RI Webinar: The value of transformative agreements – 1579101

“Summary

With ever-tighter budgets, how do institutions decide whether transformative/read-and -publish agreements represent good value? If they do make the decision, what are the implications for librarians?

 

Key takeaways

A breakdown of the impact of transformative agreements on libraries
Insights into programmes that can help libraries implement transformative agreements
Funding considerations and the value transformative agreements can provide…”

What we are working on: 2022-11-04 | Invest in Open Infrastructure

“We hosted our first Funders Summit. More than 60 participants joined us in discussing why, how, and what to fund in open infrastructure. We look forward to sharing out more from the Summit in the next few weeks!

We announced the launch of a fund to further investment in open infrastructure globally. The fund will serve to catalyze and deepen investment in under-resourced areas, increase and expand the pool of funders of open infrastructure, and activate a mechanism for bold, higher-risk investments. Over the course of the next year, we will be hosting invited discussions and launching a Community Investment Council to bring transparency and accountability to fund stewardship. You can register your interest to join those conversations via this short survey….”

Full article: Lessons Learned from Reevaluating Big Deals with Unsub

Abstract:  The value of big deals is increasingly unclear. This article briefly discusses factors others have considered in evaluating big deals and covers the four factors that should be considered moving forward: open access, interlibrary loan, post-termination access, and a-la-carte costs. Unsub, a tool for reevaluating big deals created by the nonprofit OurResearch, is introduced. Lessons learned are shared from two years of helping libraries reevaluate big deals to provide insight into the complexities and tradeoffs involved in evaluating big deals across many libraries.

 

Libraries take charge

“The Open Access publishing landscape: why academic libraries are entering the Open Access publishing space….

Academic publishing is changing, and university libraries are becoming more intrinsically woven into the fabric of the new landscape. Although publishers affiliated with universities, such as Cambridge University Press and Oxford University Press, have been around for centuries, university libraries are now launching their own publishing and content hosting initiatives, usually with a sole focus on Open Access. If you’re not familiar with it, Open Access is part of a movement to facilitate the free exchange of knowledge and widen access globally. It often entails publishing academic articles, books, resources and content under public copyright licences, usually Creative Commons licenses, to enable free distribution and reuse of the work under certain conditions.

 

The past decade has seen the launch of several new university presses in the UK dedicated to publishing Open Access research, including Cardiff University Press (launched in 2014), UCL Press (2015), the University of Westminster Press (2015), White Rose Press (2016) and, most recently, the Scottish Universities Press (2022). At the same time, libraries have been carving out their own space in the publishing sphere, providing hosting solutions to their academics, staff and students. Initiatives include the University of St Andrews Journal Hosting Service, Liverpool John Moores University Open Journals Service and Edinburgh Diamond (which I manage)….”

How to make more than 200 monograph titles available OA annually on a small-ish budget

When it comes to library budgets, how far can £10,000 stretch? Access to a small database, a couple of journals, a handful of article processing charges (APCs), maybe one OA book via a book processing charge (BPC)?

That figure might also support scholar-led and small university presses to publish more than 200 front-list monographs annually on an immediate open access (OA) basis. Sound interesting?

Jisc has been supporting a number of OA monograph community agreements, which operate on a few different models, but all with the aim of raising sufficient income to allow the publication of new monograph content without needing to charge the author a BPC.

 

Critique of “Transformative” Reasons: “T”As and Their Discontents | Brianne Selman @ Library Publishing Forum, 18 May 2022

Presentation slides by Brianne Selman. Session description: “This session will summarize some of the major categories of the critiques of “transformative” agreements. Perspectives that critique negotiation approaches, the continued bundling of costs into large agreements, market concentrations, decline in scholarly standards, analysis of whether OA goals are even being met by TAs, as well as major equity and diversity concerns will be summarized and discussed.”

From library budget to information budget: fostering transparency in the transformation towards open access

The discussion on the transformation of scholarly journals to open access (OA) increasingly concerns financial aspects. Considering the variety of funding strategies for article processing charge (APCs), the array of cost types for scientific information and the need for data monitoring to promote cost transparency, an integrated view of the financial dimension of the OA transition is needed. This commentary describes the need for implementing an information budget that looks beyond just the library budget and comprehensively targets all financial flows from universities and other research performing organizations to publishers. An information budget promotes an integrated perspective on the distributed costs at a given institution. This centralized approach of assessing financial flows can be used to strengthen the position of research institutions when negotiating with publishers.

From library budget to information budget: fostering transparency in the transformation towards open access

The discussion on the transformation of scholarly journals to open access (OA) increasingly concerns financial aspects. Considering the variety of funding strategies for article processing charge (APCs), the array of cost types for scientific information and the need for data monitoring to promote cost transparency, an integrated view of the financial dimension of the OA transition is needed. This commentary describes the need for implementing an information budget that looks beyond just the library budget and comprehensively targets all financial flows from universities and other research performing organizations to publishers. An information budget promotes an integrated perspective on the distributed costs at a given institution. This centralized approach of assessing financial flows can be used to strengthen the position of research institutions when negotiating with publishers.

India and a historical perspective of open access | Emerald Insight

Abstract:  Purpose

The environments of the library under open access (OA) are distinctively found as less expensive which ultimately reciprocates better services and technological support for the users as well. Focussing on the Librarians’ perspective, the purpose of the study is to highlight and establish a balance between the vision of OA initiatives and the support of Librarians in India. The principal and philosophy of the study are based upon the exploration of open source initiatives and their significance among the Library & Information Science community.

Design/methodology/approach

The study reflects the historical perspective of OA in India and around the world. The study further focusses on how the OA movement has taken a leap in adaptability by the librarians on the basis of acceptance model given. Considering the reviews of the librarians, the study reflects the librarians support OA initiatives in India. OA is a “provocation to thought”, it is a “social contract”.

Findings

Exploring beyond the researchers have come across that OA is a belief where knowledge evolves best when shared. Based on the acceptance the study given significant. It describes the librarian’s attitude while embracing the OA model with an increased acceptance towards OA, which supports in building Institutional Repositories and broadening the research horizons based on budgetary implications. The librarians and libraries adopt and work to build up a resilient model for OA to bring out awareness among the users.

Research limitations/implications

The scope of the study is limited to Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. The focus of the study is purposely laid down on the three given states of India keeping in mind Delhi being a capital city of India, Uttar Pradesh being the largest state of India (area wise) and Haryana state, which opened up multiple educational opportunities for the students and researchers Rajiv Gandhi Educational city plans to host many educational institutions including medical and engineering institutions.

Practical implications

The study describes the librarian’s attitude while embracing the OA model with an increased acceptance towards the OA, which supports in building Institutional Repositories and broadening the research horizons based on budgetary implications. The librarians and libraries adopt and work to build up a resilient model for OA to bring out awareness among the users.

Social implications

The present study brings out the need of different policies and mandates by Government of India for OA along with University Grants Commission, National Knowledge Commission and Research Organisation to promote the culture of OA. The study further recommends that LIS communities come together and build the learning culture to promote limitless sharing of information and knowledge for scholarly society.

Originality/value

This research work aims to make a difference in highlighting the librarians’ support on OA initiatives in India due to the role of librarians on transitional point. Dissemination and management of information using digital technology during pandemic have had a significant impact on divided environment. With this paradigm shift, the world struggles with the pandemic. The librarians try to keep themselves in pace by embracing the technology and LIS professionals do adopt the radical reventure the info technology.

Full article: The Buyback Dilemma: How We Developed a Principle-Based, Data-Driven Approach to Unbundling Big Deals

Abstract:  [University of Saskatchewan] is a publicly funded, medium-sized research intensive medical doctoral university in Canada. Like other academic libraries, we have been coping with the rising costs of Big Deal journal packages in the context of shrinking budgets and variable currency fluctuation between the Canadian and American Dollar. When faced with a need to cancel two Big Deal packages in order to balance our budget, we undertook a data-driven, principles-based approach. We discuss the context at [University of Saskatchewan], and the principles and steps we used to successfully determine which packages to cancel, and how to determine titles for re-subscription within a limited budget. We discuss how we compiled and used data that addresses scholarly (citation), pedagogical (downloads), and reputational (survey responses) concerns, and share the formula we developed. We also share some lessons learned and recommendations and ideas for future Big Deal assessment.

 

Library funding for open access at KU Leuven

Abstract:  As main buyers of scholarly literature, research libraries have always provided essential economic support for sustaining the market of academic publishing. With the switch to open access (OA), libraries are now faced with transitioning this support from the demand (subscriptions) to the supply (publications) side. The way in which this is currently done, in general, risks strengthening the preponderance of the for-profit approach to scholarly communication. We therefore believe that it is essential to apply library budgets to foster a greater diversity. That is exactly the purpose of the Fund for Fair Open Access, set up by KU Leuven Libraries in 2018, which is exclusively devoted to stimulating the development of non-profit and community-led initiatives. This is achieved by library memberships to sustain open scholarship infrastructure, by supporting diamond OA programmes and by subsidizing OA books published by Leuven University Press. In this article, we will demonstrate the accomplished successes of the fund and share some insights we have gathered along the way, such as our decision to cease financing article processing charges, even in a Fair OA business model.

