AAA Publishing Looks Toward the (Murky) Future – Anthropology News

“As a committee, we have discussed various business models for open access, from transformative agreements like the one between Elsevier and the University of California system to the Subscribe to Open model now being implemented at Berghahn and Annual Reviews. We have begun to consider a more federated approach to AnthroSource that would bring together AAA content from multiple sources, inspired by the work of the Next Generation Library Publishing project. Over the past decade, different iterations of the PFC have also thought about the possibility of creating a larger mega-journal composed of Sections corresponding to some of the subfields represented in our current portfolio….

The second step of the process will be to engage a third-party scholarly communication consultant to assist in plotting out scenarios for a sustainable future for the AAA publishing program. Experience with a range of open access models and a demonstrated understanding of the challenges facing social science society publishers will be our primary considerations in selecting a consultant. A consultant who sees the advantages of partnering with different types of publishers will be given the highest consideration. The committee regards the results of the self-study as critical to the consultant’s work, and we will request that prospective consultants outline a process for reaching out to and collaborating with the Sections. It is the PFC’s hope that the consultant will be able to provide each publishing section with a clearer understanding of not only a future for their journal but also of the portfolio as it moves toward a more open future.”

Time to Reform Academic Publishing | Forum

“In particular, as graduate, professional, and medical students, we have been shaped by the relics of an inequitable publishing model that was created before the age of the internet. Our everyday work—from designing and running experiments to diagnosing and treating patients—relies on the results of taxpayer-funded research. Having these resources freely available will help to accelerate innovation and level the playing field for smaller and less well-funded research groups and institutions. With this goal of creating an equitable research ecosystem in mind, we want to highlight the importance of creating one that is equitable in whole….

But today, the incentives for institutions do not align with goals of equity, and change will be necessary to help support a more equitable system. Nor do incentives within institutions always align with these goals. This is especially true for early-career researchers, who might struggle to comply with new open-access guidelines if they need to pay a high article publishing fee to make their research open in a journal that is valued by their institutions’ promotion and tenure guidelines.

To these ends, it is imperative that the process for communicating research results to the public and other researchers does not shift from a “pay-to-read” model to a “pay-to-publish” model. That is, we should not use taxpayer dollars to pay publishers to make research available, nor should we simply pass these costs on to researchers. This approach would be unsustainable long-term and would go against the equity goals of the new OSTP policy. Instead, we hope that funders, professional societies, and institutions will come along with us in imagining and supporting innovative ways for communicating science that are more equitable and better for research….”

How can I persuade my institution to support collective funding for open access books? | Community-led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (Part One) · Community-led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM)

By Lucy Barnes and Tom Grady

As part of our work at COPIM, we speak to a lot of librarians. Many are personally convinced of the need to support collective funding models for open access (OA) books because these serve as equitable alternatives to the Book Processing Charge model,[undefined] but many librarians find themselves in the position of needing to convince their management team or budget holders to invest in Open Access initiatives.

For librarians who find themselves in this position, we have compiled a list of resources and arguments to help inform decisions to invest in OA monograph initiatives. This will be a two part blog post: in the first we’ll give some background by laying out the problems with Book Processing Charges (BPCs) and disentangling the various alternative models; in Part Two we’ll go into more detail, with practical steps on how colleagues might convince their budget holders to invest in collective funding models.

So, why should a library or institution invest in collective funding for open access books?

[…]

 

How can I persuade my institution to support collective funding for open access books? (Part Two) | Community-led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM)

This is the second part of a two-part blog post. Part One explores why your institution should support collective funding for open access books. This second post highlights practical steps you can take to build a case to management for supporting collective OA book funding.

 

Open Access Publishing: A Study of UC Berkeley Faculty Views and Practices

Abstract:  This project focused on open access (OA) publishing, which enhances researcher productivity and impact by increasing dissemination of, and access to, research. The study looked at the relationship between faculty’s attitudes toward OA and their OA publishing practices, including the roles of funding availability and discipline. The project team compared University of California Berkeley (Berkeley) faculty’s answers to questions related to OA from the 2018 Ithaka Faculty Survey with the faculty’s scholarly output in the Scopus database. Faculty Survey data showed that 71% of Berkeley faculty, compared to 64% of faculty nationwide, support a transition to OA publishing. However, when selecting a journal to publish in, faculty indicated that a journal having no cost to publish in was more important than having no cost to read. After joining faculty’s survey responses and their publication output, the data sample included 4,413 articles published by 479 Berkeley faculty from 2016 to 2019. With considerable disciplinary differences, the OA publication output for this sample, using data from Unpaywall, represented 72% of the total publication output. The study focused on Gold OA articles, which usually require authors to pay Article Processing Charges (APCs) and which accounted for 18% of the publications. Overall, the study found a positive correlation between publishing Gold OA and the faculty’s support for OA (no cost to read). In contrast, the correlation between publishing Gold OA and the faculty’s concern about publishing cost was weak. Publishing costs concerned faculty in all subject areas, whether or not their articles reported research funding. Thus, Berkeley Library’s efforts to pursue transformative publishing agreements and prioritize funding for a program subsidizing publishing fees seem like effective strategies to increase OA. 

