“F1000 and the Max Planck Digital Library (MPDL) have reached an agreement whereby MPDL will cover the cost for Max Planck Society-affiliated authors to publish on F1000Research. …”
“Our previous post looked at how additional funders joining Plan S might affect the overall market. Modelling the big picture is vital to producing benchmarks against which an organization can judge its own position relative to others.
However, your organization’s experience may be different to the average. It will have its own mix of products and dependencies. So, how might we tailor a model to reflect an organization’s specific experience and see how it might differ to the market average?
Our models combine a large number of criteria, including overall growth, the balance between different business models, regional effects, and pricing changes for both volume and value. We also project these criteria over time using regression (or “best fit”) analysis. In doing so, we can choose whether to take conservative or aggressive approaches for projections.
With so many possibilities, developing a model for a specific organization requires choosing which parameters to vary. We must also decide which scenarios to model….
[W]e decided to model two scenarios:
- The effects of a ban on hybrid, as Plan S funders will not fund APCs in hybrid journals (the green line). We assumed a “worst case” in which hybrid revenue will disappear – authors will either submit to other publishers’ journals, or follow a green option. As a point of comparison, we show a market-average scenario of the EU banning hybrid in the dotted grey line. Note how our fictitious organization suffers LESS reduction in its income even though its hybrid income is GREATER than average. This is because its growth dynamics are influenced by its faster than average revenue and publication growth, and higher-than average proportion of non-EU submissions.
- China moves forward on its plans to increase OA adoption, making an aggressive move to raise OA uptake to levels similar to that in Plan S countries (i.e. those with strong OA policies). In this scenario, we also assume that subscription revenues per article are replaced by lower open access revenues (playing to the principles of cost-neutrality discussed at the OA conference, and assuming aggressive pricing negotiations took hold). Here we see the organization seeing a much more profound decrease in projected revenues compared with an EU-only Plan S adoption. The dynamic here is one of core, higher-value subscription revenues being eroded by the widespread adoption of open access. …”
“The Office of the Director (OD), Office of Science Policy (OSP) is looking to fill a Supervisory Health Science Policy analyst position to serve as the Director of the Science Policy Coordination, Collaboration & Reporting Division. In addition, the incumbent will also serve as a senior advisor to the Associate Director for Science Policy providing development, planning, analysis, and management over a range of science policy issues across the spectrum of biomedical research….
“We [Bristol Universityh Press] offer a range of flexible open access options for both journals and book publishing which continue to evolve, and we are always interested in working with our authors to explore new ideas.
Both Green and Gold options are available for all our journal and book content and we are flexible to allow for funder compliance. See our open access options for books and open access options for journals for more information.
For journals our OA content is available to access on our IngentaConnect platform where it is clearly signposted.
We offer discounts on our standard APCs to researchers in developing countries and to those in institutions who subscribe to our journal collections….”
“University Libraries’ Publishing and Repository Services (PRS) engages with partners across the university to increase the amount, value, and impact of OSU-produced digital content including, but not limited to, conference proceedings, journals, monographs, student scholarship, working papers, technical reports, and faculty articles. PRSoffers support by organizing, providing access, distributing, and preserving digital scholarship through the Knowledge Bank repository program and the Libraries’ Open Access Publishing Program.
The Production Assistant reports to the Publishing Services Lead and performs production work for Publishing and Repository Services on multiple simultaneous projects. Production work includes: submitting content, creating metadata, DOI registration, designing and documenting workflows, monitoring and ensuring the quality of data input, tracking projects in project database, and scheduling and supervising the production work of student assistants. The Production Assistant works collaboratively with the Head of the Department and other departmental staff. The position requires attention to detail, sound judgment and decision making, and knowledge of related and applicable software programs (e.g. DSpace). All other duties as assigned….”
“In 2018, the repository received 140,616 new submissions, a 14% increase from 2017. The subject distribution is evolving as Computer Science represented about 26% of overall submissions, and Math 24%. There were about 228 million downloads from all over the world. arXiv is truly a global resource, with almost 90% of supporting funds coming from sources other than Cornell and 70% of institutional use coming from countries other than the U.S….”
The new year begins with good news: The International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI) and its partners announce the founding of a new scientometric open access journal. The journal will be managed by the former board members of the renowned Journal of Informetrics, who have collectively resigned from this Elsevier journal and who would rather continue their work in an open access context after a journal flipping. TIB supports this process by taking on a significant share of the transformation costs….
