arl 1 library publishing services: new opportunities for research libraries karla hahn arl office of...
TRANSCRIPT
1ARL
Library Publishing Services: New Opportunities for Research Libraries
Karla HahnARL Office of Scholarly Communication
ARL May Membership MeetingMay 21, 20082-3 pm
2ARL
ARL Member Survey
• September and October of 2007
• 80 members responded (response rate 65%)
3ARL
Follow-up interviews with program managers
• Semi-structured interviews
• 10 publishing program managers
• Cohort presented diverse program characteristics
• Especially programs reporting:
» explicit business planning » partnerships with university presses
4ARL
43%
21%
36%
Yes
No, but planning
No
Research Libraries Offering Publishing Services
5ARL
Types of Materials Libraries are Publishing
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
JournalsMonographs
Technical reports
Conference proceedings
Other
6ARL
Library-published journals frequently are:
• Electronic only
• Peer reviewed
• Open Access
• Previously published by another mechanism
• Humanities titles
7ARL
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Electronic Only Electronic and Print Electronic and Print onDemand
Journals inDevelopment
Established Journals
New Journals
8ARL
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
OpenJournalSystem(OJS)
DSpace Locallydevelopedsoftware
bepress DPubs Other
Software Used for Publishing Services
9ARL
The Basic Service Suite
• Hosting and application management
• Advice and consultation
• Workflow management
10ARL
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Libraryoperating
budget
Grantsupport
Endowmentfunds
Additionsto librarybudget
Revenuefrom sale
of productsor services
Chargeback tocampus
units
Royalties Other
Currently
In the Future
Funding Sources: Present and Future
11ARL
Other Publishing-related Services
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Digital repositoryservices
Digitizationservices
Copyrightadvisory
Other authoradvisory
Other, pleasedescribe:
Editing services
12ARL
31%
31%
38%
Yes
No, but exploring
No
Presence of campus or system presses
Partnerships with local university presses
Yes, our institution has itsown university press
Yes, our institution is part ofa system that supports auniversity pressNeither
13ARL
Partnerships other than university presses
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
No partners Overall % with atleast 1 partner
Yes, withInformation
Technology partners
Yes, withdepartment-level
partners
Yes, with college-level partners
14ARL
The publishing landscape
• New opportunities
• Growing gaps in traditional systems
15ARL
New opportunities
• New strategies for dissemination
• New kinds of works
• New tools for collaboration
• New awareness of copyright management
16ARL
Growing gaps in the traditional system
• Challenges of moving into electronic publishing
• Difficulty of moving out of print publishing
• Revenue-based publication models cannot meet the needs of many small fields
• Subscription models are working less and less well for smaller publishers over time.
17ARL
A common narrative for service development
• Campus demand
• Open source applications
• Synergies with other activities
18ARL
Service-based or content-based publishing?
At its core, a change in business models has the potential to fundamentally redefine the scholarly publishing industry by replacing the content-provider model that has traditionally defined scholarly publishers with a new service-provider model.
Redefining Scholarly Publishing as a Service Industry
Paul Peters 2007 JEP
19ARL
Library publishing services
• Service - based approach. Does not rely on content control
• Synergize with other investments libraries are making
• Leverage many opportunities for partnership
• Focus on necessary services for publishing
• Build on open source infrastructure
20ARL
State of service development
5.88%
52.94%
26.47%
14.71%
Experimental
In development
Integrated into thelibrary organizationOther
21ARL
Looking ahead
• Growth
• More titles
• Broader range of disciplines
• More sources of support
• More planned transition of established publications
22ARL
Key questions
• Support for broader information sharing
• Leveraging the evolving service suite
• Further application development
• Fostering new kinds of collaborations
• Longer term business planning
• Building university support
23ARL
The university perspective
• University publishing has been decentralized
• Investments are generally local
• Little expertise is built
• Little synergy with other activities
24ARL
University presses
• Largely outside the university infrastructure
• Focused publishing programs
• Revenue driven
• Tradition of competition rather than collaboration
• Slow to build expertise in digital scholarly communication
25ARL
Creating opportunities for university publishing
• Libraries have done a great deal with very modest investments
• Campus entities are turning to libraries for publishing services
• Libraries are open to partnerships and creative in constructing them
26ARL
What will, or should, the future scholarly communications system look like? First, every university that produces research should have a publishing strategy.
“University Publishing in a Digital Age”Ithaka Report, 2007
27ARL
The question is no longer whether libraries should offer publishing services, but what kinds of services libraries will offer.