Library Impact Research Report: Open Access Publishing: A Study of UC Berkeley Faculty Views and Practices – Association of Research Libraries

Overall, the UC Berkeley study found a positive correlation between publishing gold OA and the faculty’s support for OA (no cost to read). In contrast, the correlation between publishing gold OA and the faculty’s concern about publishing cost was weak. Publishing costs concerned faculty in all subject areas, whether or not their articles reported research funding. Therefore, UC Berkeley Library’s efforts to pursue transformative publishing agreements and prioritize funding for a program subsidizing publishing fees seem like effective strategies to increase OA.

Global Professional Publishing 2022-2026 : Market Research Report

“Key Findings

Among the key findings highlighted in the report are:

The largest segment withing professional publishing is Tax, Accounting and Business, which generated revenue of $40.8 billion in 2021, gaining 7.1% year over year.
RELX continues its reign at the top of the professional publishing industry, delivering revenue of $8.9 billion in 2021 with a market share of 11.9%
Strategic M&A activity, a tight market focus, and application of advanced technology has powered the tax, accounting, and business segment as the growth engine for professional publishing.
Content-drive technology, incorporating AI, machine learning and other advanced technologies is creating new opportunities for publishers to drive growth and improve profitability….”

DIAMAS: Supporting High Quality Diamond Open Access Publishing (podcast)

In this episode, we are discussing the project Developing Institutional Open Access Publishing Models to Advance Scholarly Communication, in short: DIAMAS. At the heart of the project is support for Diamond Open Access, i.e. free for the reader as well as the author (no publishing charges). Co-lead of DIAMAS, Pierre Mounier explains the importance of lending support to not-for-profit institutional publishing. Besides the diversity offered by such scholar-led, high quality publication outlets, the multilingualism that they represent is key when the dissemination of knowledge and the promotion of citizen science across Europe is taken into account. The Helsinki Initiative on Multilingualism in Scholarly Publishing lends verbal support to linguistically diverse scholarly outputs; the EU-funded DIAMAS Project paves the way for stronger and more sustainable infrastructures facilitating them.

Since its inception in September 2022, the project will last for 3 years. An ultimate goal of DIAMAS is to help the providers of publishing services raise the quality and visibility of diamond open access by establishing a Europe-wide capacity center. A sister project, CRAFT-OA, focusing on the purely technical aspects of institutional diamond open access publishing begins in January 2023. The preliminary Diamond OA Journals Study (published March 2021), the first ever global survey of diamond open access journals, serves as foundation for both projects.

 

The recording was made in conjunction with the Munin Conference on Scholarly Publishing in December 2022. First published online January 10, 2023.

JSTOR and university press partners announce Path to Open Books pilot

JSTOR, part of the non-profit ITHAKA, and a cohort of leading university presses announced today Path to Open, a program to support the open access publication of new groundbreaking scholarly books that will bring diverse perspectives and research to millions of people.

 

Tired of the profiteering in academic publishing? Vote with your feet. – Spatial Ecology and Evolution Lab

“First, let’s say one of the Olympian Editors asks you to review a manuscript for one of the profit-making esteem engines. You record on your CV that you have been asked to review for this journal (esteem points!), but you politely decline the invitation, explaining that you would rather your professional service go towards open science initiatives.

The editor at the esteem factory finds that her job has just become a lot harder than it used to be. It is hard to find reviewers, and the reviews aren’t as thorough or as good anymore. She keeps the line on her CV stating that she has been an editor at X (esteem points!), and then steps down at the next opportunity. She has better things to do than spend her days cajoling reluctant reviewers. And so it goes.

Being a discerning reviewer has nothing but benefits. There are no esteem points lost for the individual, and there is a higher turnover of editorial staff at high-esteem journals. This turnover means more opportunity and less competition for these positions, and it means the esteem hierarchy is flattened somewhat because, well, who hasn’t been an editor for Nature, and, besides, the stuff published there isn’t as good as it used to be. Overburdened reviewers have an important reason to do less reviewing; they are, through individual decision, changing the face of academic publishing and making science accessible to all….”

Craft OA: EU-Projekt zur Förderung von Diamond Open Access (EU project to foster uptake of Diamond OA) | OPERAS-GER

engl. version via deepl.com

    OPERAS is a consortium partner of the EU project “Creating a Robust Accessible Federated Technology for Open Access”, short: CRAFT-OA, which started in January 2023. The project with a total of 23 partners in 14 European countries is funded by the European Commission for three years with 4.8 million euros. The project is led by the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen / Niedersächsische Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen (SUB Göttingen).

