“Because the lion’s share of both the University’s research output and of our library budgets is bound up with the services of journal publishers, advancing these goals [journal affordability and the moral imperative of achieving a truly open scholarly communication system] is inextricably entwined with the University’s ongoing relationships with publishers and must be addressed in the context of the agreements we sign with them. Our goal, simply put, is to responsibly transition funding for journal subscriptions toward funding for open dissemination. As we approach major journal negotiations for 2019, the UC system will be guided by the principles and goals outlined below in negotiating agreements with publishers….
We believe the time has come to address these issues head-on through a combined strategy that places the need to reduce the University’s expenditures for academic journal subscriptions in the service of the larger goal of transforming journal publishing to open access. Through our renewal negotiations with publishers, we will pursue this goal along two complementary paths: by reducing our subscription expenditures, and investing in open access support….
It has become increasingly clear that the problem of rising journal costs in the context of a widespread movement toward open access can only be addressed by tackling the subscription system itself….
As a leading research institution that produces 8% of all US research output, UC is uniquely positioned to both contribute to and accelerate such transformation, locally, nationally, and globally. Indeed, we believe that as a public university sustained by taxpayer and extramural funding, we have a signal obligation to do so; and we invite our colleagues in the North American research community to embark with us on this journey….
Strategic Priorities for Journal Negotiations
We will prioritize making immediate open access publishing available to UC authors as part of our negotiated agreements.
We will prioritize agreements that lower the cost of research access and dissemination, with sustainable, cost-based fees for OA publication. Payments for OA publication should reduce the cost of subscriptions at UC and elsewhere.
We will prioritize agreements with publishers who are transparent about the amount of APC-funded content within their portfolios, and who share that information with customers as well as the public.
We will prioritize agreements that enable UC to achieve expenditure reductions in our licenses when necessary, without financial penalty.
We will prioritize agreements that make any remaining subscription content available under terms that fully reflect academic values and norms, including the broadest possible use rights.
We will prioritize agreements that allow UC to share information about the open access provisions with all interested stakeholders, and we will not agree to non-disclosure requirements in our licenses.
We will prioritize working proactively with publishers who help us achieve a full transition to open access in accordance with the principles and pathways articulated by our faculty and our libraries.
We will adjust our investments to follow and support transformative initiatives mounted by academic authors, editorial boards, and societies when they seek to establish a journal on fair open access principles, including transitioning support from prior legacy journals when necessary.
We will actively seek to partner with other national and global research institutions in transforming research output to OA….”
“This Executive Summary accompanies a Pathways to OA document (“Pathways document”) prepared ursuant to the Council of University Librarian’s (CoUL)1 3 August 2017 charging statement. In the Pathways document, our Working Group2 analyzes the various approaches to or models for achieving open access (Green, Gold-APC, Gold-non-APC), and the actionable strategies that exist to implement each approach (e.g., for Gold OA APC-based approach, one strategy is library subvention funding). Our Pathways document is intended to assist campus libraries and the California Digital Library (CDL) with individual and, where appropriate, collective decision-making about which OA strategies, possible next steps, or experiments to pursue in order to achieve large-scale transition to OA….”
“Scholarly communication has become expensive, restrictive, and increasingly falls short of realizing its full potential to make scholarly information broadly accessible. The University of California Libraries are committed to working collaboratively with a variety of partners and stakeholders to provide leadership in transforming scholarly communication into a system that is economically sustainable and ensures the widest possible access to the scholarly record. Part of this commitment to transforming scholarly publishing at a large scale necessitates transitioning away from subscription-based publishing models, and repurposing our investments into sustainable open access (OA) funding models.
In order to make informed and data-driven decisions about which endeavors to pursue at scale, the UC Libraries prepared an analysis of the various approaches to or models for achieving open access, and the actionable strategies that exist to implement each approach. This analysis, compiled in the Pathways to OA documents linked below, was endorsed by the UC Council of University Librarians (CoUL) on 27 February 2018. The Pathways to OA is intended to assist campus libraries and the California Digital Library with individual, and where appropriate, collective decision-making about which OA strategies, possible next steps, or experiments to pursue in order to achieve large-scale transition to OA.
Pathways to OA: Executive Summary [PDF]
Pathways to OA: Full Report [PDF]
Pathways to OA: Chart Summarizing Approaches, Strategies, & Next Steps [PDF]”
The resource aims to help research libraries and institutions throughout the world, by empowering them with information that could enable them to redirect their spending away from high-cost subscription services and toward sustainable open access scholarly publishing.
“Essentially no research institutions in the world,” says UC Berkeley University Librarian Jeffrey MacKie-Mason, “can afford to provide their scholars with access to the full corpus of scholarly literature being produced and then sequestered behind increasingly out-of-reach subscription paywalls that yield major academic publishers a nearly 40 percent profit margin.”
“…Readers who visit the Free Read Press website can download and distribute books by experienced authors, many of whom are connected with USC, at no cost and with no usage restrictions. In addition to work by Dane and Rowe, who is professor of English, American studies and ethnicity, and comparative literature, contributors include Distinguished Professor of English Percival Everett, Aerol Arnold Professor Emeritus of English Jim Kincaid, and Richard Fliegel, associate dean for undergraduate programs. Unlike traditional printing houses, there is little editing, and authors can make changes to their work at any time. For readers who prefer the texture of a crisp page over the digital swipe, Free Read Press has partnered with printers to sell physical copies of each book at cost….”
“Editoria™ is a web-based open source, end-to-end, authoring, editing and workflow tool that presses and library publishers can leverage to create modern, format-flexible, standards compliant, book-length works. Funded by the Mellon Foundation, Editoria™ is a project of the University of California Press and the California Digital Library….”
There are many actions researchers can take to increase the openness and reproducibility of their work. Please join us for a workshop, hosted by the Center for Open Science, to learn easy, practical steps researchers can take to increase the reproducibility of their work. The workshop will be hands-on. Using example studies, attendees will actively participate in creating a reproducible project from start to finish.
Open source tools like the Center for Open Science’s Open Science Framework to easily implement these concepts in a scientific workflow.”
In 2014, University of California, Davis University Library and the California Digital Library collaborated on an Andrew W. Mellon Foundation grant-funded project to explore costs associated with moving scholarly journal subscriptions in the U.S. market entirely to an Article Processing Charge business model, known also as ‘Gold Open Access.’ We contacted MacKenzie Smith, one of the principal investigators, in order to get her reflections on the process of gathering the data, and to discuss some implications of the findings. The interview suggests that the ‘Pay It Forward’ model could be successful over time, following a necessarily complex transition period.