re: potential positive spiral in transition to open access

[Heather Morrison <heatherm@eln.bc.ca>]

Peter Banks wrote:

I fail to see any rationale basis for zeroing in on subscriptions 
costing more than $1,000.  [Peter goes on to say that my model 
makes no distinction between journals in this category]. (from: 
http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/ListArchives/0706/ 
msg00082.html)

Comment:

The rationale for focusing on subscriptions costing more than 
$1,000 US per year, in this particular example, is that this is 
the cost of a year's hosting and support for a journal at the 
non-profit Scholarly Exchange 
(http://www.scholarlyexchange.org/).

A library paying subscriptions in this price range might be well 
advised to inquire as to whether the journal could manage on a 
volunteer / in-kind support model.  My model assumes that only a 
small fraction of journals in this price range (10%) would be 
able to manage.  Nevertheless, if even this small percentage of 
journals could transition in this fashion, there would be 
significant savings over the library community as a whole, which 
could then be applied to other open access initiatives.

How could such an expensive journal manage on a volunteer / 
in-kind support model, or how can you tell whether a journal 
could successfully transition in this way?

The key is whether the journal is essentially managing on such a 
model now.  In peer-reviewed scholarly literature, authors, and 
peer reviewers, are not paid.  Payment of editors varies widely; 
it can be a volunteer task, underpaid / paid at an honorarium 
level, or highly paid.  Support costs also vary.  Some journals 
pay for office space; others enjoy free space at universities, 
and editors and others often work from their homes as well.

Even if a journal is unlikely to be able to transition with just 
the revenue from a single subscription, a polite inquiry would 
not hurt. It would be helpful to advocacy efforts to change in 
scholarly communication to point out to the editors of such 
journals, that the cost of a single subscription is more than 
sufficient to fund one of the more substantial costs of managing 
a journal - hosting and support of the online version.

Further comments on my blogpost, A Potential Positive Cycle: 
More Access, More Funds, are most welcome! 
http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/2007/06/potential-positive-cycle- 
more-access.html

Any opinion expressed in this e-mail is that of the author alone, 
and does not reflect the opinion or policy of BC Electronic 
Library Network or Simon Fraser University Library.

Heather Morrison, MLIS
The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics
http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com