    CRAFT-OA aims to strengthen and further develop institutional publishing in the Diamond Open Access model throughout Europe. The Diamond Open Access model means that researchers do not have to pay for the publication of scientific publications and readers do not have to pay for access to them. The special feature of CRAFT-OA is its focus on journal publishing. For this purpose, services and tools are to be developed that will enable local and regional platforms and service providers to expand their content, services and also platforms and thus achieve stronger networking with other information systems in science. For scientists in the institutional Diamond Open Access area, this means easier work.

German original:

OPERAS ist Konsortiumspartner des im Januar 2023 gestarteten EU-Projekts „Creating a Robust Accessible Federated Technology for Open Access“, kurz: CRAFT-OA. Das Projekt mit insgesamt 23 Partnern in 14 europäischen Ländern wird von der Europäischen Kommission drei Jahre lang mit 4,8 Millionen Euro gefördert. Die Leitung liegt bei der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen / Niedersächsischen Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen (SUB Göttingen).

CRAFT-OA hat das Ziel, europaweit das institutionelle Publikationswesen im Diamond Open Access-Modell zu stärken und weiterzuentwickeln. Unter dem Diamond Open Access-Modell versteht man, dass sowohl die Forschenden für die Veröffentlichung von als auch die Lesenden für den Zugriff auf wissenschaftliche Publikationen keine Gebühren zahlen müssen. Das Besondere an CRAFT-OA ist hierbei die Spezialisierung auf das Journalpublizieren. Hierfür sollen Services und Werkzeuge entwickelt werden, die es lokalen und regionalen Plattformen und Serviceanbietern ermöglichen, ihre Inhalte, Services und auch Plattformen zu erweitern und somit eine stärkere Vernetzung mit anderen Informationssystemen in der Wissenschaft zu erreichen. Für Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler im institutionellen Diamond Open Access-Bereich bedeutet dies ein erleichtertes Arbeiten.

 

Publication and data surveillance in academia | Research Information

“It is becoming increasingly clear that the core functions of higher education are destined to be quantified and that this data will be harvested, curated, and repackaged through a variety of enterprise management platforms. All aspects of the academic lifecycle, such as research production, publication, distribution, impact determination, citation analysis, grant award trends, graduate student research topic, and more can be sold, analysed, and gamed to an unhealthy degree. By unhealthy, we mean constricted and self-consuming as the output we develop is directly contingent on the input we receive. Well-meaning tools, such as algorithmically derived research suggestions and citation analysis, create a shrinking and inequitable academic landscape that favours invisibly defined metrics of impact that are reinforced through further citation thereby limiting the scope and scale of research available….

As the shift to open access gains momentum, there is danger of the unintended consequences as enterprise platforms seek to maximise profit as the models shift from under their feet. As Alexander Grossmann and Björn Brembs discuss, the cost creep incurred by libraries reflects this pivot shifting to a model of author costs, which are often supported by libraries, thereby adjusting costing methods from the backend subscription model to the front-end pay to publish model. It is not surprising or controversial that for-profit enterprise, database, and academic platform vendors are seeking to turn a profit. We should remain vigilant, however, to academia’s willingness to find the easy and convenient solution without considering the longer-term effects of what they are selling. In a recent industry platform webinar, academic enterprise representatives discussed the “alchemy” of user-derived data and their ability to repackage and sell this data, with consent, to development companies with their key take away being a driver towards increased revenue. More to the point, they had learned the lessons of the tech industry, and more specifically the social media companies in understanding the data we generate can be used to target us, to sell to us, to use us for further development. They discussed the ways in which the use of this data would become, like social media, intelligent and drive user behaviour – further cinching the knot on the closed-loop as algorithmically-based suggestions further constrain research and reinforce a status-quo enabled by profit motive in the guise of engagement, use, and reuse….”

Digital Publishing Manager – University Libraries

“Reporting to the Head of the Digital Library at Washington University Libraries, the Digital Publishing Manager plans, develops, implements, and assesses the services and operations for the University Libraries’ programs and services in support of long-form publishing and scholarly digital projects. The incumbent is responsible for creating a customer-first approach to delivering robust services, engaging in user support, training, and outreach, and collaborating with colleagues in the Libraries and University departments to create and manage content. The incumbent may support related library repository initiatives and provide backup support for additional DLPS services….

Preferred Qualifications…

 

Knowledge of trends, issues, and resources in scholarly publishing, digital scholarship, scholarly communications, and/or open access….”

New to the SCN: Publishing Values-based Scholarly Communication | OER + ScholComm

This is the latest post in a series announcing resources created for the Scholarly Communication Notebook, or SCN. The SCN is a hub of open teaching and learning content on scholcomm topics that is both a complement to an open book-level introduction to scholarly communication librarianship and a disciplinary and course community for inclusively sharing models and practices. IMLS funded the SCN in 2019, permitting us to pay creators for their labor while building a solid initial collection. These works are the result of one of three calls for proposals (our first CFP was issued in fall 2020; the second in late spring ‘21, and the third in late fall 2021).