A new wave of university presses Lara Speicher Publishing Manager, UCL Press

New UK university presses  UCL Press, June 2015  Cardiff University Press, June 2015  Westminster University Press, Sept 2015  White Rose University Press, Jan 2016 Distinguishing features:  All OA  All based within their libraries  Goldsmiths Press, launches May 2016 with a different business model.

Missions  Support open access  Disseminate research widely  Rigorous peer review  Support scholars working in specialist areas  Support experimental forms  Cutting-edge research  Global outreach and impact  Extend public engagement  Support early career researchers  To support the field of academic publishing  Support non-commercial books

ANU Press Launched 2003 Decision to found ANU Press based on:  Need to … disseminate high quality ANU scholarship that lacks a ready commercial market  Determination to eliminate barriers inherent in existing models of scholarly communication  An acceptance that the operational overheads of the conventional academic press are no longer affordable

Why libraries?  Move in focus in last 10 years  Provision of research support services eg repositories  Pressures of library budgets  Digitisation programmes  Copyright advice  Provision of DOIs  Support of OA ethos  Management of OA funds for APCs  Libraries are driving change, championing OA  ‘Room for libraries to develop services that challenge traditional publishing models’ (Armstrong, 2011)

University presses ‘It is one of the noblest duties of a university to advance knowledge, and to diffuse it not merely among those who can attend the daily lectures — but far and wide.’ Daniel Coit Gilman, Johns Hopkins University, 1878 ‘University presses can rise phoenix-like through 21st century digital environments and the reworking of scholarly communication frameworks’ Colin Steele, 2008

Original purpose  MUP founded in 1904 to publish academic research being carried out at Manchester.  The University of California Press in the middle of the 20th century was publishing monographs mainly from UC faculty members.  University Presses were founded to publish the intellectual output of their own scholars.  Princeton University Press (1895). Mission ‘the promotion of education and scholarship and to serve the University.’

Diversification ‘on the one hand, they had a foundation brief to publish original and often esoteric scholarship, but on the other, they needed to achieve financial viability. They were thus between an academic publishing rock and a financial hard place.’ Colin Steele, ANU ‘we have ceded control of dissemination to inappropriate commercial concerns that have come to stand for what should have been academic criteria.’ Danny Miller, UCL Anthropology

The future of university presses My hope for the university press in the twenty-first century…, is that it might serve as a reminder for all of us of that greater mission, and that its exploration of new platforms and processes for opening up scholarly communication in the digital realm might help our institutions refocus on the goals of advancing knowledge and diffusing it far and wide. Kathleen Fitzpatrick, MLA

Institutional support for university presses ‘Leaders across our collective information/education/knowl edge industry must ensure that presses live comfortably thereby strengthening all UPs and improving the health and impact of scholarly communication’ Jon E. Cawthorne, West Virginia University ‘Shulenburger exhorted universities to take responsibility for the dissemination of its research and advocated for the development of distribution strategies’ (David Shulenburger, Vice- President for Academic Affairs for the National Association of State Universities) ARL, 2007, 2011

Benefits to the institution Benefits of own press – reach, impact, prestige Supporting research from inception to publication Showcasing own academics – brings wide benefits Benefits of OA – increase in readers Dissemination of research that wouldn’t otherwise be published commercially but still has an audience Worldwide reach, to countries where print books wouldn’t otherwise reach or would be unaffordable

Benefits 2 Recruiting students Raising author profile, and therefore institution profile – invitations to speak, write articles, attend conferences Contribute to REF Impact Publishers at the institution – attend careers forums, lectures to MA students, workshops for ECRs Support university-specific publishing eg museums, collections, anniversary events, institutional histories Relationship with authors as colleagues Advice, OA advocacy Contributing to student experience

Downsides Vanity press Investment Scaleability Longevity Ability to attract authors Competition with other presses Reputation difficult to establish Only offered books that other presses have rejected

OA dissemination At a time when HSS disciplines around the world are having to justify their funding, and even existence, the primary vehicle used to disseminate the latest and best research in HSS has an average circulation of , globally. It is very hard to argue that HSS scholars are … making an important contribution to society (and should therefore be funded by public monies) when their best research is inaccessible to near enough the entire population. Rupert Gatti, Open Book Publishers

Someone has to go first  The real challenge facing the open-access model of the university press is getting the ball rolling… But someone has to go first, and that someone is going to incur considerable costs not borne by later participants and free riders. After all, the first university press to give away its books will receive nothing in return until the second university press begins to give away its books.  Marshall Poe, ‘What Can University Presses Do?’, Inside Higher Ed, July 2012

UCL Press: The First Fully OA Press in the UK  Employs publishers  Based in UCL Library services  Launched 2015 with first books  All books freely available as PDF, and for sale in print  Received over 150 proposals for books and over 20 for journals in first two years (c.50% rejection rate for books)  Funds UCL academics to publish (BPC for non-UCL)  Peer review for UCL and non- UCL  Senior level support and belief in OA ethos

UCL Press: Dissemination  Over 25,000 downloads of 11 books in over 160 countries (published between June 2015 and March 2016)  How the World Changed Social Media by Daniel Miller et al: over 4,200 downloads since 29 Feb 2016  Coverage on the Today programme, the Economist, BBC World Service, Wired

Impact and institutional buy-in  Align with institutional strategies  Internal marketing as important as external  Critical to demonstrate impact via download figures, media coverage, academic buy-in etc  Support student experience  Raise profile of academics  Embed publishing activity into life of the institution

Future of University Presses  UPs should be celebrated, supported for all the good work they do to promote and support their institutions  What is future for all UPs?  How can we collectively demonstrate our value to our institutions?  Are existing business models viable?  Are future business models viable?  Readership figures when books are made OA are inescapable  Effect of HEFCE mandate for OA monographs?  Will universities take on a greater role in research dissemination?  Will we see more OA university presses springing up?

Thank you! Lara Speicher