[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Looking an open access gift horse in the mouth
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Looking an open access gift horse in the mouth
- From: "Rebecca Kennison" <rkennison@plos.org>
- Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 16:53:10 EST
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
This is posted in response to the questions that have arisen about institutional memberships in general and about PLoS' in particular. We encourage anyone who has questions or comments on the program to contact us directly: Helen Doyle, hdoyle@plos.org or +1.415.642.1217 or Andy Gass, agass@plos.org or +1.415.624.1202. FAQs about the PLoS Institutional Membership Program The Public Library of Science (PLoS) announced its Institutional Membership program in January 2004. Here we answer some of the questions that have been raised about this program. (See also http://www.publiclibraryofscience.org/support/instmembership.html for more information.) What is the purpose of the Institutional Membership program? The Membership plan was largely motivated by librarians, members of library associations, and others who have approached us asking how they can help catalyze the open-access movement. Memberships are intended both to offset the costs of publication for authors affiliated with that institution, and thereby provide an incentive for authors to publish in PLoS journals, but also to explicitly support PLoS' open-access advocacy efforts. It is not intended to be a cost-recovery program, whereby a Member receives a certain number of publication charge discounts until they reach their ceiling. How do Institutional Memberships differ from subscriptions? Subscription-based journals generate funds by restricting access, requiring that institutions pay a certain amount for access to the content. Our Membership program is NOT a subscription in any sense -- the content of PLoS Biology (and all future PLoS journals) is and always will be free online. As stated above, the Membership program was instead created as another way to catalyze the transition to open-access publishing by reducing financial barriers for authors and by supporting open-access advocacy. Institutions that cannot become Members will always have access to PLoS journals and their affiliated authors can always submit manuscripts to PLoS journals. But the Membership does provide an action-oriented way for libraries, universities and colleges, foundation, research funding agencies, professional associations, and other stakeholders to support PLoS and to very directly support their faculty and staff who want to publish with us. How should an institution determine what Membership level they should be on? The Membership levels are structured to accommodate a variety of types and sizes of institutions and are intentionally not strictly delineated by institution size or research output. The Membership is not intended to be based solely on the number of researchers or potential publications, but rather to be flexible with respect to the institution's ability to promote open access via this mechanism. An institution should opt for a Membership level that seems reasonable to them, and we will accept that or negotiate with them to determine the appropriate level. Who should pay for an Institutional Membership? We do not expect the burden of open-access publication charges to fall solely on the libraries, since this model is not any more sustainable that the existing subscription-based model. We hope that, beyond the library, other departments of a university, college, or research institution, such as presidents, provosts, or deans of research will contribute to the Membership. We are already seeing a willingness on the part of university administrators to commit funds to open-access publishing for their faculty. We realize that the Institutional Membership program may be confusing because it is not a traditional subscription or professional membership. Initially we expect that some potential Members will have more flexibility with their budgets or a differing ability to pool money from multiple sources within the institution. In addition, the program is designed to accommodate Memberships from foundations, research funding agencies, industries, and others, not only academic libraries. Why do Institutional Members receive discounts on publication charges, rather than complete waivers? We opted to give discounts rather than full waivers so that the research funding agencies and other sources can also share in covering the costs of publication (not just the library or whomever is paying the Membership). This structure ensures that the cost of publication does not become invisible to authors (as it currently is in most cases) and that authors, libraries, publishers, etc., have an incentive to continue to lobby funding agencies to include publications charges in research grants. As stated in the above FAQ, the cost of publishing should be spread over multiple funding sources, including the original research funders, if possible. We also want the program to be adaptable to the increasing demand for open-access publishing options and the concurrent growth of PLoS journals. How will Institutional Memberships work with consortia of institutions? We expect to negotiate with consortia to agree on the Membership level that makes sense and is fair to them and to us. We will compare with other arrangements consortia have and use data about research output and publication rates to reach an agreement. We expect that we will renegotiate Membership levels in subsequent years based on submission and publication rates and on the changing economic climate in scholarly publishing. How does PLoS determine its publication charges? We set our publication charge of $1500 based on the best estimate we could make from existing publishing data. Most studies show that first-copy costs run between $1500-$3000, including the costs of peer review, editing, production, ongoing online hosting, robust online interactivity (such as a variety of download formats, multimedia and supporting information files, reference linking), etc. Other journals may choose to have less stringent quality control or functionality, decisions that may mean less cost to them. ***
- Prev by Date: RE: Looking an open access gift horse in the mouth
- Next by Date: RE: Looking an open access gift horse in the mouth
- Previous by thread: RE: Looking an open access gift horse in the mouth
- Next by thread: RE: Looking an open access gift horse in the mouth
- Index(es):