Category Archives: oa.negotiations

Statement of support for the sector’s rejection of the Springer Nature proposal

Posted on by
Reply

“Our university members are fully behind the recent decision by the sector, and the negotiating team, to reject the latest offer from Springer Nature. We recognise and welcome the improvements that Springer Nature has made to its offer throughout the negotiations. However, the latest proposal still does not meet the needs of the sector and our members.

UK universities agreed a clear set of requirements at the start of the negotiations and these must be met before we will support an agreement with Springer Nature. The requirements include reducing and constraining costs, ensuring all UK research can be published open access, and providing greater transparency on costs and Springer Nature’s transition to open research.

We support the continuation of negotiations in the hope an appropriate agreement can be reached which will make the transition to open access financially sustainable and equitable….”

Pressing ‘pause’ on Elsevier subscription | News | dailyemerald.com

Posted on by
Reply

“On Nov. 17, 2022, University of Oregon Executive Vice President Janet Woodruff-Borden said UO will pause its subscription journal package with Elsevier Publishing Company at the end of 2022 in an email announcement….

UO partnered with Oregon State University and Portland State University, who also subscribe to Elsevier’s journal package, to negotiate prices with Elsevier. All three universities ended their subscriptions after failing to reach an agreement….

The three universities were looking to cut the cost of each of their subscription packages by 50%, which Elsevier was aware of going into negotiations, Bowman said….

 

Part of the disagreement between Elsevier and universities was that Elsevier was charging the same price, even though many of its articles were open access, Dave Fowler, a collection management librarian at UO, said. In other words, anyone could have access to certain Elsevier published content without paying a subscription to Elsevier….

Because of the contract lapse, students and faculty may experience delays in having access to requested Elsevier articles, Salaz said. “In the long term however, we are confident that students, researchers and scholars everywhere will benefit from a system that doesn’t exploit academic labor for excessive profit,” she said….”

Guest Post – Texas Library Coalition for United Action (TLCUA) and Elsevier Conclude Negotiations for Access to ScienceDirect Journals – The Scholarly Kitchen

Posted on by
Reply

“Designing an access and pricing model that satisfies the needs of a diverse membership like TLCUA’s presents a unique challenge. Starting with clear objectives and sticking with them is one of the basics of successful negotiation. TLCUA tested that principle by beginning with two goals that could be satisfied in multiple ways. TLCUA’s lofty goal of a single pricing model that meets the needs of all members and is unrelated to historical spend proved untenable, as members were dealing with different financial pressures and different needs for access. Instead, the coalition agreed on several package options for members.

All the options address TLCUA’s concern with financial sustainability, with reduced spends ranging from 2.5% to 30%. All options include a price decrease in the first year. The contract term aligns all TLCUA contracts to end in 2024. Three-year contracts have a 0% price increase in year two and a 2% price increase in year three, while four-year contracts have a 0% increase in year two, a 1% increase in year three, and a 2% increase in year four.

In the agreement, TLCUA and Elsevier agreed to remove references to outdated CONTU guidelines in the interlibrary loan provision. In addition, the parties agreed to remove non-disclosure terms from licenses. Both changes are important for libraries to work together to meet the needs of the scholarly community….

The agreement includes two provisions focused on increasing access to scholarly publications. First, authors affiliated with a TLCUA member are entitled to a discount on APCs during the contract period. Authors publishing in Elsevier Gold OA journals receive a 10% discount, while those publishing in Hybrid OA journals receive a 15% discount. Cell Press titles, The Lancet, and certain society titles are excluded from the discount. Elsevier has extended similar discounts to other groups. There is no cap on the number of articles TLCUA members can publish as open access using these discounts.

Second, TLCUA asked Elsevier to explore alternatives to authors permanently transferring copyright to publishers, without requiring the author to pay an APC for open access publishing. Publishers say that signing over copyright to them allows them to recoup the costs of producing a journal, plus some profit.  In the United States, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years, which seems longer than needed to meet the goal of providing publishers appropriate recompense for the valuable services they provide. Elsevier, like many publishers, has an author rights statement, which outlines ways authors may use their own work without requesting permission from the publisher. TLCUA acknowledges that Elsevier’s author rights statement meets many needs, but seeks a more robust protection for authors. Not only are author rights statements subject to change by the publisher, but when journals are acquired, the new publisher may not offer the same privileges….”

ALLEA advocates for EU-wide secondary publication rights and better negotiation of ‘big deals’ – International Science Council

Posted on by
Reply

“In the light of an increase in spending on scholarly publishing, and new rules on copyright law in the European Union (EU), ALLEA recently released a statement that evaluates the negative consequences of so-called ‘Big Deals’ and provides recommendations for research institutes, libraries and policy-makers to work towards change.

‘Big deals’, or ‘read and publish agreements’, are concluded between scientific publishers, on one side, and research libraries, institutions and universities, on the other, in order to provide access for readers and authors of scientific journals.

An increase in the number of articles published under a Gold Open Access model – and thus free to read – has come at the expense of the authors of scholarly publications, who often face substantial article processing charges (APCs) to publish their work as Open Access….”