 

Library Funding for Open Access at KU Leuven

As main buyers of scholarly literature, research libraries have always provided essential economic support for sustaining the market of academic publishing. With the switch to open access (OA), libraries are now faced with transitioning this support from the demand (subscriptions) to the supply (publications) side. The way in which this is currently done, in general, risks strengthening the preponderance of the for-profit approach to scholarly communication. We therefore believe that it is essential to apply library budgets to foster a greater diversity. That is exactly the purpose of the Fund for Fair Open Access, set up by KU Leuven Libraries in 2018, which is exclusively devoted to stimulating the development of non-profit and community-led initiatives. This is achieved by library memberships to sustain open scholarship infrastructure, by supporting diamond OA programmes and by subsidizing OA books published by Leuven University Press. In this article, we will demonstrate the accomplished successes of the fund and share some insights we have gathered along the way, such as our decision to cease financing article processing charges, even in a Fair OA business model.

Thinking politically about scholarly infrastructure: Commit the publishers to 2.5% | Boston | College & Research Libraries News

Boston, A. (2021). Thinking politically about scholarly infrastructure: Commit the publishers to 2.5%. College & Research Libraries News, 82(6), 265. doi:https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.82.6.265

Abstract

Maybe it’s unsurprising that I think about scholarly communication in terms similar to U.S. politics. I originally drafted this article for the Library Publishing Coalition blog before the 2020 election and revised it for C&RL News during the weirdly long interregnum period before the actual inauguration. The 2016 Republican National Committee was the backdrop to my becoming a scholarly communication librarian in February of that year. That’s also when I joined Twitter, to better follow politics and librarianship, and maybe that’s to blame.

“STEM Abstracting and Indexing (A&I) Tool Overlap Analysis” by Joshua Borycz, Alexander J. Carroll et al.

Abstract:  Objectives: Compare journal coverage of abstract and indexing tools commonly used within academic science and engineering research.

Methods: Title lists of Compendex, Inspec, Reaxys, SciFinder, and Web of Science were provided by their respective publishers. These lists were imported into Excel and the overlap of the ISSN/EISSNs and journal titles was determined using the VLOOKUP command, which determines if the value in one cell can be found in a column of other cells.

Results: There is substantial overlap between the Web of Science’s Science Citation Index Expanded and the Emerging Sources Citation Index, the largest database with 17,014 titles, and Compendex (63.6%), Inspec (71.0%), Reaxys (67.0%), and SciFinder (75.8%). SciFinder also overlaps heavily with Reaxys (75.9%). Web of Science and Compendex combined contain 77.6% of the titles within Inspec.

Conclusion: Flat or decreasing library budgets combined with increasing journal prices result in an unsustainable system that will require a calculated allocation of resources at many institutions. The overlap of commonly indexed journals among abstracting and indexing tools could serve as one way to determine how these resources should be allocated.

The New Abnormal: Periodicals Price Survey 2021 | Library Journal

“A large number of public and academic libraries are also looking at moderate to severe budget contractions due to unplanned COVID-related expenses, declines in tuition dollars, and/or local and state funding cuts. Many institutions are seeing or planning for permanent cuts between 9 and 13 percent to their base budget, a key difference from temporary cuts made after the Great Recession. Public libraries may fare better than academics: in an LJ survey of 223 public libraries across the United States, 84 percent reported an increase in FY21 total operating budgets for a rise of 2.9 percent. (See “The Price of a Pandemic.”) This was more modest than last year’s 3.5 percent increase, but represents continued, if uneven, gains….

Transformative agreements will make more content openly available, but they won’t pump any more money into library budgets or promise to make scholarly communications more sustainable. In the absence of national or statewide plans for funding OA (California being the notable exception), it’s difficult to see most “publish” universities in the United States agreeing to shoulder the costs of transformative agreements to make content open for all to read, particularly when faced with permanent budget cuts….

For the first time in a decade, libraries can anticipate subscription price increases of less than 6 percent: 3-4 percent is predicted for 2022. If a local serial portfolio skews toward large publishers, then the increase will be toward the 4 percent level. But with most institutions preparing for further collection cuts, even such a modest increase is not sustainable. Supported by faculty and emboldened by seeing the goals of Plan S and OA2020 start to come to fruition, libraries will be likely more prepared than ever to walk away from the table. Publishers will need to sharpen their pencils….

Although there were increases in the metrics for Impact Factor and Eigenfactor, the increases were not comparable to the increase in price. The average price ($6,637) for the most expensive journals was 18 times higher than the least expensive ($338), while the Impact Factor slightly more than doubled. The price increases for the more moderately priced titles were also lower than the more expensive titles, which showed close to a 4 percent increase. This analysis continues to show that higher priced titles do have higher Impact Factors and Eigenfactors, but the increase in the metrics is small when compared with the huge increase in costs….”