Alternative Publishing Models Category

New Open Access Humanities Press Makes Its Debut

– May 29, 2008Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models

Jennifer Howard, writing in The Chronicle of Higher Education, reports that a new venture with prominent academic backers wants to help humanists put their work online.

Open Humanities Press, will open it’s doors on May 12 with the publication of seven peer-reviewed journals, which have established track records as open access titles.:
Cosmos and History (2005-)
Culture Machine (1999-)
Fibreculture (2003-)
Film-Philosophy (1997-)
International Journal of Žižek Studies (2007-)
Parrhesia (2006-)
Vectors (2005-)

From the OHP website: “Open Humanities Press journals are fully peer reviewed, scholarly publications that have been chosen by OHP’s editorial advisory board for their outstanding contribution to contemporary theory. OHP’s journals are independent, published under open access licenses and free of charge to readers and authors alike.”

Each journal will retain editorial independence. The press will “provide editorial and technical-development services, using the Open Journal Systems software created by the Public Knowledge Project, and it will help with distribution and promotion”. Aside from the editorial boards of the various journals, the Open Humanities Press has, according to the Chronicle, put together a “star-studded lineup of literary critics and theorists as its editorial advisory board. The panel includes Alan Badiou, professor of philosophy emeritus at France’s École Normale Supérieure; Jonathan Culler, professor of English and comparative literature at Cornell University; Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, professor in the humanities at Columbia University; and J. Hillis Miller, professor of English at the University of California at Irvine. Another member is Stephen Greenblatt, professor of the humanities at Harvard University. In 2002, as president of the Modern Language Association, Mr. Greenblatt issued a rallying cry to humanists about the crisis in traditional scholarly publishing.”

How is this being paid for? And what is are it’s long-term goals? From the Chronicle article:

To begin with, the press will have no operating budget and no formal staff. Internet hosting is being provided gratis by ibiblio, a sort of Internet library—or “conservancy,” as they call it—based at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The founders will draw on their professional networks, and those of the journals, to get things done in the near term.

Those involved with Open Humanities Press hope to expand beyond critical theory, perhaps even beyond journals and into open-access monographs, once the enterprise has a reputation for what Mr. Ottina called “rigorous academic quality.”

“Ultimately,” he said, “the goal is to get as much academic content into an open-access distribution model as possible.”

UIUC Scholarly Communication, May 12, 2008

Converting High Energy Physics Publishing from Subscription to Open Access

Karen Fischer

– May 29, 2008Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models, Open Access

The Audacity of SCOAP3, Ivy Anderson, Director of Collections, California Digital Library

Introductory Note: SCOAP3 (Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics) is a grand experiment. It is a new model for scholarly communication proposed by a community of scientists. Physicists interested in expanding access to their literature have designed a novel approach to garner support from individual libraries, library consortia, research institutions, and even nation states to turn a core set of journals in the high energy physics (HEP) discipline into open access publications. SCOAP3 aims to convert all HEP literature published in high-quality journals, existing and new. This operation will be facilitated by the fact that seven journals carry the large majority of the literature in the field. These journals are published by the American Physical Society (APS), SISSA-IOP, Elsevier, and Springer. Already leaders in making their science freely accessible through the e-print service arXiv, the scientists are now proposing to make a substantial portion of the published literature open access as well.

Online Company Tries an Unexpected Publishing Model: Free Textbooks

Karen Fischer

– May 29, 2008Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models, Open Access

by Catherine Rampell, Chronicle of Higher Education, April 24, 2008.

Excerpt:

The high prices of textbooks, which are approaching $1,000 per year for an average student, have those students and their professors crying for mercy. Yet publishers say their cheaper options—electronic versions of traditional texts—aren’t selling.

Enter Flat World Knowledge. Starting next year, the new digital-textbook publisher will offer online, peer-reviewed, interactive, user-editable textbooks, free of charge. The catch? It’s not clear whether they can make any money doing so.

“We are finding and signing authors who we believe are the best in their fields,” said Eric Frank, co-founder of Flat World, which began its first peer review of textbook content last week. “We want to show professors that they’re not deciding between price and quality.”

Flat World hopes to leverage the availability (and hoped-for popularity) of these free books to make money by selling materials that supplement the online texts, such as study guides or print-on-demand hard copies. They will also take a cut of sales of user-created study materials sold through the Flat World site.

… Mr. Frank and his co-founder Jeff Shelstad, like the leaders of Freeload Press, collectively spent decades in the traditional textbook industry, most recently at Pearson Prentice Hall, before starting Flat World. Mr. Frank said they were leveraging their connections to get “authors who have existing best-selling books with other houses.”

The first books, which are planned for a January release, will be business and economics textbooks. Then, Mr. Frank said, he hopes to publish texts for other disciplines. That is, if the company can recoup the major upfront costs of producing a top-notch textbook.

But skeptical observers, including those who work on digital texts, think all the digital hurdles may be hard to surmount.

“I can’t imagine anyone taking this seriously,” said Bob Stein, director of the Institute for the Future of the Book, a think tank based in New York. “My reaction would be that either they’re not spending much money to produce these books, so they’re not of value and they’re giving poor kids the short end of the stick once again. Or, they’re going to overprice these ancillary things.”

But, he added, “I don’t understand what’s going to make anybody buy those in the first place.”

The Importance of Open Access for Taxonomy Research

Karen Fischer

– May 29, 2008Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models

from Open Access News by Peter Suber, May 29, 2008

Kevin Zelnio, PLoS ONE Publishes First Taxonomic Paper, The Other 95%, May 28, 2008. Excerpt:

[PLoS ONE just published its first species description:] an excellent paper by Fisher and Smith on the ants of Malagasy region….

Why should one support open access publishing of taxonomic papers?

Visibility is important to the field of systematics, where the relevance is often lost amidst the taxonomic jargon. By removing the subscription barrier, taxonomists make their work accessible and noticeable to researchers all over the world. Increasingly, the need has never been greater for high quality taxonomy. The treatment of neglected tropical diseases relies on proper identification a the pathogen or parasite. Species form the fundamental unit of much of evolution and ecology. Sound knowledge of species and their attributes is basic to all other fields of biology ranging from the molecular to the metacommunity. While scientists might not agree on what a species is, there is no doubt about their importance and the necessity to identify and describe them.

The time is now for taxonomy and taxonomists to enter the digital age. New web technologies can prove effective at linking papers, potentially increasing readership and bringing disparate fields together. For instance, a paper describing a new species of pathogenic nematode can have hyperlinked keywords that summarize the findings, i.e. “Nematoda” “Genus species sp.nov.” “Genus species (of host)” “Pathogenesis” “Endoparasite” “Locality Information”, etc. Other articles of interest with hyperlinked keywords can be linked together for researchers to uncover. Species names themselves can be linked to the original paper, so one can find basic information about that species. This will make it easier to ground-truth simple observations about a species that can affect interpretations in other research, such as where it has been described from, variation in characteristics between sexes and sites, behavioral and diet observations and life history traits….

Should taxonomists forego traditional publishing outlets?

The better option would be for those outlets to go online and open access! If there is some success to PLoS ONE in their venture to publish papers of a taxonomic nature, hopefully it will inspire established journals to follow suit. If you believe strongly in the force of the digital age to implement positive change in science, support open access initiatives by publishing your articles there. One may posit that hybrid journals, where authors may elect to pay an additional fee to make their article accessible online for free, is a step forward in the right direction….Peter Suber notes one should proceed with caution when electing to publish in a hybrid journal for several reasons. In particular, hybrid journal options do not free up subscription money from libraries. Because it is a risk-free strategy for journals, there is not an incentive to get rid of subscriptions fees all together, since most authors do not elect the free-access option. Many publishers still do not make their publishing model or data on the efficacy of the hybrid option available. This makes it difficult to police whether they are reducing subscription fees in relation to author uptake of the free-access option, where high fees are paid to offset subscription fees….

NIH Mandates Open Access to Researchers’ Publications

Karen Fischer

– February 5, 2008Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models

PUBLIC ACCESS MANDATE MADE LAW
President Bush signs omnibus appropriations bill,
including National Institutes of Health research access provision

Alliance for Taxpayer Access
News Release

Washington, D.C. – December 26, 2007 – President Bush has signed into law the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2007 (H.R. 2764), which includes a provision directing the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to provide the public with open online access to findings from its funded research. This is the first time the U.S. government has mandated public access to research funded by a major agency.

The provision directs the NIH to change its existing Public Access Policy, implemented as a voluntary measure in 2005, so that participation is required for agency-funded investigators. Researchers will now be required to deposit electronic copies of their peer-reviewed manuscripts into the National Library of Medicine’s online archive, PubMed Central. Full texts of the articles will be publicly available and searchable online in PubMed Central no later than 12 months after publication in a journal.

“Facilitated access to new knowledge is key to the rapid advancement of science,” said Harold Varmus, president of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Nobel Prize Winner. “The tremendous benefits of broad, unfettered access to information are already clear from the Human Genome Project, which has made its DNA sequences immediately and freely available to all via the Internet. Providing widespread access, even with a one-year delay, to the full text of research articles supported by funds from all institutes at the NIH will increase those benefits dramatically.”

“Public access to publicly funded research contributes directly to the mission of higher education,” said David Shulenburger, Vice President for Academic Affairs at NASULGC (the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges). “Improved access will enable universities to maximize their own investment in research, and widen the potential for discovery as the results are more readily available for others to build upon.”

“Years of unrelenting commitment and dedication by patient groups and our allies in the research community have at last borne fruit,” said Sharon Terry, President and CEO of Genetic Alliance. “We’re proud of Congress for their unrelenting commitment to ensuring the success of public access to NIH-funded research. As patients, patient advocates, and families, we look forward to having expanded access to the research we need.”

“Congress has just unlocked the taxpayers’ $29 billion investment in NIH,” said Heather Joseph, Executive Director of SPARC (the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, a founding member of the ATA). “This policy will directly improve the sharing of scientific findings, the pace of medical advances, and the rate of return on benefits to the taxpayer.”

Joseph added, “On behalf of the Alliance for Taxpayer Access, I’d like to thank everyone who worked so hard over the past several years to bring about implementation of this much-needed policy.”

For more information, and a timeline detailing the evolution of the NIH Public Access Policy beginning May 2004, visit the ATA Web site at http://www.taxpayeraccess.org.

Revised Policy on Enhancing Public Access to Archived Publications Resulting from NIH-Funded Research, Release date January 11, 2008 | Effective Date April 7, 2008

Summary

In accordance with Division G, Title II, Section 218 of PL 110-161 (Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 ), the NIH voluntary Public Access Policy (NOT-OD-05-022) is now mandatory. The law states:

The Director of the National Institutes of Health shall require that all investigators funded by the NIH submit or have submitted for them to the National Library of Medicine’s PubMed Central an electronic version of their final, peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of publication: Provided, That the NIH shall implement the public access policy in a manner consistent with copyright law.

Specifics

1. The NIH Public Access Policy applies to all peer-reviewed articles that arise, in whole or in part, from direct costs 1 funded by NIH, or from NIH staff, that are accepted for publication on or after April 7, 2008.

2. Institutions and investigators are responsible for ensuring that any publishing or copyright agreements concerning submitted articles fully comply with this Policy.

3. PubMed Central (PMC) is the NIH digital archive of full-text, peer-reviewed journal articles. Its content is publicly accessible and integrated with other databases (see: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/).

4. The final, peer-reviewed manuscript includes all graphics and supplemental materials that are associated with the article.

5. Beginning May 25, 2008, anyone submitting an application, proposal or progress report to the NIH must include the PMC or NIH Manuscript Submission reference number when citing applicable articles that arise from their NIH funded research. This policy includes applications submitted to the NIH for the May 25, 2008 due date and subsequent due dates.

Objections to the NIH Mandate from Publishers:

STM comments on U. S. National Institutes of Health Unfunded Mandate, Jan. 4, 2007 Press Release

American Association of Publishers (AAP), Jan. 3, 2007 Press Release

Together Again: Springer, Max Planck Agree To New “Experimental” Deal

Karen Fischer

– February 5, 2008Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models, Open Access

After a highly-publicized split last October, Springer announced this week that it has won back a key subscriber, Germany’s prestigious Max Planck Institute (MPS), with an innovative two-year deal that features Springer’s open access (OA) option. The new agreement, signed last week, was billed as a “mix” of open access and subscription models under which Max Planck researchers will have access to all 1200 Springer journals in SpringerLink as well as having author charges waived for researchers choosing to publish in journals under Springer’ OA option, Open Choice. Financial details, however, were not disclosed.

Though billed as “a two-year experiment,” the new deal represents a significant reconnection for Springer, a leading STM publisher, and the well-funded Max Planck, one of the world’s most prestigious research institutions with more than 12,000 staff members, 9000 Ph.D. students, post-docs, guest scientists and researchers, and student assistants working in over 80 affiliated research institutes. The agreement, however, was billed as “a two-year experiment.” Over the duration of the deal, noted Peter Hendriks, Springer’s president of STM publishing, both sides will “evaluate the effects of open access on both authors and users.”

Springer spokesman Eric Merkel-Sobotta told the LJ Academic Newswire the deal was along the lines of two other recent “experimental” deals Springer has struck, one with UKB, a consortium of the Universities and the Royal Library of the Netherlands, and one with the Georg-August University of Göttingen, both of which also waive author fees for those institutional researchers choosing to submit to Springer journals using Open Choice. The standard Open Choice author fee is $3000.

Springer’s Jan Velterop, an OA pioneer during his years at BioMed Central wrote on his blog that the new deal “could quite conceivably yield an increase in article submissions to Springer journals by authors from Max Planck Institutes…in fact, such an increase is expected, over time.” On his blog, OA advocate Peter Suber noted that this kind of deal “helps create a new body of OA content articles by faculty at participating institutions for about the same price that institutions currently pay for subscriptions.” Velterop added that such deals could reconcile “the desire for universal and immediate open access to peer-reviewed scientific journal articles with the need to ensure the economic sustainability of peer-reviewed journals.”

In October, 2007, after negotiations had broken down, MPS VP Kurt Mehlhorn said Springer was intent on charging “approximately double the price” the organization regarded as “reasonable.” In a statement, MPS officials suggested the breakdown in negotiations with Springer was representative of “extreme price developments in the supply of information, as well as usage restrictions,” and suggested scientific organizations throughout the world should “rethink” their information policies.

Chalk it up to all’s fair in negotiation. Merkel-Sobotta said Springer has always been open to open access, so long as any such system recognizes the value added by journal publishers and said that despite the public perception of acrimony, the two sides continued to talk and that Springer was “very pleased” with the eventual, innovative deal—and also interested to see what the next two years will look like. “If researchers really want open access,” he noted, “we’ll see.”

Library Journal Academic Newswire, Feb 5, 2008

Open Content Primer

Karen Fischer

– February 5, 2008Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models, Open Access, Open Data

Lawrence Liang, Free/Open Source Software, Open Content, United Nations Development Programme, 2007. Under a CC-BY license. Excerpt:

…The Open Content model of knowledge creation and dissemination has emerged as a significant way in which we can move beyond the barriers of restrictive licensing. At the same time, it enables us to rethink our relationship to the world of knowledge and cultural production. Inspired by the Free Software movement, Open Content seeks to move away from the traditional user/producer binary in favour of a more participative process of knowledge creation and usage.

This e-Primer introduces the idea of Open Content by locating it within the larger historical context of copyright’s relation to the public domain. It examines the foundational premises of copyright and argues that a number of these premises have to be tested on the basis of the public interest that they purport to serve. It then looks at the ways in which content owners are increasingly using copyright as a tool to create monopolies, and how an alternative paradigm like Open Content can facilitate a democratization of knowledge and culture….

The argument of this e-Primer will be that policy makers across the world, and particularly in developing countries, should take note of the advantages of the Open Content paradigm as a way of overcoming barriers which restrict access to information, knowledge and culture. There are also significant economic advantages for developing countries which shall be detailed, for instance in relation to the cost of learning materials….

We…use the phrase ‘Open Content’ to primarily refer to content that provides the greatest freedom (the right to modify), since other kinds of content which do not provide the right to modify may actually be covered by the Open Access movement….

Some of the key areas for policy makers to consider include:

* Open Content policy to enable access to publicly funded research;
* Access to primary material such as research data;
* Financial, technological and other support for Open Access and Content repositories; and
* Support for publications based on Open Content resources….

It is also important to note that the problem does not merely lie with government policies but also with educational institutions, which are supported – either in full or in part – by public funding….In other words, there is a serious and urgent need for all public institutions to examine the public availability of the knowledge that they produce, and the most effective strategies for further dissemination. For the reasons already outlined in this e-Primer, it would make immense sense for them to start moving towards an Open Content/Open Access paradigm….

Transitions: scholarly communications news for the UI community | November 2007

Karen Fischer

– November 16, 2007Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models

November 2007
Issue 4.07

Welcome to the November issue of Transitions.

The purpose of this irregular electronic newsletter is to bring to readers’ attention some of the many new projects and developments affecting the current system of scholarly communication, with emphasis on new products and programs, the open access movement and other alternative publishing models. Scholarly communication refers to the full range of formal and informal means by which scholars and researchers communicate, from email discussion lists to peer-reviewed publication. In general authors are seeking to document and share new discoveries with their colleagues, while readers–researchers, students, librarians and others–want access to all the literature relevant to their work.

While the system of scholarly communication exists for the benefit of the world’s research and educational community and the public at large, it faces a multitude of challenges and is undergoing rapid change brought on by technology. To help interested members of the UI community keep up on these challenges and changes we plan to put out 4-6 issues per year of this newsletter.

This newsletter aims to reflect the interests of its readers so please forward comments, suggestions and entries to include to karen-fischer@uiowa.edu. Also, read the health sciences counterpart to Transitions: Hardin Scholarly Communication News.

Table of Contents:

U of Iowa Faculty Senate Approves Author’s Addendum for Publishing Agreements
So Close, Yet Still so Far? Bill Containing NIH Public Access Provision Is Vetoed
ACS editor makes the case for ACS Author Choice program
Decision to Disclose Information Can Enter Gray Area
First articles from PhysMath Central
Max Planck Society Cancels Licensing Agreement with Springer
Retaining Copyrights to Increase Research Impact: Online Tutorial
Copyright Crash Course
U of Michigan Press Keeps Link to Controversial Publisher
Washington University Revises Author’s Addendum
Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access
Pleiades: Lots of Ancient Geodata Released!

ACS editor makes the case for ACS Author Choice program

Karen Fischer

– November 16, 2007Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models, Open Access

Lawrence J. Marnett, AuthorChoice: A Great Way to Get Your Papers Read, Chemical Research in Toxicology, September 17, 2007. An editorial. Excerpt:

The American Chemical Society instituted a new program last fall called ACS AuthorChoice, which enables authors to purchase immediate and permanent Open Access status for their accepted manuscripts in ACS journals. Pricing is on a sliding scale, depending on whether the author is an ACS member and/or is affiliated with an institution that has a site license to ACS journals. The highest price is $3000, and the lowest price is $1000. ACS AuthorChoice is the Society’s response to the Open Access movement, which has been the subject of much sound and fury over the past few years….

The Society is blending its conventional subscription revenue with a small amount of AuthorChoice revenue (at least at the outset) to offset the cost of peer review and publication. The solid institutional subscription base for ACS journal publications has enabled the Society to institute the very reasonable rates noted above ($1000 for an ACS member at a subscribing institution).

So how is the experiment going? It’s a little early to tell, but some very interesting data have already been generated. So far, there aren’t many ACS AuthorChoice logos sprinkled around the tables of contents of ACS journals (all ACS AuthorChoice articles are available [here]). So, at first glance, it looks as though our authors aren’t too committed to Open Access, at least when they have to pay for it. If that is true, it’s too bad, but even if it is true, I think authors should reconsider because they are missing an important point.

Why do authors publish papers? So people will read them, and ACS AuthorChoice is a great way to get them read! I’ve published five articles via ACS AuthorChoice since last October and have been monitoring the downloads in consultation with ACS staff. It’s too early to determine statistical significance, but so far, the trends look very good. In fact, the first article that I published as an ACS AuthorChoice article (in October 2006) ranks as one of the top downloaded articles in CRT for 2007….

I am planning to make all of my publications in ACS journals AuthorChoice —It’s a no-brainer. If my papers are downloaded more, they will be read more and will be cited more….Frankly, the cost of publishing an article as ACS AuthorChoice is a real bargain and a good reason to join the ACS. One-thousand dollars is trivial as compared to the cost of conducting the research that we are reporting….Because ACS doesn’t charge an author ANYTHING to publish in its journals, the ACS AuthorChoice charge is all one has to pay, and one can forget about reprints. That is a deal that is hard to beat.

There is another subtle point about ACS AuthorChoice of which authors need to be aware. Designating an article ACS AuthorChoice means that it is freely downloadable as soon as it is mounted on the web, and with ASAP publishing, this is often several weeks before the print version appears….This suggests that the ACS AuthorChoice model may provide higher “impact value” for authors than the delayed free access that other societies offer. So, I congratulate ACS Publications for listening to its editors and authors and for formulating a realistic policy to Open Access that accomplishes the most fundamental goal of journal publishing —getting articles read!

First articles from PhysMath Central

Karen Fischer

– November 16, 2007Posted in: Alternative Publishing Models

PMC Physics A has published its first articles. It’s the first journal from PhysMath Central, the OA spinoff of BioMed Central. From the announcement:

PhysMath Central, BioMed Central’s open access publishing platform for the fields of physics, mathematics and computer science, today announced that PMC Physics A, the first PhysMath Central journal, has published its first research articles. The articles included a groundbreaking study that could change the way physicists understand dark matter….

PhysMath Central also announces that its second journal, PMC Physics B will be edited jointly by Prof. Peter Hatton, Professor of Physics, Durham University, and Prof. Steve Buckman of Australian National University. The new journal will focus on condensed matter and atomic, molecular and optical (AMO) physics.

“This is exciting news for us as we continue our aim of bringing new open access journals to all areas of physics,” said Chris Leonard, associate publisher, PhysMath Central….

Launched to meet the increasing need for open access journals from major research institutes (such as CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research) and other funding organizations and government bodies, PhysMath Central seeks to make research in physics, mathematics and computer science more widely available and increase access to this research to all institutes and individuals, free of subscription charges….

from Open Access News by Peter Suber, Oct. 2, 2007

Links
- Copyright LibGuide
- Scholarly Publishing LibGuide
Categories
Archives
Archives
Subscribe

Alternative Publishing Models Category

Links

Categories

Archives

Subscribe