RE: OA-journals alive or??

["Sally Morris" <info@publishingresearch.net>]

The low number of 'ceased' OA journals in Ulrich's is not 
altogether surprising, since what triggered this discussion was 
the observation that dead OA journals don't get a formal burial - 
they just lie there!

I would also suspect that those which are listed in Ulrich's are 
more likely to have some kind of institutional support, in that 
somebody is carrying out the 'infrastructural' processes of 
publishing (such as marketing)

[Replying to a different thread] I have no problem with journals 
being subsidized, whether by their parent society, a third-party 
sponsor, or their parent institution

What does bother me is when those costs which are subsidized are 
somehow deemed not to exist!

Sally Morris
Publishing Research Consortium
Email:  info@publishingresearch.net
Website:  www.publishingresearch.net

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of David Prosser
Sent: 13 July 2007 20:40
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: OA-journals alive or??

Sally

I've quickly looked at Ulrich's: selecting 'refereed' and 
'academic/scholarly' gives us 25,700 titles.

Selecting 'refereed', 'academic/scholarly', and 'ceased' gives us 
1,660 titles.

So, it would appear that 6.4% of journals listed by Ulrich's are 
not active. These things are all relative, of course, but 7.5% 
for the DOAJ does not appear particularly large compared with 
6.4%.

Interestingly, Ulrich's underestimates the number of ceased open 
access journals - of a total of 1,668 listed only 15 are 
'ceased', giving 0.9%. This does show that the 6.4% figure above 
is mainly subscription journals.

David C Prosser PhD
Director
SPARC Europe
E-mail:  david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk