models for increasing access leo walford. bloomsbury conference, 29 june 2007 remember 1997? as a...

Models for Increasing Access

Leo Walford

Bloomsbury Conference, 29 June 2007

Remember 1997?

● As a librarian, you:Bought print journals via subscription agentsWere beginning to think about electronic journalsWorried about pricing

● As a Publisher, you: Sold individual print subscriptions via agents to libraries Thought about pricingWorried about electronic journals


Since then

● What have publishers been doing to improve access and availability?


Models for Increasing Access

1. Big Deals

2. Licensing

3. Donation Schemes

4. Pay per view

5. New pricing/access models

6. Open Access


1. Big Deals

● Libraries want to:

“facilitate the widest access to the most appropriate resources for their user community”

Business Models for Journal Content, Rightscom for JISC, April 2005


Big Deals

Publishers want to:

● Build reputation and brand ● Build – or at least maintain - revenue● Build – or at least maintain - profits


Big Deals – what are they?

● A library (or group of libraries) pays a sum to gain electronic access to all (or a substantial chunk) of a publisher’s list of titles.

● Pricing usually is based on the amount that the customer is currently paying for the titles it subscribes to, plus an extra amount to cover the additional titles

● The package is usually fixed: titles, or the amount paid cannot be changed (ie no cancellations)

● Pricing is usually fixed: any changes in price for subsequent years form part of the agreement

● Deals often (but not always) three years● Some deals are opt-in


Big Deals: Pros and Cons for Libraries

● ProsMuch greater access to contentPredictability of costs

● Cons Lack of flexibilitySome titles may not be used and can’t be cancelled(Perceptions of) licence termsBudget tied-upVAT


Big Deals: Pros and Cons for Publishers

● ProsMuch greater exposure for contentMuch greater usageTie-in of revenue

● ConsLimited growth potentialRequires sales teamMuch greater administrationHigher demand on customer service teams


Big Deals: The Effects

1998-99 2004-2005 % change

Total HE spending on journals £62.8M £96.1M 53%

total current subscriptions 597,000 1,200,000 101%

Average periodical price £252 £423 68%

Average price paid/subscription £105 £80 -24%



Institutional Circulation

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2002 2006

Big deal subs

Trad subs



0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2021 2024

Effect of big deals on library funds

remainder

big deals


2. Licensing to Aggregators

● Bundles of content● May be publisher-specific, discipline-specific

or both ● Protagonists: Ebsco, ProQuest, Ovid, etc.,● Aggregators generally licence in content from

publishers and pay them a royalty based on volume of content and/or usage


Aggregators: Pros and Cons for Libraries

● Pros

Big bundles of content at (relatively) low prices

One negotiation

Students like them● Cons

Content may disappear from the package

Limited (if any) rights to permanent access

Embargo periods mean content not the most current


Aggregators: Pros and Cons for Publishers

● Pros

Exposure

New Markets

Revenue● Cons

Brand dilution

Subscription cancellations


3. Donation Schemes

● Developed by publishers often in conjunction with other bodies, to improve access in (largely) the developing world

● Benefit users who would otherwise not be able to access the journals

● Provide good publicity for publishers, at marginal (direct) cost or loss of revenue


Donation Schemes

● HINARI, AGORA, OARE – in conjunction with WHO

● INASP : International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications

● Journal Donation Project (Soros Foundation)


Donation Schemes

Example: HINARI

Offers over 3,800 journals

2,500 institutions in 117 countries

Institutions in countries with <$1,000 gdp pay nothing

Institutions in countries with $1-$3,000 gdp pay $1,000 for access to everything


Donation Schemes

Romania: "If you think you are excited about this, I can tell you that everyone here, academics, students and staff are absolutely thrilled.”

Gambia : “It has been a very popular initiative here. Intellectual isolation is considered one of the factors (that mean that) African Research centres cannot develop world class researchers. This can go some way to changing that.”


4. Pay per view

● User only pays for what they use● Publishers charge a fee per article● Fee may be different for different publishers,

different content, different markets or different conditions

● Some variants on this, e.g. pay for fixed time period


Pay per view

● Appears to provide an additional revenue stream for publishers

● Libraries generally unhappy about blanket use of PPV because it is unpredictable

● Libraries concerned that PPV isn’t used for material that is already owned by the library


5. New Pricing/Access Models

● Libraries, funders and (maybe) publishers are on the look-out for new models which will:

● Bridge real or imagined information gaps● Provide greater value for money● Provide flexibility● Provide more accountability● Be simpler ● In short, ‘cheaper and better’


New Pricing/Access Models

● National licence● PPV converting to subscription● Core + peripheral PPV● Value-based pricing ● Open Access



● National licence A single national payment to publishers for limited access to all their contentHas worked in certain clearly-defined circumstances, e.g. JISC purchase of OUP backfilesWorks as a mechanism for standardising opt-in consortial dealsHard to see it working on a larger scale



● PPV converting to subscription

Once a certain level of PPV expenditure on a title is reached, it automatically becomes a subscription title

Although simple in principle, this is difficult to model, and is unattractive to publishers and librarians

Not currently used?



● Core + peripheral Discipline-specific package of journals, with an add-on chunk of ‘free’ PPV from non-subscribed titlesPricing can be varied according to how much access is allowed (ie PPV can kick in early if the library pays a smaller up-front subscription payment)Vulnerable to disagreement on selection of ‘core’ titles, movements of titles between publishersAdministratively difficultNot used?



● Value-based pricingBeing launched in 2008 by American Chemical Society

Appears not to apply to consortial customers

“These new subscription models de-couple the prices of the print and electronic versions of each journal and utilize value-based metrics such as number of articles published, ISI® impact factor, and total downloads to establish prices for each ACS Journal. “


6. Open Access

● Publishers already offer a lot of open access material:

● Free Access periods● Hybrid Journals offering Open Choice options (several

thousand titles)● Full Author-Pays OA journals (a few)● Freely available content on publishers’ platforms

– e.g. HighWire has 1.7M open access articles


Conclusions

● The big deal is here to stay (at least for a while): it offers too many benefits for libraries and publishers to be discarded lightly

● Aggregated databases have an important role to play● Donation schemes have made great strides, but there is more to

be done● PPV is a useful adjunct, but is unlikely to displace anything● While new pricing models will emerge, it is unlikely there will be

any major shift in the ways libraries pay for journal content● There’s lots of OA content out there –much of it compatible with

publisher’ existing business models


Back to 2007

●Compared with ten years ago, this is a golden age for content availability

●What more can be done?

Thank you

models for increasing access leo walford. bloomsbury conference, 29 june 2007 remember 1997? as a...

Documents

bloomsbury conference

effects slide

current slide

big deals publishers

open access slide

vat slide

optin slide

big deals libraries