1 1 SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING & ACADEMIC RESOURCES COALITION SPARC EUROPE Business Models for an Open Digital World David Prosser SPARC Europe Director

2 2 SPARC Europe Scholarly Publishing & Academic Resources Coalition Formed in 2002 following the success of SPARC (launched in 1998 by the US Association of Research Libraries)‏ Encourages partnership between libraries, academics, societies and responsible publishers Originally focused on STM, but coverage expanding Has over 110 members in 14 countries By acting together the members can influence the future of scholarly publishing

3 3 Business Models for an Open Digital World Review of open access Current status Business models The future?

4 4 Open Access What is it? Call for free, unrestricted access on the public internet to the literature that scholars give to the world without expectation of payment. Why? Widen dissemination, accelerate research, enrich education, share learning among rich & poor nations, enhance return on taxpayer investment in research. How? Use existing funds to pay for dissemination, not access.

5 5 Budapest Open Access Initiative Two complementary strategies: Self-Archiving: Scholars should be able to deposit their refereed journal articles in open electronic archives which conform to Open Archives Initiative standards Open-Access Journals: Journals will not charge subscriptions or fees for online access. Instead, they should look to other sources to fund peer-review and publication (e.g., publication charges)‏

6 6 What are institutional repositories (open archives)? Essential elements Institutionally defined: Content generated by institutional community Scholarly content: preprints and working papers, published articles, enduring teaching materials, student theses, data-sets, etc. Cumulative & perpetual: preserve ongoing access to material Interoperable & open access: free, online, global

7 7 Why institutional repositories? For the Individual Provide a central archive of their work Improved discovery and retrieval Increase the dissemination and impact of their research Acts as a full CV For the Institution Increases visibility and prestige Acts as an advertisement to funding sources, potential new faculty and students, etc. Helps in administration, e.g., Research assessment and evaluation For Society Provide access to the world’s research Ensures long-term preservation of institutes’ academic output

8 8 What is a Journal? Scholarly publishing comprises four functions: Current model: Integrates these functions in journals This made sense in print environment ARCHIVING Preserving research for future use AWARENESS Assuring accessibility of research CERTIFICATION Certifying the quality/validity of the research REGISTRATION Establishing intellectual priority

9 9 The Four Functions - Repositories ARCHIVING Preserving research for future use AWARENESS Assuring accessibility of research CERTIFICATION Certifying the quality/validity of the research REGISTRATION Establishing intellectual priority

Certification Certification gives: Authors – Validation of their work (important for promotion and grant applications)‏ Readers – Quality filter Journals provide peer review and give a ‘quality stamp’ to research and authors Journals should be open access

The Four Functions of a Journal ARCHIVING Preserving research for future use AWARENESS Assuring accessibility of research CERTIFICATION Certifying the quality/validity of the research REGISTRATION Establishing intellectual priority

How the pieces work together Author ContentServices Reader Institutional Repositories Disciplinary Repositories Interoperability Standards Registration e.g.: by institutions Certification e.g.: peer review Awareness e.g.: search tools, linking Archiving e.g.: by library

Theory Into Practice - Institutional Repositories OpenDOAR (Directory of Open Access Repositories)‏ An authoritative directory of academic open access repositories Lists over 900 repositories Over 100 in the UK Can be used to search across content in all listed repositories Gives information on repository polices (copyright, re- used of material, preservation, etc.)‏

Theory Into Practice - Open Access Journals Lund Directory of Open Access Journals ( – lists over 2825 peer- reviewed open access journalshttp:// PLoS Biology (launched 2003 – IF 14.1), PLoS Medicine (2004 – IF 13.7), PLoS Computational Biology, PLoS Genetics, PLoS Pathogens (2005)‏ BioMed Central (published over 27,250 papers)‏ Hindawi (publishes 80 open access journals)‏ Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO- – 279 titles open access online

Theory Into Practice – Hybrid Open Access Journals Authors have option of whether or not to make their papers open access (for a fee)‏ Over time, as proportion of authors who pay increases subscription prices can fall Eventually, entire journal is open access A number of ‘traditional’ publishers are transforming their closed access journals into open access journals (Proceedings of the National Academies of Science (PNAS), American Institute of Physics)‏ Oxford University Press has announced reduced 2008 subscription rates for some journals as a result of level of take-up by authors

Open Access and Public Policy We see a unique coming together of: Agents for change:  The ‘knowledge economy’ (e.g. the Lisbon agenda)‏  Accountability and assessment – ‘value for money’  E-Science / E-Research  Concerns regarding access to data  Freedom of information Technological changes (Internet, Digital publishing technologies)‏ New business models Leading to an increasing number of public policies relating to open access from: Research groups Universities Research centers Funding bodies Governments National and international bodies

Open Access Policies – Berlin Declaration in Support of Open Access ‘Our mission of disseminating knowledge is only half complete if the information is not made widely and readily available to society.’ Signatories should promote open access by encouraging researchers/grant recipients to publish in open access. encouraging the holders of cultural heritage to support open access by providing their resources on the Internet. developing means to evaluate open access contributions and online-journals in order to maintain the standards of quality assurance and good scientific practice. advocating that open access publication be recognized in promotion and tenure evaluation. Issued on 22 nd October

Berlin Declaration in Support of Open Access 238 signatories world-wide, including: Germany: Fraunhofer Society, Wissenschaftsrat, HRK, Max Planck Society, Leibniz Association, Helmholtz Association, German Research Foundation, Deutscher Bibliotheksverband France: CNRS, INSERM Austria: FWF Der Wissenschaftsfonds Sweden: Swedish Research Council, Swedish Library Association, Association of Swedish Higher Education China: Chinese Academy of Sciences, National Science Foundation China (NSFC) Italy: Rectors of almost all Italy’s universities Spain: Rectors and Chancellors of 13 universities, Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) Belgium: 17 Higher education rectors and ministers

Research Councils UK – Policy in Support of Open Access The seven Research Councils in the UK spend approximately £2.1billion annually ‘Ideas and knowledge derived from publicly-funded research must be made available and accessible for public use, interrogation, and scrutiny, as widely, rapidly and effectively as practicable.’ Six Councils have mandated deposit of papers in freely accessible electronic repositories: Arts & Humanities Research Council Biotechnology & Biological Sciences Research Council Economic & Social Research Council Medical Research Council Natural Environment Research Council Science and Technology Facilities Council The remaining Council has no policies in place: Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council

US National Institutes of Health Political Interest: US Congress instructed the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to develop new access policy Grant recipients are ‘requested’ to deposit their papers up to 12 months after publication Approximately 60,000 papers each year could be made freely available as a result of the policy However, uptake of voluntary policy has been disappointing (about 4%)‏ Congress is currently looking to instruct the NIH to change the ‘request’ to a mandate

European Commission Study ‘Study on the economic and technical evolution of the scientific publication markets in Europe’ Connected to the EC’s objective of ‘establishing a genuine European Research Area and [their] aim to raise the profile of European research’ Looking at: What are the main changes in Europe? What and who is driving change and why? If there is any resistance to positive change, what/who is blocking it? What are the consequences for users (authors, readers, libraries)? Launched 15 June

European Commission Study Concludes that ‘…policies should make sure that the market is sufficiently competitive and ‘dissemination-friendly’. In particular, they should address the need to: enhance access to research output; prevent strategic barriers to entry and to experimentation. Recommendation A1. Guarantee public access to publicly-funded research shortly after publication Research funding agencies … should promote and support the archiving of publications in open repositories, after a … time period to be discussed with publishers. This archiving could become a condition for funding. The following actions could be taken at the European level: (i) Establish a European policy mandating published articles arising from EC funded research to be available after a given time period in open access archives, and (ii) Explore with Member States and with European research and academic associations whether and how such policies and open repositories could be implemented. study_en.pdf