TRLN E-Resources Management Working Group Publishes TRLN Guide to Negotiating Accessibility in E-Resource Licenses – Triangle Research Libraries Network

Posted on by
Reply

“The E-Resources Management Working Group (ERMWG) of the Triangle Research Libraries Network (TRLN) is pleased to announce the publication of the TRLN Guide to Negotiating Accessibility in E-Resource Licenses. This guide was created to help TRLN member libraries engage in conversations with vendors around e-resource accessibility. Recognizing that licensing is key to codifying the shared understandings and priorities of vendors and libraries, the TRLN E-Resources Management Working Group sought to create “a reference tool for library staff involved in licensing and e-resources management as they advocate for strong accessibility assurances in their formal contracts with service and content providers.” …”

Texas consortium of 44 colleges strikes deal with Elsevier

Posted on by
Reply

” “If you want open access to become the universal model of access to scholarship, then [this deal] … is going to feel like a real setback,” Rick Anderson, university librarian at Brigham Young University, said, referring to the set of principles and practices in which research articles are available online free, without barriers. “But if you’re OK with the subscription model in principle and just want to see it work better for all parties, then this deal provides what may be a very useful template.”…

Lower Costs, More (Though Not Open) Access

In the agreement, Elsevier said it will cap annual increases at 2 percent, which is lower than the industry standard—“startlingly low,” Anderson said. That near-term cost certainty will allow member institutions to budget responsibly, according to Charles Weaver, associate dean for sciences and professor of psychology and neuroscience at Baylor University, who served on the consortium’s negotiating team. Baylor is a consortium member.

The deal also includes a pilot project in which article copyrights revert to authors “after a period of time that will be collaboratively determined” by consortium members and Elsevier, according to the news release. In addition, authors affiliated with the consortium who publish open access will pay discounted author publication charges….

But some, including some consortium members, see some shortcomings.

“Our institution would have liked to see more increased focus on open-access publishing,” said Catherine Rudowsky, dean of university libraries at Texas A&M University at Corpus Christi, who served on the steering committee and whose institution is a coalition member. “We appreciated the reduced author publication charges, but at the end of the day, we are still paying Elsevier to read and to publish. We will not solve the world’s biggest problems by limiting access to research and by controlling information.” …”

Texas consortium of 44 colleges strikes deal with Elsevier

Posted on by
Reply

” “If you want open access to become the universal model of access to scholarship, then [this deal] … is going to feel like a real setback,” Rick Anderson, university librarian at Brigham Young University, said, referring to the set of principles and practices in which research articles are available online free, without barriers. “But if you’re OK with the subscription model in principle and just want to see it work better for all parties, then this deal provides what may be a very useful template.”…

Lower Costs, More (Though Not Open) Access

In the agreement, Elsevier said it will cap annual increases at 2 percent, which is lower than the industry standard—“startlingly low,” Anderson said. That near-term cost certainty will allow member institutions to budget responsibly, according to Charles Weaver, associate dean for sciences and professor of psychology and neuroscience at Baylor University, who served on the consortium’s negotiating team. Baylor is a consortium member.

The deal also includes a pilot project in which article copyrights revert to authors “after a period of time that will be collaboratively determined” by consortium members and Elsevier, according to the news release. In addition, authors affiliated with the consortium who publish open access will pay discounted author publication charges….

But some, including some consortium members, see some shortcomings.

“Our institution would have liked to see more increased focus on open-access publishing,” said Catherine Rudowsky, dean of university libraries at Texas A&M University at Corpus Christi, who served on the steering committee and whose institution is a coalition member. “We appreciated the reduced author publication charges, but at the end of the day, we are still paying Elsevier to read and to publish. We will not solve the world’s biggest problems by limiting access to research and by controlling information.” …”

India heads into open access negotiations | Times Higher Education (THE)

Posted on by
Reply

“India could drive a hard bargain with academic publishers, leveraging its massive higher education system to secure a favourable nationwide deal for journal subscriptions, according to Europe’s open access guru….

From April 2023, India will adopt a “One Nation, One Subscription” policy, a move that would replace individual subscriptions with a single centrally negotiated deal, bringing all government-funded universities under one umbrella and putting it on par with countries such as Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland….

Johan Rooryck, executive director of the Coalition S group of funders advocating for open access in Europe, said India was in a “very strong position” heading into the talks. “They seem to have unified…subscribers into a single national negotiation consortium. That puts them in a very different position from when subscriptions were negotiated with individual universities,” he said.

The move comes at a time when institutions increasingly have come to expect open access, following the removal of paywalls during the pandemic. Just months ago, a Biden administration decision mandated that all federally funded research in the US be made freely available, seen as paving the way for global open access….”

Education Ministry To Implement ‘One Nation One Subscription’ For Open Access To Research Papers

Posted on by
Reply

“The Ministry of Education (MoE), Government of India will implement the ‘One Nation One Subscription’ (ONOS) initiative for open access to scientific research papers and journal publication in India from April 1, 2023. All the educational and research institutions, including universities, colleges, and research organisations, as well as each and every person in the nation, are expected to gain benefit from this initiative.

