Re: How to fund open access journals from available sources

[Phil Davis <pmd8@cornell.edu>]

The success of David's Open Access funding proposal relies on voluntary
payments by those who currently participate in the market, and the
minimization of "free loading" -- individuals that derive benefit from the
system without paying into it.

Voluntary systems can work very well in small groups where there is
intense peer-pressure to conform to the good of everyone, since those who
don't conform and act purely selfishly are publicly scorned or shunned.  
This model however starts breaking down in larger groups (and one could
argue that the sheer number as well as geographic dispersion of libraries
and authors makes it harder to apply peer pressure).  Individuals start
working in their own selfish interest.

But even in a tightly-knit group where there is pressure to "do the right
thing" (a phrase we keep hearing regarding OA), there is always pressure
to defect.  Libraries could begin to reduce their voluntary contribution
to journals from David's proposed 75% to 50% because they claim their
budget was just slashed again.  Or from 50% to 0%.  And if that journal
were Open Access, what would be the harm to their reader communities?  
Those librarians would not lose the respect of her peers because of
pragmatic pressures -- it was what they had to do to balance their budget.  
In the same way, if my peers were not sending contributions to journals to
help pay for their own article publications, would I make a voluntary
payment?  Not if I didn't want to feel like a "sucker".

The likelihood of success of a voluntary payment model in large systems
relies on the individual interests of authors and libraries to be in line
with the best interests of all possible readers.  What is in the selfish
interests of individual authors and libraries is not always what is in the
best interest of the entire universe of readers.  Until these interests
coincide, I can't say there is much evidence to suggest voluntary payments
will work.

For an excellent review on social dilemmas, see:

Peter Kollock.  Social Dilemmas: The Anatomy of Cooperation.  Annual Review 
of Sociology.  1998,  24:183-214.  
http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/toc/soc/24/1

--Phil Davis

At 10:15 PM 4/14/2004 -0400, you wrote:
> How to fund open access journals from available sources
>
> This is the outline of a plan using available money without requiring
> changes in the academic world to provide funding for true open access
> journals. It is based on the example of a single publication produced by a
> non-profit society. (This plan is inspired, in part, by Ross Atkinson's
> earlier posting on this list, and by discussions with the students in my
> doctoral seminar at the Palmer School of Library and Information Science.)
>
> There are three components: voluntary payments by libraries, voluntary
> charges to authors/universities/sponsors, and economies arising from open
> access publication.
>
> Libraries have long been accustomed to paying for publications by
> maintaining memberships in the publishing organization. (Many research
> libraries spend several hundred thousand dollars a year on such
> memberships.) Sometimes this is more economical than a corporate
> subscription, and sometimes it is the only way to obtain the material..
> Libraries also contribute small sums to particularly worthwhile
> experimental projects, even if the results do not provide any direct
> economic benefit. What libraries are not generally willing to do is make
> open-ended financial commitments, or significantly increase the amount
> they pay for individual publications. What libraries are unable to do, at
> least by themselves, is bring about changes in the financial system
> supporting academic research.
>
> I propose that the publisher of a journal declare that the journal will be
> totally open access in electronic format, but that libraries (and others)
> that have been subscribers are invited to contribute, at a suggested
> amount of about 3/4 of the current rate (with the proviso that any library
> that can contribute only a smaller amount is welcome to do so). I think
> that most research libraries will gladly accept the 25 percent savings
> rather than be free-loaders; it is a long time since there have been
> negative price changes! If even 3/4 of the libraries do pay, this will
> yield just over half the current subscription revenue. The key difference
> from previous proposals is that the members of the university, along with
> the rest of the world, will get access to all the articles--whether or not
> their library pays.
>
> Most authors (or more realistically their departments, universities, or
> research sponsors) have been willing to pay reasonable sums for
> publication; they have done so for high-prestige journals even before open
> access. The amount that publishers suggest they would need to charge
> ranges from $500 to $8000 per article. The only known trustworthy value
> for cost per article is the $1500 reported by the American Physical
> Society; various plausible but unproven reasons can be suggested why
> journals in other subjects might need more. The percentage of authors
> paying publication charges has been reported as high as 90 percent, but
> this is in well-funded fields. If the suggested publication charge is half
> the total cost, probably 3/4 will pay some or all of this reduced charge;
> this gives an amount about equal to the other half of the current revenue.
> An incentive to discourage unrealistic submissions leading to high
> rejection rates can be added by requesting an initial fee for submission,
> and an additional amount for publication. As customary, the payment of the
> fee is handled separately from the editorial decision-making. The key
> difference from previous proposals is that only half the actual cost need
> be recovered at the author/sponsor end. There will remain an incentive to
> lower the suggested cost to the author, thus reducing excessive or
> unrealistic pricing. Obviously these figures will vary with each
> publication: they can be adjusted as needed to yield the revenue to
> produce a journal.
>
> There will be some lowering of costs from electronic-only open access
> production. Paper subscriptions would still be available, presumably at
> somewhat over total cost (including the extra cost needed for the
> multiformat preparation). This will remove the cost disadvantage of
> material with extensive illustrations, and the need to charge extra for
> color.  Since all the electronic material will be open access, there will
> be no need for authorization servers, staff to handle authorization
> problems, contracts, negotiations, or licensing.
>
> The basic feature of this plan is the provision of two major revenue
> streams, thus greatly reducing risk. The cost to libraries will be
> reduced; the cost to authors will be affordable.
>
> Many additional points remain to be explored:
>
> 1. The financial details for any particular title
> 2. The financial risk involved to a society
> 3. The role of society memberships
> 4. Applicability to groups of publications produced by a society
> 5. Applicability to commercial publishers
> 6. Coexistence with other publishing models
> 7. The practical rate of transition
> 8. The manner of archiving, as there will be no contractual provisions
> 9. Applicability to primary research material other than journal articles.
>    Some points need not be explored because they are not directly relevant
>    to this model, but rather of more general concern:
> a. The role of peer -review
> b. The relationship between publication and tenure
> c. The role of secondary services and metadata harvesting
> d. The most appropriate copyright model in an international context.
>
> I emphasize that I do not propose this as necessarily the best of all
> possible models, but rather as one that is financially practicable in a
> range of circumstances, while not making difficult changes in
> institutional arrangements.
>
> Dr. David Goodman
> Associate Professor
> Palmer School of Library and Information Science
> Long Island University
> dgoodman@liu.edu