Re: Growth for STM publishers in 2008

[Sandy Thatcher <sgt3@psu.edu>]

Joe Esposito wrote:

"It is not clear to me why the Trustees of Princeton or The 
University of Chicago would choose to subsidize less prestigious 
institutions with smaller research programs."

Well, in fact, they already do, in the form of the present system 
of university presses, supported by the largest universities but 
benefiting all.

Sandy Thatcher


>I think it probable that open access will increase costs, a topic
>I have written about a number of times and I will not bore this
>list with yet another link.  When you change one component of a
>system, the other pieces do not remain in place.
>
>PLOS, on the other hand, has already demonstrated one way to
>lower costs through its PLOS One program. The reduction in cost
>derives from adopting a policy of less rigorous peer review.
>
>But even if one believes that the costs will be the same or even
>that they would be cut in half, there is little doubt that the
>apportionment of those costs would change, with the larger
>research universities picking up the lion's share of the bill,
>since publication is connected to research output. It is not
>clear to me why the Trustees of Princeton or The University of
>Chicago would choose to subsidize less prestigious institutions
>with smaller research programs.
>
>Joe Esposito
>
>
>On 10/20/09 4:19 PM, "John Houghton" <John.Houghton@vu.edu.au> wrote:
>
>>  Sandy et al. Two points worth noting:
>>
>>  1.There is public funding of research because of the universally
>>  recognised market failure due to the public good nature of
>>  knowledge leading to private under-investment as investors in R&D
>>  cannot prevent spillovers. The purpose of taxpayer funded
>>  investment in R&D is to fill the gap and realise economic and
>>  social returns. The fact that research findings are picked up and
>>  used is the point, not a problem. The purpose of OA, or any other
>>  form of scholarly and scientific communication, is to make
>>  research findings readily accessible and usable for researchers
>>  and research users in all sectors. The best publishing business
>>  model is the one that best achieves this outcome.
>>
>>  2,On balance, the evidence does not suggest that the university
>>  community would pay more in an OA environment when system-wide
>>  costs are taken into account. In some research intensive
>>  universities, author-pays fees might conceivably be more than
>>  their library subscription expenditure, but when one also takes
>>  into account research and library negotiation, purchasing,
>>  handling, processing and user support cost savings (not to
>>  mention individual and departmental subscriptions), which would
>>  of course be greatest in research intensive universities, the
>>  university community is likely to pay less for OA, and it is
>>  difficult to imagine the circumstances that would see any
> > individual university (community) having to pay more.
> >
> > Regards,
> > John Houghton
> > Victoria University