[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'
- To: <email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'
- From: "Hamaker, Charles" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 20:31:05 EST
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Karl, way back in the 1980's Dick Dougherty and others discovered journal editors making many multiples of your $10,000 hypothetical for editing commercial journals. Chuck Hamaker Associate University Librarian Collections and Technical Services Atkins Library University of North Carolina Charlotte Charlotte, NC 28223 phone 704 687-2825 -----Original Message----- [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Karl Bridges Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:35 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org; Anthony Watkinson Subject: Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts' I would suspect that most editors of scholarly journals do this as a part time situation in conjunction with their primary work as professors in their various fields. The numbers of academic journal editors, outside of corporations and professional publishing, who edit journal(s) as their full time employment is probably very small. Thus, I would argue, information about what they are paid being available probably wouldn't have much effect on anything. For example, Professor X of Big Name University works as a law professor and gets $10,000 a year for editing the Journal of Silly Legal Cases on the side. Assume he's probably making $150,000 a year -- the extra $10000 is just not enough, in my view, to either sway him not to be an editor or to demand more money. His fee covers his time and trouble for the hassle of being an editor, but he doesn't depend on it in any real economic sense that matters e.g. he needs the money to buy food or pay his rent. Professor X has no real economic incentive to demand $20,000 a year because the publisher will simply get a new editor -- making Professor X's cost for his demand $10,000. If you assume individuals act in their own economic self interest Professor X will go for the situation that pays him $160,000 yearly as opposed to any situation that results in less than that. (And, actually, if you look into it, I would suspect that many people who have marketable skills (law, medicine, engineering) don't serve as editors simply because they can make more money on the side working in their field of expertise e.g. being a consultant, being a doctor, whatever) Karl Bridges Bailey Howe Library University of Vermont Burlington, VT 05405 email@example.com
- Prev by Date: Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'
- Next by Date: Academic MySpace(s) on the Horizon?
- Previous by thread: Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'
- Next by thread: Re: Post Brussels : Elsevier and Australian STM debate 'sprouts'