A poster summarizing the experience of Kansas State University administering an APC fund for six years.
“The international Plan S research-funder consortium cOAlition S proposes that institutional libraries should transition from subscription to ‘pure publish’ deals with open-access journals by 2024 (see Nature 572, 586; 2019). However, the coalition represents just 16 European funding agencies and 3 international charity foundations. Many other European funders are not in a position to pay open-access publication fees on behalf of their researchers.
For example, Denmark’s 14,000 private foundations that currently support half of the country’s research are stretched to the limit. Their researchers will therefore have no choice but to pay the bill out of their own research grants, which are already under intense pressure from spiralling costs.
Remedial action is urgently needed if publication and knowledge flow are not to be skewed towards the wealthiest countries and universities. For example, national or European Union funds could be established to help cash-strapped researchers cover their publishing costs.”
“This report presents data from 73 academic libraries about their open access publication fee payment practices. The 53-page study enables its end users to answer questions such as: How much have libraries spent in the past year on publication fees for open access and hybrid journals for their institution’s authors? How much will they spend in the next year? What percentage of libraries pay such fees at all or have plans to? What share of these fees are paid by libraries and what share by other departments and entities of the college or university? Have academic libraries partnered with consortia or other libraries to negotiate these fees? How many articles did the pay for in the past year? How many do they plan to pay for in the next year?
Data in the report is broken out for R1 and R2 research universities, for doctoral level institutions and for those offering only BA/MA degrees. In addition the data is broken out for public and private colleges, and by enrollment and tuition levels, and other variables, including work title, age and gender of the survey participant.
Some of the report’s many findings are that:
35.3% of R1 research universities in the sample had a line item in their budgets for the payment of author processing fees for hybrid and open access journals
20.51% of public institutions sampled said that departments or entities other than the academic library at their college or university contributed to the payment of author processing fees.
5.88% of BA/MA granting colleges in the sample have partnered with other colleges or universities or consortia to negotiate the level of author processing fees with publishers of hybrid or open access journals….”
“As of July 1, 2019, the Library’s Open Access Publishing Fund has been repurposed as an Open Access Investment Fund. We feel that by shifting our focus toward the long-term transformation of the scholarly publication ecosystem, we can accelerate the progress of the global open access movement.
From 2014 to 2019, the Library was able to offer direct support to UA-affiliated authors in the form of subsidies to cover the article processing charges for open access publications. While this funding model helped support open access publication of almost 300 articles, it was not a sustainable or scalable model for changing the landscape of scholarly publication.
The current ecosystem of scholarly publication, largely dominated by commercial publishers and dependent upon rapidly rising costs for accessing content, is not sustainable. Transitioning expenditures from “pay to read” (traditional licensing agreements) to “pay to publish” (payment of article processing charges) does little to transform the current ecosystem or stem the flow of increasing amounts of money into the system. Disrupting the traditional scholarly publication system will take more than merely subsidizing a small, finite number of scholarly publications in academic journals. True and lasting change requires investment in new infrastructure models and a commitment to new community-based models of scholarly publishing.
The Library’s Open Access Investment Fund has a twofold purpose:
Support of UA-affiliated author publication costs: The Library will continue to support UA-affiliated authors who publish in open access journals, though in a more indirect way. Through the Library’s institutional memberships with specific publishers, UA authors benefit from pre-arranged discounts on article processing charges.
Support of initiatives and projects that advance open access: The Library will commit funding in memberships and initiatives that have wide potential global impact, such as projects that develop open publication infrastructure or that convert portfolios of subscription-based peer-reviewed journals to open access.
Transitioning the UA Library’s Open Publishing Fund away from its previous internal focus toward a more global focus has the potential for much greater impact in changing the landscape of scholarly publication. The University of Arizona Library remains committed to supporting open access to both scholarship globally and to the published work of the UA campus community….”
“Health and Human Rights Journal? does not charge authors article processing fees unless authors can utilize an institutional open access publishing grant. Many institutions and research facilities have funding grants available to support publication in open access journals—some are listed in this? OA Directory. If authors cannot access OA grants, article processing fees are waived by HHR. …”
From Google’s English:
“Bernard Rentier, Open Science, the challenge of transparency, Preface by Philippe Busquin, Royal Academy of Belgium, L’Académie en Poche Collection n ° 114, Dec.2018, 152 p. ISBN / EAN: 978-2-8031-0659-2
A new way of conceiving scientific research, open science, was born with the computer revolution. In the wake of Open Access (free access to the results of research funded by public money), it accompanies the great ideal of transparency that today invades all spheres of life in society. This book describes its origins, perspectives and objectives, and reveals the obstacles and obstacles to private profit and academic conservatism.”
“While library supported open access funds have helped the institution’s faculty raise visibility of their articles by making them openly available, the authors of this poster urge libraries to critically examine their participation in OA fund programs. In our experience as OA fund coordinators at the Health Sciences Library of the University of Colorado (CU-HSL), we faced many practical challenges but additionally, as a number of scholars point out, it can lead to changes in the core mission of academic libraries….”
Abstract: The OpenAPC initiative releases data sets on fees paid for open access (OA) journal articles by universities, funders and research institutions under an open database licence. OpenAPC is part of the INTACT project, which is funded by the German Research Foundation and located at Bielefeld University Library. This article provides insight into OpenAPC’s technical and organizational background and shows how transparent and reproducible reporting on fee-based open access can be conducted across institutions and publishers to draw conclusions on the state of the OA transformation process. As part of the INTACT subproject, ESAC, the article also shows how OpenAPC workflows can be used to analyse offsetting deals, using the example of Springer Compact agreements.
“For several years, UI Libraries has maintained an Open Access (OA) Fund to help researchers pay for the article processing charges (APCs) on open access publications. This fund supports authors choosing to make their publications open for anyone to read, broadening their audience and providing wide access to important research. We have decided to sunset the OA Fund for APCs within two years due to budget constraints. We found that the fund did nothing to offset our rapidly increasing journal subscription costs. In fact, the fund largely supports the same publishers to which we pay our pricey subscriptions. Given this reality, the final year that funding will be available is 2020, and the amount of funding for 2019 has been reduced from $3,000 per article to $2,000 per article. Additionally, each author will only be eligible to receive funding from the OA fund one time per fiscal year in 2019….”