Open Access Publishing
Part one: What are the current barriers facing Librarians?
At Veruscript we have been talking to librarians throughout the research community to try and assess some of the current barriers in open access, in an effort to map out some ways to overcome them and to move forward with open access publishing. This is part one of a two-part blog post, in which Lisa Walton summarises the problems currently faced by librarians. In part two we will discuss the growth of new university presses (NUP), which focus on dissemination of research rather than profit.
Barriers in open access
When we have discussed the problems facing librarians, the barriers discussed can be split into two broad types. The first, and more easy to solve, revolves around everyday issues to do with systems and workflows, which create day-to-day strife but are slowly being dealt with by publishers and librarians in tandem. The second is a thornier group of problems that centre on the principles and ethics surrounding open access publishing, the direction scholarly publishing should be going, and the best way to get there.
Obviously there is a big overlap in these two themes. Problems with the principles behind publishing feed into the things which make the everyday lives of librarians more difficult. For example, publishers adding page and colour charges on top of their article processing charges (APCs) can present an ethical issue, as there can be doubt that these charges are reasonable. However, this also presents a day-to-day issue, as there is a need to process these additional charges so they don’t become a barrier to publication.
Systems and Workflows
Librarians often struggle with access to information that has been targeted to researchers alone.
Many of the everyday barriers are to do with information. These include how easily librarians can access the information they need, and how informed their researchers are when it comes to open access.
Librarians often struggle with access to information that has been targeted to researchers alone. This can include: finding APCs that are buried in the submission systems, determining page charges and working out when they will be included, and information on the manuscript that should be (but isn’t) included on the invoice. These can all be problematic.
Researchers’ knowledge of open access varies dramatically across disciplines. There are areas where a level of familiarity can be assumed, notably the life sciences, but there are other areas where open access is a peripheral concern at best, particularly for practical arts-based researchers. Researchers’ areas of confusion include (as always) the array of mandates and what applies to them, repositories — including what counts as a repository (and why Academia.edu and ResearchGate do not), what versions of papers should be deposited, and confusion and some fear around payment and invoice systems.
Principles and Ethics Barriers
Many librarians voiced their disappointment with the current system, particularly with hybrid journals.
On the other side are some more intractable barriers, and they seem to stem from different ideas about where academic publishing and open access is heading. Many librarians voiced their disappointment with the current system, particularly with hybrid journals. Whilst they do not want to curtail researchers’ choice of journals, and know that there are many different motivations behind those decisions, the librarians we spoke to had a pretty much universal hatred of hybrid open access. It has become clear that hybrid is not being seen by publishers as a route to flip to a fully open access system, but is instead functioning as an additional revenue stream for them. This is deeply resented by librarians, as is the high cost of hybrid compared to fully open access journals.
Page and colour charges are also something that has been highlighted as a concern, especially where they are included after acceptance, alongside the APC. They are seen as another way for publishers to increase their revenue, rather than being driven by an actual need. Both these issues are seen as publishers being disingenuous when it comes to open access — appearing to support it outwardly, but clinging to subscription revenue, viewing open access funds as a way to increase revenue, and turning the drive for open access to their own advantage.
Changes
Researchers are increasingly becoming au fait with the world of open access, particularly early career researchers…
What changes would help eliminate these barriers? Some changes are underway; information on open access, mandates and charging has improved massively in the past few years. Publishers and librarians are increasingly working together to further improve information availability and accessibility, particularly in regard to information included in the metadata of the article. Jisc’s publication router is one example of initiatives aimed at bettering the flow of information through the system.
Librarians have also been educating their researchers on open access and mandates for years. Although there are areas that are still yet to be reached, researchers are increasingly becoming au fait with the world of open access, particularly early career researchers who have come up through a system in which open access is discussed regularly. Increasing outreach is always welcome, and with that in mind we have started a new blog to help provide a resource on all aspects of journals publishing.
These approaches address the issues that can generally be solved through working together, building resources, and improving systems. For the other barriers, rather more radical solutions are being envisioned. There is an increasing feeling that academic publishing needs to be de-centralised. To give researchers cheaper options, librarians and academics have been looking at taking publishing into their own hands. There has been an increase in university presses that have grown out of libraries. These focus on dissemination of research rather than returning a profit to their institution. This movement is something that we will be discussing in our next blog post, where we will be looking at the changing roles of libraries and librarians in response to the current open access landscape.
Lisa Walton
Executive Editor, Veruscript
We would like to thank all the librarians that took the time to talk to us about their views on open access publishing:
Matthias Ammon, University of Cambridge
Joanna Ball, University of Sussex
Duncan Belk, University of Arts Bournemouth
Laura Ennis, Edinburgh Napier University
Danny Kingsley, University of Cambridge
Louise Tripp, Lancaster University
Kate Walker, University of Southampton
Keep up-to-date with our latest posts, sign up for our ealert.
A quick advertisement!
We hope you found the above useful. This is just to let you know that Veruscript’s Partner Journals and Presses service allows societies and institutions to set up and run their own open access journals . Find out more about our low-cost, high-quality service for societies and universities or contact us directly at partnerships@veruscript.com.
