A case for help for smaller publishers

[heatherm@eln.bc.ca]

This is a combined reply to several posts on the thread "Who gets hurts by
OA".

James O'Donnell, Toby Green, Joe Esposito, and David Prosser have all
expressed concern for the smaller publishers, a concern I share as well.  
There is concern for smaller publishers in the current marketplace even
without OA.  Unlike the bigger players, they do not have the funds to
invest in shifting to the electronic environment and shifting business
models - whether moving to licensing from print subscriptions or
subscription to open access.

To me, this suggests that it is fair and appropriate to provide help to
smaller publishers to make this change.  There are groups who are
providing subsidies to help publishers make the transition, such as JISC.  
This exchange affirms the need for this help.

There are other forms of help for publishers, such as the free, open
source software Open Journal Systems - check out OJS in an hour, from:
http://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/

For publishers in developing countries, there is Bioline International,
which provides software, hosting and much more: http://www.bioline.org.br/

Final thought: open access is so much in the interests of authors - it
results in more impact, pleases research funders, and is more convenient
besides.  It is increasingly essential for publishers to move to open
access, whether allowing for immediate self-archiving or fully open access
publishing, to attract the best authors.  So, the better question might
be:  who benefits from open access? Answer:  everyone.  Even if a
publisher does not make the shift - they are still a human being, who will
benefit from the acceleration in research and education that OA makes
possible. Think about the mapping of the human genome - then imagine the
same cooperation and open sharing being applied to climate change, and I
think you'll agree!

cheers,

Heather G. Morrison