Re: Do governments subsidize journals (was: Who gets hurt by Open

["Sally Morris \(ALPSP\)" <sally.morris@alpsp.org>]

On this topic, it probably hardly needs saying that, in those countries
where Government contributes to the costs of universities, univ library
subscriptions are in effect taxpayer (not Government - Govt doesn't have
any money of its own!) funded.  However, as various studies have shown,
only part of journals' income comes from university subscriptions - as
much has half may come from industry in some disciplines, not only through
subs but also offprint sales and advertising.  Under an 'author-side
payment' OA model, however, virtually all of the costs will be borne by
the taxpayer via research (or other institutional) funding

Sally Morris, Chief Executive
Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers
South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK
Tel:  +44 (0)1903 871 686
Fax:  +44 (0)1903 871 457
Email:  sally.morris@alpsp.org

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <heatherm@eln.bc.ca>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: Do governments subsidize journals (was: Who gets hurt by Open

> On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:06:56 -0400 (EDT) espositoj@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I think we have a forest-and-the-the-trees problem in this debate over
> > whether or not some journals, and the ADA journals in particular, are
> > subsidized by the government.
> [snip]
>
> To clarify:  Joe, what Dr. Goodman is referring to here is whether the
> research that was reported in one issue of Diabetes was sponsored.
> Whether the journal itself, or the ADA, is sponsored by the government
> or not is a completely separate question.
>
> What Dr. Goodman's findings tell me is that the research that it
> described in Diabetes is generally sponsored either by government, or by
> a nonprofit agency, or both.
>
> To me, this reinforces an important concept:  academic publishing is not
> the common type of business, in which one sells the fruits of one's own
> labor and/or goods and services one has paid for.  Rather, one is
> selling the final report of research that many people and organizations
> have contributed to:  the researcher(s) and their employers (whether
> universities, governments, or industries), as well as the research
> funders, and often human research subjects and voluntary associations
> who assist in matching researchers with subjects.  Plus volunteer peer
> reviewers and sometimes editors too, of course.
>
> My point here is that the results of the research belong in some measure
> to all of these groups - the taxpayers, the universities, the
> researchers, the funding agencies, the human subjects and the voluntary
> associations, which all helped to make the research possible.
>
> Dissemination of research results needs to serve the needs of all these
> groups - but most especially, in the case of diabates, the needs of
> persons with diabetes above all.
>
> Publishers could post the final peer-reviewed copy of an article the
> moment it is available, and/or strongly encourage the author to
> self-archive such a copy as soon as possible.
>
> This would be the optimum way to meet the needs of people with diabetes;
> as soon as one study is complete, another group of researchers can make
> use of the results and carry on with the next steps.  For the person
> with diabetes, this maximizes the odds that a better treatment or cure
> will be found before the disease causes them more damage.
>
> Assuming that the reason for existence of the American Diabetes
> Association is to better the lives of those with diabetes, to me it is
> obvious that ADA will completely embrace open access, just as soon as it
> is understood how OA is the best possible means to achieve the ADA's
> mission.
>
> If this seems like a financial challenge, perhaps some research should
> be done to find out why people join an association llike ADA, and what
> they think is more important:  research and better treatment - or
> publishing profits to fund the ADA's other laudable programs?
>
> Many thanks to Dr. Goodman for his very helpful analysis.
>
> cheers,
>
> Heather Morrison