[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SCOAP3

Dear Ann, thank you for keeping the SCOAP3 debate going. I got across your message by chance yesterday and I would like to send a reply to the list. However, as I am not a subscriber the message got blocked. I would appreciate if you could post it on the list on my behalf.

Hope to see you again soon,

Best regards Jens

****

From Jens.Vigen@cern.ch Thu Dec  6 08:56:33 2007

To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
From: Jens Vigen <Jens.Vigen@cern.ch>
Subject: Re: SCOAP3

Ann Okerson wrote:
Dear all, When we met recently with a leader of the SCOAP3 initiative,
this was actually me. As Head Librarian at CERN I have been involved in SCOAP3 since the start, when the model was designed with inputs from Researchers, Libraries, Funding Agencies and -of course, Publishers, among which APS, Springer and SISSA/IOP. Researchers, our users, are actually the driving force behind this process: the large collaboration building detectors for the LHC accelerator at CERN, a 8bn$ world-wide endeavour, have unanimously voted that "We strongly encourage the usage of electronic publishing methods for [our] publications and support the principles of Open Access Publishing, which includes granting free access of our publications to all. Furthermore, we encourage all [our] members to publish papers in easily accessible journals, following the principles of the Open Access Paradigm.", as from page 34 of http://www.scoap3.org/files/ Scoap3WPReport.pdf

Now SCOAP3 is a much larger enterprise, http://scoap3.org/aboutus.html, with support from Germany, Italy, France, Sweden and Greece which, together with CERN, have already pledged 2.5 Millions Euros towards the model, 1/4 of its estimated yearly budget. Many more countries, covering a similar fraction contribution, are expected to join relatively soon. News are broadcasted at http://scoap3.org and in particular http://scoap3.org/news.html. So, in my role of one of the funding partners of SCOAP3 I have been discussing its workings and benefits with a few of the readers of this list.

Other funding partners of SCOAP3 have taken similar steps in other countries.

he mentioned that one of the incentives for libraries to join is
that the combined SCOAP3 group of subscribers will be large enough
to negotiate with the publishers and to reduce the overall
subscription fees we pay by as much as 2/3. This seemed hugely
optimistic to me, as none of the publishers listed below, whatever
their $/article, is making anywhere approaching 2/3 surplus. And,
in fact, societies like the APS note that they have "no fat to trim."
The concept to retain is that all those numbers are pure speculation. The only way forward to prove, or disprove the model, and address the well-founded concerns of the APS, is to give SCOAP3 a chance, at no risk for anyone: only when enough Libraries will have manifested their intention to join the consortium, under the condition it delivers what it promises, we can issue a call for tender. We will learn many things from its outcome: the prices-per-article of publishers; the quality/price ratios for the different journals; whether all publisher will participate. Come to that, we did not hear any negative statement, only positive ones, among others from Springer (http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0711&L=pamnet&T=0&F=&S=&P=2326), SISSA/IOP (Top of page 3 in http://jhep.sissa.it/jhep/docs/SISSA_IOP_OA_proposal.pdf) and APS here below, willing to move PRD OA if sustainability is achieved.

So, the choice stays with us Libraries. If we pledge to back-up the financial envelope of SCOAP3, if it will deliver, SCOAP3 will try to deliver. If we entrench in opinionated debates, like we have done for half a century or so, nothing will change, we will keep the model which we have deplored for the last quarter of a century and, at the same time, OA will come upon us in an uncontrolled way with uncontrolled consequences (anybody out there was recently surprised by the increasing volume of OA author-fees that Authors asked Libraries to cover?)

Anyhow, this led to the SCOAP staff's statement that it should be possible for publishers to bring their costs down that much, through additional savings in their publication costs, and the SCOAP3 negotiations will push publishers to achieve these. In turn, we suggested that if such low cost, high quality could be achieved, it might be useful for SCOAP3/CERN to demonstrate that by starting a journal that proves the concept.
SCOAP3/CERN is not a publisher. The research community which strongly backs this initiative wants and needs independent, high-quality, journals to thrive, and is as concerned about their sustainability as publishers are. And it wants OA. And it wants it now. SCOAP3 is designed to assist publishers in the transition of their titles to OA in a controlled and sustainable way, linking quality and price (what seems to me an absolute novelty in our Library world, try and explain this to anyone in the outside world). Let's not even mention what can happen to the journals our Physics readers/authors love and need, whose content is all on arXiv anyhow, once Library budgets are crunched even more...

We've not heard back on this matter from the SCOAP3 group yet;
would welcome any comments from readers of this list.
Ann Okerson/Yale Library
We would be most pleased to explain the SCOAP3 model and advocate the need of the support from *all* the Library community to start the price inquiry and take informed decisions. The answers to most questions are at http://www.scoap3.org/us_faq.html and it would be great if an event could be organised (in the US? we have had quite a few in Europe leading to such widespread consensus to the model) to discuss this further.

Best regards Jens Vigen

Jens Vigen, CERN
Chief Scientific Information Officer
Phone: + 41 22 767 2410
E-mail: jens.vigen@cern.ch
Postal address: CERN, CH1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
Web: http://library.cern.ch & http://www.scoap3.org