European Commission Study The EC hosted a conference on scholarly communication in Brussels in February Before the meeting a SPARC Europe and the Knowledge Exchange partners co- sponsored petition collected 22,000 signatories calling on the Commission to adopt the study’s recommendations. ( University associations Portuguese Rectors Conference, Hochschulrektorenkonferenz (Germany), Irish Universities Association, Finnish Council of University Rectors, Association of Swedish Higher Education, Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions, Conference of Italian University Rectors Research funders European Research Council, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, German Research Council, Austrian Science Fund, Spanish National Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Swiss National Science Foundation, CNRS, INRIA, Medical Research Council, Association of Medical Research Charities (UK), Max Planck Society, Swedish Research Council National academies Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Royal Swedish Academy of Letters, History & Antiquities, Royal Flemish Academy of Arts and Sciences, Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, Royal Scientific Society of Jordan, Schweizerische Akademie der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Academia Romana, Hungarian Academy of Sciences

European Commission Study The conference was inconclusive, but the Commission has issued a ‘Communication’ which includes: A commitment to include open access publishing costs in EC grants The promise of specific guidelines to be issued, within specific programmes, on the publication of articles in open repositories (e.g. subsequent instructions for Framework 7 grantees – link). Significant funding for repository infrastructure and digital preservation Funding of research on publication business models and on the scientific publication Also, the EC has published a Green Paper – The European Research Area: New Perspectives, describing:The European Research Area: New Perspectives Effective knowledge sharing. This should consist of: open and easy access to the public knowledge base. Access to knowledge generated by the public research base and its use by business and policymakers lie at the heart of the European Research Area, where knowledge must circulate without barriers throughout the whole society. Europe should stimulate the development of a 'continuum' of accessible and interlinked scientific information from raw data to publications…

Self-Archiving Policies Research Organisations: CERN – Requires researchers to deposit papers in the CERN repository CNRS (Centre National de la recherche scientifique)‏ Institutions: Queensland University of Technology Bielefeld University University of Bremen University of Hamburg University of Lund Universidade do Minho University of Southampton Case Western Reserve University University of Oslo

What Should a Policy Look Like? Berlin 3 meeting, held 28 February – 1 March 2005 in Southampton provided a simple template for an open access policy. In order to implement the Berlin Declaration institutions should: 1) Implement a policy to require their researchers to deposit a copy of all their published articles in an open access repository. and 2) Encourage their researchers to publish their research articles in open access journals where a suitable journal exists and provide the support to enable that to happen.

Open Access Business Models Repositories Why? How? Open Access Journals Who pays? The role of the library? The future

Open Access Business Models - Repositories Why would an institution be interested in hosting a repository? Improved visibility of the institution Providing free access to research outputs, leading to Improved impact of its outputs More effective ‘marketing’ of the institution Better management of the institution’s intellectual assets  The preservation and curation of research outputs  The collection of research outputs  A place for teaching and learning materials Easier assessment of what the institution is producing and creating  Research assessment and monitoring Facilitation of workflow for researchers and teachers Facilitation of collaborative research Taken from Swan, A. (2007) The business of digital repositories, in Weenink, K., Waaijers, L. and van Godtsenhoven, K., Eds. A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (Amsterdam, 2007). Amsterdam University Press. (Available at

Open Access Business Models - Repositories Institutions: Do it themselves In Collaboration  White Rose Consortium – Leeds, Sheffield, York White Rose Consortium  SHERPA-LEAP – Partnership of 13 University of London institutions SHERPA-LEAP Outsource to commercial (e.g. BMC) or non- commercial (e.g. EPrint Services) Subject based: arXiv in physics arXiv PubMedCentral in biomedicine PubMedCentral Centralised: E.g. HAL - Hyper-Article en Ligne in FranceHAL

Open Access Business Models - Journals Pre-Internet there were a variety of revenue streams, including: Institutional subscriptions Personal subscriptions Ads Page charges Reprint and offprint charges Sponsorship Subsidy (e.g. by learned societies, governments, etc.)‏ Combination of some or all of the above Online environment added new review streams Purchase of large corpuses – ‘Big Deals’ Pay-per-view Aggregators

Open Access Business Models - Journals Similarly, there is not one single open access journal business model: Subvention - Institutional support for the journal (approximately 50% of open access journals listed in the DOAJ are run this way)‏ Publication charges (e.g., BMC, PLoS, Hindawi)‏ Provision of additional services (e.g., print subscriptions to members and institutions)‏ Advertising Etc.

Open Access Business Models - The Role of the Library? Host for the institutional repository Host for subject-based repositories (note that arXiv is hosted by a university library – universities could gain kudos by hosting subject-based repositories or portals)‏ Host for open access journals. Perhaps using IR as base of a publishing system. Provides kudos for the institution Holder of funds for journal publishing fees. Some libraries are already setting-up open access funds: Nottingham University Imperial College University of Wisconsin at Madison University of Amsterdam Texas A&M

The Future – Building on Repositories Taken from Swan, A. (2007) The business of digital repositories, (Available at

The Future – Building on Repositories Add certification to papers deposited in repositories. ‘Overlay journal’ concept. See, for example, the RIOJA Project which plans to:RIOJA Project build a generic module enabling interoperability between journal software and public repositories in support of the overlay of quality certification and implement this tool for the arXiv subject repository. arXiv To construct a demonstrator journal, incorporating the RIOJA tool, illustrating interaction between arXiv and the DPubs software.DPubs Improve navigation and searching Provide editorial features based on repository material. Perhaps similar to the BMC ‘Faculty of 1000’ concept (currently applied to the journal literature)‏ Formulise archiving and preservation strategies

Integrate open access into E- Science / E-Research ‘Scientists developing collaboration technologies that go far beyond the capabilities of the Web To use remote computing resources To integrate, federate and analyse information from many disparate, distributed, data resources To access and control remote experimental equipment Capability to access, move, manipulate and mine data is the central requirement of these new collaborative science applications’ Tony Hey Successful E-Science needs: Resources to integrate, federate and analyse Interoperability Open access Institutional repositories will increasingly become part of the infrastructure that allows E-Science to take place (across all disciplinary and geographic boundaries).

Integrate open access into E- Science / E-Research The nanoHUB is ‘a rich, web-based resource for research, education and collaboration in nanotechnology.’nanoHUB Resources include: Online Presentations Courses Learning Modules Podcasts Animations Teaching Materials Simulation tools Resources added by users. Used by 25,000 nanotechnologists with usage increasing five-fold in the past two years.

Integrate open access into E- Science / E-Research Take content from repositories (local and remote)‏ Add Web 2.0 functionality Plus user desire for increased collaborative working Create resources (like nanoHUB) that serve the community in new ways by providing not just content, but a complete research environment A role for the library of the future?

The Role of the Library? “A primary role of a research library is to offer the members of its user community the most efficient means of access and preserving the globally accumulated scholarly knowledge in their field of interest” LIBER (Association of European Research Libraries) Development Plan

The Role of the Library? Yes, but increasingly in an open access environment, the role of the library may be: To maximise the dissemination of authors’ work Promote the institution by promoting the research performed within the institution To play an increasing role in the ‘publication’ of research – though organising peer-review, alerting services, searching tools, etc. Providing virtual research environments that take advantage of Web 2.0 tools to fulfil the E-Science needs of researchers and political masters and funders Take responsibility for the long-term preservation of an institution’s intellectual output (theses, data, publication, etc.)‏ These new roles will require the library to reposition itself in the scholarly communication value chain and develop new business models

The New (Old?) Role of the Library “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, First President, Johns Hopkins University, 1878 (on the university press)‏ Contact SPARC Europe: