today's world, 
for better our worse, even the physicists can't do good work in 
isolation. I do think the role of libraries is evolving and in 
the future may be more active as an access center or distributor 
of information, but I do think it will have a role if only as an 
expanded information commons plus a special collections facility. 
It would be a terrible mistake for university libraries to 
involve themselves in the promotion/tenure practices of 
departments. I've worked in the business world and academia and 
been involved in administration for a long time. It is the 
grossest naivete to think these commercial outfits are going to 
give up their profits without a very long and extended fight. My 
guess is they'll evolve another information product or service 
should OA start making truly disturbing inroads on their profits 
because their very existence depends on a substantial revenue 
stream.  Publishers that may be damaged are small, speciality 
presses and, unfortunately, scholarly association publishers.

And, as for letting the Dean handle it, we handle a lot of very 
touchy situations -- journal cancellations being the first that 
comes to mind. We can defend ourselves successfully on library 
matters and have had to with the budget "gods", but decisions on 
support for authors' fees are out of the realm of any library 
administrator.  If we were in some weird dimension where 
libraries never had to pay for journals/information, it would be 
more effective to give the library funds to the academic 
departments where there is the knowledge and experience needed to 
decide which faculty efforts should be supported and which need 
help. I've been on enough editorial boards and reviewed enough 
grants to know that the majority should not be published and the 
proposals do not merit funding.  Many large universities, 
including mine, have internal peer groups that review grants 
before they can be submitted to external funding agencies.  In my 
library, we have faculty who review grant proposals and 
publication drafts for those who have no experience in those 
areas. The more successful faculty then assist those who need and 
want the help. Both of these practices have been very effective 
and led to success in both publishing and funded grants. 
Universities would need such internal peer groups in place in 
their disciplines before committing funds for publishing. 
Libraries are not the place to take on those responsibilities 
outside their own discipline.  I foresee a mix of OA and 
commercial publications for a long time to come and market forces 
will determine the outcome. That's not something that I 
necessarily favor but I think that's the reality of the 
situation. Profit, as in everything, is the motivating factor. 
Follow the money is as true in this environment as in any other.

And, strange as you may find it, we have already broached this 
topic with our University budget officers. We provided the 
arguments I summarized here. The money guys considered, decided 
we were right, that this was not the responsibility of the 
library, and no one took any money away. In fact, we got an extra 
million this past year -- not because of this but because we 
could justify our need. Numbers and logic are strong persuaders 
when you deal with University budget administrators.

Jane Kleiner
Associate Dean of Libraries for Collection Services
The LSU Libraries
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Phone: 225-578-2217
Fax: 225-578-6825
E-Mail: jkleiner@lsu.edu


"David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>@lists.yale.edu on 05/02/2006
06:09:54 PM
cc:     (bcc: Janellyn P Kleiner/jkleiner/LSU)
Subject:    RE: Institutional Journal Costs in an Open Access Environment

If the Springer or the Elsevier [etc.] journals are paid for by 
author fees, the library will not need to subscribe to them. If 
the library will not need to subscribe to them, it will not need 
the money it has been using for it.

There are now two choices for the library: a/ use the money for 
subsidizing the faculty's publishing in such journals b/ let the 
Dean use the money to subsidize the faculty's publishing in such 
journals.

Who is naive enough to think that a library could keep the money?

The best the library will be able to do, is to let the Dean use 
half the money for subsidizing faculty publication, and let the 
library use the other half for improving library resources 
generally. I would strongly advise proposing this very soon--if 
the administration proposes it before the library does, the 
probable result will be for the library to give up 90% of the 
money for subsidizing faculty publications, and be generously 
permitted to keep 5 or 10% for library purchases.

I think the library can expect the cooperation of the humanities 
faculty, who are desperately in need of some source of money for 
publishing subsidies, and would be delighted if there were also 
some money to use on materials for them. You probably could count 
on many of the science faculty too. All they need is the 
journals, and if the publishers supply them without a 
subscription, they have no further use for the money except to 
subsidize their own articles.

(As Phil Davis posted in short dramatic form, the worst strategy 
is to distribute the money yourself, and let the faculty all 
resent the library's decisions. Let any conflict take place in 
the administrative offices--the Dean is used to it.)

The problem is to accomplish the two ends at the same time--to 
let the journals rely on articles fees so the libraries can 
cancel the subscriptions, and for the libraries to cancel the 
subscriptions to supply the money for fees.  This takes 
cooperation on all sides.

After we stop laughing, consider the alternative:  the libraries 
can watch the journal costs escalate until no library can buy 
them, and the following year the journals will mostly cease 
publication. The library, the administration, the faculty, and 
the publishers will all have passively cooperated-- in letting 
the scholarly publication system fall apart.

Fortunately, the scientists will rig up some sort of crude IR by 
themselves. The library, no longer needed, will become faculty 
offices, and the librarians as they retire will not be replaced. 
The process is already beginning in the sciences.

Dr. David Goodman
Associate Professor
Palmer School of Library and Information Science
Long Island University
and, formerly, Princeton University Library
dgoodman@princeton.edu