 

The core committee is taking into consideration 70 publishers’ resources for the first phase of ONOS based on the Planning and Execution Committee’s (PEC) recommendations.

A statement of the MoE reads:” The ONOS intends to sign national licenses with most of the prominent STEM publishers and database producers of the world whose contents are already being subscribed by various institutions of higher education and research organizations either directly or through Government-funded consortia”.

The ONOS is implemented for the government, government-funded academic and research and development institutions, research labs from the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), Department of Science and Technology (DST), Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEiTY), Ministry of Earth Sciences (MoES) and other ministry or department funded institutions….”

Elsevier negotiation update 11/2/2022 — UW Libraries

Posted on by
Reply

“At $2.6M per year and an annual 2.5% increase, the Elsevier journal package is the most expensive annual expenditure for the University of Washington (UW) Libraries. For context, the total UW Libraries collections budget for the Seattle campus is approximately $16 million, and we spend about $13 million on ongoing subscriptions. Immediate access to 2,500 Elsevier journal titles published in the current year represent about 15% of the Libraries annual collections budget. Moreover, these high ongoing costs undermine the primary mission of the University of Washington — the preservation, advancement and dissemination of knowledge.

The Elsevier journal package reinforces the scholarly publishing model based on paywalls and rationing of access, inequitable opportunities for publishing, and excessive pricing and annual price increases that undermines a scholarly ecosystem where the open sharing of knowledge is critical to accelerating change for the public good. In spring 2022, the UW Faculty Senate voted to approve a Class C Resolution expressing its support for UW Libraries’ Principles in Licensing Scholarly Resources focused on the tenets of sustainability, access and equity, and support for scholarship and teaching. These principles guide negotiation priorities and empower the UW Libraries to discontinue negotiations that conflict with these principles. More importantly, the principles clearly articulate our intentions:

“We are shifting spending away from purchasing content from proprietary, closed, for-profit scholarly information providers and increasing investments to create and support community-owned infrastructure and shared digital resources.”

The negotiating team, comprised of UW faculty and librarians, began meeting with Elsevier during summer 2022, and communicated the UW Libraries fiscal realities (see Subscription Review 2020-21) and UW faculty contributions as authors of Elsevier articles (see FCUL 10/12 slide 7). The response and proposals received during our negotiations convey a commercial, proprietary, profit-seeking, and unsustainable relationship by Elsevier at the expense of UW.

As a result, the Libraries will be unable to maintain immediate access for all titles in  our current list of 2,500 Elsevier journal titles on ScienceDirect. There is no choice but to begin identifying which journals need to be available for immediate access to meet patient care needs as well as long term use for research, teaching, and learning. The Libraries will continue to provide faculty, students and staff access to published articles through alternative access options such as PubMed Central, Google Scholar, and interlibrary loan — most requested articles are delivered within a few hours or business days….”

Springer negotiations: what’s our plan B?  – Unlocking Research

Posted on by
Reply

“The UK universities sector is negotiating a read & publish deal with publisher Springer Nature. Reaching a transitional agreement is particularly important to make it easier for our authors to publish their work open access, as well as continuing to read all of Springer Nature’s content. The deal needs to be affordable for our sector, which is already under financial strain.  

The Jisc negotiating team and the University of Cambridge are committed to finding a deal that works well for us, that is our plan A. But we are aware that some previous negotiations between universities and publishers could not find enough mutual ground (for example UCLA and German universities). If a contract can’t be signed, what would that mean for our researchers? …”

Access to chemical database Reaxys under threat in UK as fees spiral | Chemistry World

Posted on by
Reply

Concerns have been raised that institutional access to the Reaxys chemical and reactions database could end at universities across the UK in a row over rising costs. The dispute over subscription fees is being described as a potentially significant problem for chemists in the UK, and maybe worldwide.

Reaxys incorporates Beilstein – the largest organic chemistry database – and Gmelin – a sizeable repository of organometallic and inorganic compounds and databases, as well as other key chemistry resources. Launched in 2009 and licensed by commercial publishing giant Elsevier, Reaxys enables research chemists to search and find chemical compounds, reactions, properties and synthesis planning information. It also includes chemical patent literature.

The Joint Information Systems Committee (Jisc), an organisation that assists UK universities with digital resources and negotiates on behalf of the UK higher education and research sector, is currently in talks with Elsevier to make institutional access to Reaxys more affordable.

[…]

 

Library Open Access Funding on the Ground: Workflows for a Successful OA Transition

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  Library-funded open access publishing support at Iowa State University has been growing and has required finding scalable solutions to processes, incorporating new tools, and developing effective workflows. This article is based on a NC Serials Conference presentation that provided insights into the Library’s approach to managing author participation in open access deals with publishers. 

Clinical trial results for $3.2 billion Covid drug are missing in action

Posted on by
Reply

“The results of most clinical trials of the Covid drug molnupiravir (Lagrevio) have not been made public and remain completely unknown, a new study has found.

 

 

 

The drug is currently being administered to Covid patients in the United States, the UK, and India. The World Health Organisation has issued a “conditional recommendation” for its use in some patient groups. Global sales so far stand at $3.2 billion….”