Copyright Angst, Lust for Prestige and Cost Control

What institutions can do to ease Open Access

Leo WaaijersDisciple of Eve

Czech University Libraries Annual Meeting November 4-5, 2008

Pilsen, Czech Republic.

Eve inaugurating the A2K movement

Berlin Declaration, October 2003“Our mission of disseminating knowledge is only half complete if the information is not made widely and readily available to society.”

European University Association, January 2008“Universities should develop institutional policies and strategies that foster the availability of their quality controlled research results for the broadest possible range of users, maximizing their visibility, accessibility and scientific impact.”

Research life cycle

at work with- exams- bachelor/master theses- reports- doctoral theses- articles- books- conferences

Quality controloften organized by publishers

Q culture

Q processRe: articles

submission(pre-print)

acceptance(post-print)

payment

Dialogue between author and editor

(+reviewers)

cash copyright

rejection

toll-gated journal

(licences)

open access journal

(internet)

Gold and Green

o Authors retain copyrightso Institutes or projects pay for publication feeso Immediate open access to all versionso Limited number of OA journals (~15%)

o Publishers get copyrightso Institutes pay for subscription or licence feeso Embargoed open access to some versionso You can start today

Re: articles

However, no difference in quality control !

Publishers’ role

add value byo registrationo organizing quality controlo presentationo branding - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - of journals

distribute publications o limited (toll gated; paper paradigm)o unlimited (open access; internet based)

operate ao monopoly based access fee model o market based publication fee modelo (+ third party contribution: subsidy, ads)

Re: articles

-- of articles

Q price

open access: subscriptions:• publication fees (on average €1300 per article;

see price comparison)

• subscription/licence fees• document supply fees (per article: €10 via libraries or €20

via publishers) • copyright clearance fees (for use in readers, course packs etc)

• contractual costs (collection policy, licencing, digital

rights management)

Re: articles

Institute of Social Studies

Open Access Subcriptions

Publication fees ISS1 120,000€ Subscriptions & licences 180,000€

65,000€

Platform or aggregation costs2 25,000€ Collection management4 60,000€ 145,000€ 305,000€

September 2008.Michel Wesseling,Head of the Office of Library and Information Technology Services.

3. Includes out of pocket costs to third parties (other libraries, publishers) and in house handling costs.4. This is a rough estimate. Includes defining the collection, acquisitions and administration, shielding access and copyright issues.

2. ISS assumes that even in a full open access world still some aggregation or platform fees will be needed.

Document supply3 + copyright clearance fees

1. 60 peer reviewed articles @ 2000. The publication fee is an estimate based on the pricelist published by BioMedCentral. The list refers to STM journals mainly (http:/ /www.biomedcentral.com/info/authors/apccomparison/). For social sciences the fees may be lower.

Established in 1952, the Institute of Social Studies in the Hague is an international graduate school with typically 400 students per year. I ts research programme results in books, reports and about 60 articles in peer reviewed journals annually. An intangible open access advantage is the free access that ISS alumni, who are often based in developing countries, will have to these articles.

Re: articles

Utrecht UniversityRe: articles

Open Access Subcriptions

Publication fees UU1 6,500,000€ Subscriptions & licences 4,500,000€

1,000,000€

6,500,000€ 5,500,000€ Publication fees research funders2 1,950,000€ Remaining costs UU 4,550,000€

September 2008.Bas Savenije,University Librarian of Utrecht University

3. Includes out of pocket costs to third parties (other libraries, publishers) and in house handling costs.4. Includes defining the collection, acquisitions and administration, shielding access and copyright issues.

1. 5000 peer reviewed articles @ 1300 2. 1500 peer reviewed articles @ 1300

Established in 1636, today Utrecht University is an internationally renowned top research university with almost 30.000 students and over 8.500 staff. Annually UU publishes 5000 articles in peer reviewed journals; of these 1500 result from externally funded research (figures 2005). Utrecht University is a signatory of the Berlin Declaration on Open Acces.

Document supply3 + copyright clearance fees + collection management4

Impactology: manager’s belief that journal impact is a measure of journal and author quality.

Impact = over a period of time

# citations = f (article age, # authors, discipline, journal type & size, item type, accessibility, citation syndicates and other games, ornamental citations and … quality) ‘real articles’ = articles, reviews, proceedings, but no news items, letters to editor, editorials. ( -> ‘impact officers’ )period: typically 2 years, but also 4 or 5 years.

Further reading Rossner et al. Show me the data, Journal of Cell Biology, 17 December 2007.Thomson Scientific Corrects Inaccuracies In Editorial (undated, > Dec. 2007)

Q reli

# all citations# ‘real articles’

Re: articles

Q sceptic

Michael Mabe, then Elsevier’s Director of Academic Relations:

“Extending the use of the journal impact factor from the journal to the authors of papers in the journal is highly suspect; ......[impact factors] are not a direct measure of quality and must be used with considerable care.”

If this was said in the instruction of a product, would you buy it?

Why?Research managers do.

What, in the stem cell research fraud case,is the name of- the author? - his university? - the journal? - the publisher?

- the reviewers?

Who is responsible?Further readingJust like Hwang Woo Suk? Another fraudulent paper in Science! New England Journal of Medicine Wins Peer-Review Court Case

Hwang Woo-SukNational University of SeoulScienceAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science, AAASAnonymous

Re: articles

Q responsibility

A multi-coloured field: SHERPA/RoMEOMain colours:- publishers require copyrights allow nothing, never- publishers require copyrights allow open preprints- publishers require copyrights allow open postprints- publishers require copyrights allow open preprints and

postprints- embargo periods and reuse conditions vary greatly- changes or exceptions can often be negotiated by authors - publishers waive copyrights (open access journals)

There are more copyright policies than publishersI n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e t o a u t h o r s !

whiteyellowbluegreen

gold

Re: articles

Copyright combat

want their articles1. published in a high impact journal

As high impact is perceived as high quality this is important for research project financing and personal career.

2. widely circulated and reusedBoth for ethical reasons (public money means open access to society, colleagues, educators) and personal reasons

(more citations).

3. easy to presentIn CV’s, lists, web sites, readers, eduware etc.

4. preserved and kept accessible perpetuallyBeing protected against digital vulnerability

Signing away copyrights to achieve 1 xxx often conflicts with achieving goals 2 and 3. xxx

Re: articles

Author and institutes alike

OA at work

The open access advantage. Gunther Eysenbach, JMIR 2006See also: http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html

Why OA?

1. Taxpayer argumentOA embodies CSR, Corporate Social Responsibility(the view that socially responsible behavior is rewarding for an enterprise or organisation)

2. Citation advantage argumentOA generates more citations => exposure, status, impact and prestige, showcasing the talents of both author and institution

3. Google Scholars’ argument OA enables everyone to see further standing on the shoulders of Giants

Ultimately Eve’s arguments,“I want to know and I want to share it”

Main commercial publishers hardly actThey cherish the classical publishing model as their golden goose. However see: BioMed Central + Springer, PLoS, Hindawi, Rockefeller University Press, Bentham Publishers, DOAJ, ...

Authors did actThey signed massively the PLoS open letter and the EC petition

Research funders and universities are acting Wellcome Trust, RCUK's, DFG, MPG, CERN, ERC, NIH, Harvard FAS, IRCSET, Harvard Law School, EUROHORCs, U-Helsinki ...(and not to forget: Open Courseware Consortium)

Policy makers are actingUS Senate and Congress, Council of the European Union, OECD, Australian Research Council, EURAB, EUA, Dutch Cabinet, …

Re: articles

Time to act

What institutions can do

1. Sign the Berlin DeclarationAkademie věd České republiky, 6 May 2008Grantová agentura České republiky, 20 June 2008Where are the Czech univesities?

2. Adopt a copyright policy for classical publishingStop giving away copyrights; use licences instead e.g. the JISC/SURF Licence (accept half a year embargo).

3. Make OA-subscription cost comparisonsStart per institute, aggregate outcomes per country and per publisher.

4. Start OA negotiations with publishersLike CERN (SCOAP3), MPG (Germany) and UKB (Netherlands) did.

5. Develop quality measures for authors (not journals)Based on various metrics (citations, downloads, prizes, ...) Similar to CHE ranking for educational programmes. See also MESUR

What libraries can do

1. Make your university sign the Berlin Declaration (or any other manifesto), followed up by an open access policy.

2. Set up an institutional OAI repository (preferably as a distributed national service).

3. Set up national OA community and OA project (common standards, practices and milestones) aiming at a Czech open science portal.

4. Involve (top) scientists via awareness campaigns.

5. Translate Licence to Publish in Czech6. Make cost comparisons: OA versus

subscriptions

Classical library

University

LibraryStacks

CatalogueCirculation

Disadvantages:1. Very expensive2. Limited clientele3. Limited usage4. People go to Google

(Scholar)

Main issue:Quality

Future library

University

LibraryOAI repository

MetadataUsage metrics

Advantages:1. Cheaper2. Unlimited clientele3. Unlimited usage4. People go to Google

(Scholar)

Main issue:Quality

10 May 2005www.creamofscience.org

Idea

Complete oeuvre of +10 top scientists per DARE participant

Some figures• 15 Institutions• 207 authors (187 male, 20 female)• 40479 records = 195/author (from 3 to 1224)• 23853 full text = 58.7% (from 19% to 96% per institute)• 25% copyright obstructed, 15% only metadata available

at the moment, 2% lost