Under the name Quantitative Science Studies (QSS), the journal complies with the Fair Open Access Principles: transparent academic control, no copyright transfer, use of an open access license for all articles, no APC payment obligation for authors, transparent and low publishing costs. The journal will be owned by the Society and published by MIT Press.
- scientific journals should belong to the scientific community and not be owned by commercial publishing houses
- journals should be open access and should comply with fair principles
- publishers should make citation data freely available
Elsevier did not want to allow these conditions, which lead to the resignation of all editors.
The conditions are comprehensible: The academic ownership increases the chance that profit interests do not dominate the management of the magazine. The Fair Open Access principles are intended to help curb harmful open access models. In particular, the expensive APC (Article Processing Charges) model means that publishing in open access journals is not open to all. In addition, institutions and authors with a high publication output are being punished. The question of open citation data is particularly sensitive in a field of research in which the relations between publications can be very important. In the future, the publisher will automatically make this information available (see also Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC)) so that it will become part of the huge corpus of free citation data….”
“Over the last few years, the editorial board of the Journal of Informetrics (JOI) has grown increasingly dissatisfied with Elsevier’s actions and policies. While some of those have specific effects on our field—such as Elsevier’s refusal to participate in the Initiative for Open Citation (I4OC)—others are affecting all fields of science—such as its restrictive open access policies and prohibitive subscription costs. The editorial board of JOI expressed these concerns to Elsevier on numerous occasions, with no success. Given the inability of Elsevier to address these issues, the editorial board unanimous resigned on January 10th 2019. As of January 12th 2019, names of associate editors and editorial board members have been removed from the website of the Journal of Informetrics.
The resignation letter can be found here.
Journals should serve the research community—not the other way around. They provide an exchange forum which can only prosper through the work of authors, reviewers, and editors. Therefore, the former editorial board of the Journal of Informetrics unanimously decided to redirect its labor to a newly created journal, Quantitative Science Studies (QSS), published by MIT Press and owned by the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. I invite all of you to join us in this new endeavor and help us demonstrate how the research community can take control back of its means for disseminating knowledge, in a fair, open, and transparent way. We must all work together in making QSS a success, not only for the field of scientometrics and informetrics, but for science as a whole….”
“Based on the letter from Ms. Mesquita on October 9, 2018, we would like to inform you that there are insufficient grounds for us to continue our collaboration with Elsevier as members of the Editorial Board of Journal of Informetrics (JOI). We therefore offer our resignation as JOI editorial board members, effective immediately.
We are disappointed that ownership of JOI and the amount of Article Publishing Charges (APCs) of JOI are non-negotiable for Elsevier. Moreover, we deeply regret that Elsevier is not willing to participate in the Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC). This initiative has broad support in the field of scientometrics (http://issi-society.org/open-citations-letter/) and Elsevier is the only publisher in our field that has not joined the initiative. Because our position on ownership, open access, and open citations is fundamentally irreconcilable with the position of Elsevier, we consider it is no longer in the interest of our community to continue working together with Elsevier as members of the JOI editorial board.
We will honor those obligations we have assumed for manuscripts currently under consideration. We will not, however, assume any additional responsibilities for new submissions received….”
“January 14, 2019. The International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI) is pleased to announce the launch of a new journal, Quantitative Science Studies (QSS). QSS is owned by ISSI, the primary scholarly and professional society for scientometrics and informetrics, and will be published jointly with the MIT Press in compliance with fair open access principles. QSS will be a journal run for and by the scientometric community. The initial editorial board will be fully constituted by the former editorial board of the Journal of Informetrics (JOI), an Elsevier-owned journal.
The transition of the editorial board from JOI to QSS was initiated by the unanimous resignation, on January 10, of all members of the JOI editorial board. The editorial board members are in agreement that (1) scholarly journals should be owned by the scholarly community rather than by commercial publishers, (2) journals should be open access under fair principles, and (3) publishers should make their citation data freely available. These conditions were not accepted by Elsevier, prompting the termination of the relationship with this publisher.
The content for QSS will be open access and therefore freely available for readers worldwide. Funding for establishing and marketing the new journal has been provided in part by the MIT Libraries. To enable access for authors, the MIT Press will charge a comparatively low charge per article which will be fully covered by the Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB) – Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology for the first three years of operation with support of the Communication, Information, Media Centre (KIM) of the University of Konstanz. The funds from TIB will be managed by the Fair Open Access Alliance (FOAA) to ensure that the journal is operating under fair open access principles. The MIT Press is also a full participant in the I4OC initiative, which promotes unrestricted availability of scholarly citation data….”