Re: University of Maryland's Open Access Deliberations

["\"FrederickFriend\"" <ucylfjf@ucl.ac.uk>]

I agree with Sandy that quantifying economic value (in addition 
to scholarly value) in the dissemination of research is not easy 
but it is possible, even in the humanities. One example is that 
making the quality of an institution's research output visible 
attracts new research grants or new fee-paying students. The 
situation is not that quantifying economic value is impossible 
but that few of the major stakeholders are accustomed to thinking 
in that way. Researchers concentrate upon personal value such as 
tenure; publishers concentrate upon the value of income in 
relation to costs; and librarians concentrate upon the value of 
the number of titles in relation to expenditure. Of the major 
stakeholders institutions and funding agencies come closest to 
looking at economic value as well as at scholarly value.

My view is that scholarly publishers such as university presses 
would benefit from adopting a wider approach to value, not 
abandoning their emphasis upon scholarly value (because the 
economic value of their publications depends upon scholarly 
value), but adding to their arsenal of arguments for support. A 
starting-point can be the Houghton/Oppenheim report for JISC on 
"Economic Implications of Alternative Publishing Models", 
much-criticised by some publishers but can be seen as an 
opportunity by others.

Fred Friend
JISC Scholarly Communication Consultant
Honorary Director Scholarly Communication UCL

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandy Thatcher" <sgt3@psu.edu>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 1:01 AM
Subject: Re: University of Maryland's Open Access Deliberations

> How does one even begin to measure the "economic value" of OA
> for, say, a work of literary criticism or a monograph on Hume's
> philosophy? We scholarly publishers would dearly like to believe
> that spreading our specialized content freely worldwide would be
> a benefit to civilization, but this is an article of faith for
> us, not something we have any easy way of quantifying
> economically.
>
> Sandy Thatcher
> Penn State University Press
>
>
>>More work needs to be done (and is being planned) on the costs
>>and benefits for institutions of all sizes from the various
>>scholarly publishing opportunities now available, but there is no
>>indication from existing work that OA publishing will not prove
>>to be good value. One important element in any such model is that
>>the economic value of benefits is included, not only a simplistic
>>comparison of existing library expenditure on journals with the
>>cost of OA publication charges.
>>
>>Fred Friend
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Phil Davis" <pmd8@cornell.edu>
>>To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
>>Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 2:04 AM
>>Subject: Re: University of Marlyland's Open Access Deliberations
>>
>>>  Okerson, Ann wrote:
>>>
>>>>  [MOD NOTE:  Surely one of the less compelling reasons for
>>>>  having authors publish in OA journals is that academic
>>>>  libraries, at least in the western world, would save money on
>>>>  subscription prices?  Even if such a thing were known to be
>>>>  true?  Is it time that we base our arguments on something other
>>>>  than the dated rhetoric of the "journals pricing crisis?"]