1. A Skeptic’s View of Open Access Michael Held The Rockefeller University Press UKSG Conference March 30, 2004

2. March 30, 2004UKSG 2

3. March 30, 2004UKSG 3 Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers: “Open Access is one alternative model which might help, but, as yet, there is little factual information about its behavioural or financial effects.”

4. March 30, 2004UKSG 4 The Royal Society: “The Royal Society is in favour of the widest practicable dissemination of science but we believe that the current proposals for Open Access journals (where papers are free online to all) lack a sustainable business model.”

5. March 30, 2004UKSG 5

6. March 30, 2004UKSG 6 BioMed Central: “…[T]he Government is urged to seek to reverse the traditional publishing models and encourage a competitive Open Access model, which avoids the limitations of the traditional model and delivers the benefits of maximal dissemination and unrestricted use of scientific research literature.”

7. March 30, 2004UKSG 7 Reasons for skepticism Basic business model Potential for enhanced government involvement Human nature Means and ends Progress and advancement Shifting political sands

8. March 30, 2004UKSG 8 Does open access make sense for a journal such as The Journal of Cell Biology?

9. March 30, 2004UKSG 9 Three types of Journals Selective, commercial (Nature, Cell) Selective, non-profit (JCB, Science) Non-selective, archival (some commercial, some BioMedCentral)

10. March 30, 2004UKSG 10 OA works for low cost, high throughput archival journals Cursory reviewing lowers publication costs High acceptance rates means that most submissions will yield income

11. March 30, 2004UKSG 11  OA does not work well at selective journals High cost of review and pre- production costs (editors, staff) Costs accrue for all papers whether accepted or not For the 10-20% of papers that are ultimately published, costs can exceed $8000 per paper for online publication alone

12. March 30, 2004UKSG 12 Why have stable and selective journals? Journals help prioritize information, however imperfectly High profile journals may irritate authors, but help readers save time and get a wide range of information Journals are a focus for scientific communities Publication process does add value (and does cost money)

13. March 30, 2004UKSG 13 Current PLoS fees are not sustainable without support from foundations or income from archival journals. Plan to charge only $1500 per paper for a highly selective journal Exorbitant in house staff costs relative to JCB (JCB has 2 senior editors compared to PloS’ 6) PloS has never made its financial plan public

14. March 30, 2004UKSG 14 Non-profits like JCB are an important component of scientific publishing, but are ignored in the OA debate Non-profits comprise only 5% of the total number of journals, but 43 of the top 100 most highly cited journals are non-profits Run by and serve the scientific community Non-profit, so can keep subscription/page charge costs low Release content after (average) 6 month delay for free

15. March 30, 2004UKSG 15

16. March 30, 2004UKSG 16 Potential Solutions (in an ideal world)? 1. Archival, less selective journals switch to open access –researchers submit more of best work to non- profit, selective journals that make content free after brief period of time 2. Research community extends open access to selective journals –Funding agencies must commit more funds dedicated to pay for publishing costs--difficult to carry out world-side; risk of being elitist

17. March 30, 2004UKSG 17 The scientific community must decide for itself how it wants to spend its money and distribute the products of its research. –Those decisions must be based on a realistic appraisal of costs involved in producing journals, not on wishful thinking

18. March 30, 2004UKSG 18 For the present: Middle ground occupied by selective journals seems the most reasonable: –Free release of all back content (including back archive to vol 1, issue 1 when available) after 6 months –Maintenance of reasonable and flexible online license fees to universities, hospitals, and research institutions.

19. March 30, 2004UKSG 19 Sites of interest for free access to the scientific literature Washington DC Principles for Free Access to Science: http://www.dcprinciples.org / ALPSP Principles of Scholarship- Friendly Journal Publishing Practice’ [PDF]: http://www.alpsp.org/SFPubpress.htm

20. March 30, 2004UKSG 20 Acknowledgements Many thanks to Charles Lowry and WilliamWells for assistance in writing and content