RE: Universal University Open Access Mandates Moot The Problem of Uncontrolled Journal Price Inflation Caused By Inelastic Demand

["Nat Gustafson-Sundell" <n-gustafson-sundell@northwestern.edu>]

This is a tempting thesis and I've seen a couple of mentions of 
it lately, but I haven't seen the study or studies underlying the 
references.

I initially thought that somebody must have run an analysis 
showing how the increase in the number of pages published per 
subject area per publisher has correlated over time with prices 
on the same per subject area/ publisher basis.  However, as I've 
thought about, it has struck me that this would not be enough 
information, since it seems likely those pages haven't had a 
constant cost to produce.  The actual study must be quite 
nuanced, given quality considerations as well (and opportunities 
for obfuscation abound). This is why NFP and OA publishers 
provide necessary yardsticks -- they are also bearing the cost of 
publishing.

A follow-up might be to consider to what extent the added OA 
outlets have decreased pressure on commercial publishers (i.e. if 
not for all of the added OA venues, how much worse would it have 
been?).  Also, it would be interesting to know whether or how OA 
growth expectations affect what the thesis is able to say about 
the future.  In other words, how much will the expansion of OA 
venues decrease inflationary pressures on commercial publishers 
over time?  Or more to the point:  where should we be investing 
given that we know scholarly output will continue to increase 
(and who is showing that they have the innovation advantage by 
providing cost-effective solutions?)?

I've read somewhere that, overall, between both commercial and OA 
titles, we are not keeping up with increased scholarly output. 
By getting a handle on how well or poorly different publishers or 
even publisher models handle the pressure (and successfully 
continue to provide the elements in the traditional publisher 
value chain, whether or not those value adds continue to be 
provided according to tradition), we should have a better idea 
about where to invest our beans for future growth.  Of course, 
this is besides Mr. Harnad's point, but I'd personally find it 
interesting.

Can you point me in the direction of the studies since I'd like 
to follow up on how the numbers shake out?

Thanks,
Nat

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Russell
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 4:51 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Universal University Open Access Mandates Moot The Problem of
Uncontrolled Journal Price Inflation Caused By Inelastic Demand

Except your starting assumption is incorrect.  The "uncontrolled
inflationary spiral" is a myth.  Price-per-page and
price-per-article are falling and continue to do so.

What keeps increasing is the number of papers being produced by
the academy and it is this that drives the increasing overall
costs of scholarly publishing.

If Gold OA constrains the amount of papers produced, and if
that's really what the academy wants, then bring it on.

Ian Russell
ALPSP

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad
Sent: 02 September 2009 23:11
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: Universal University Open Access Mandates Moot The Problem of
Uncontrolled Journal Price Inflation Caused By Inelastic Demand

** Apologies for Cross-Posting **

Stuart Shieber, architect of Harvard's OA Mandate, asks: "Do we
continue the status quo, which involves only supporting a
business model known to be subject to uncontrolled inflationary
spirals, or do we experiment with new mechanisms that have the
potential to be economically sound and far more open to boot?"

http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/pamphlet/2009/08/31/more-on-academic-freedom-an
d-oa-funds/comment-page-1/#comment-152

The answer is simple: The only reason the uncontrolled inflation
of journal subscription costs is a problem at all (and also the
reason the upward spiral continues uncontrolled) is the planet's
universities' inelastic demand and need for access to the journal
articles.

Hence the solution is for universities -- the universal providers
of all those journal articles -- to provide Open Access (free
online access) to them by mandating that their peer-reviewed
final drafts be deposited in their institutional repositories
immediately upon acceptance for publication.

Universal OA self-archiving moots the problem of uncontrolled
subscription-cost inflation by putting an end to the inelasticity
of the demand: If your university cannot afford the subscription
price for journal X, your users will still have access to the OA
version.

There is no need for universities to try to reform journal
economics directly now. What is urgently needed, universally
reachable, and already long overdue is universal OA
self-archiving mandates from universities. Focusing instead on
reforming journal business models is simply distracting from and
hence delaying the fulfillment of this pressing need.

Harvard should focus all its energy and prestige on
universalizing OA self-archiving mandates rather than dissipating
it superfluously on journal economics and OA funds.

Once OA self-archiving is universal, journal economics will take
care of itself.

[SNIP]

Stevan Harnad