UW Faculty Senate votes to support UW Libraries bargaining and licensing priorities in scholarly journal subscription negotiations — UW Libraries

On May 16, the UW Faculty Senate voted unanimously to approve a Class C Resolution expressing its support for the UW Libraries Licensing Principles and bargaining priorities in upcoming journal package negotiations with major journal publishers. The legislation, sponsored by the Faculty Council on University Libraries, endorses the Libraries’ negotiation and licensing priorities and voices support for:

  • Bringing down subscription costs and increases to a sustainable level that will not imperil other collection and service needs
  • Ending non-disclosure agreements to allow the Libraries to disclose their contractual terms and permit greater market transparency
  • Allowing interlibrary loan to facilitate resource sharing
  • Protecting the rights of users to share articles with students and colleagues
  • Ensuring the privacy and data security of all users
  • Protecting the ability of students and researchers to continue to access journals and articles
  • Supporting the University’s Open Access policies by allowing re-use and embargo-free deposit rights and protecting researchers’ copyright in their own research
  • Enabling greater market flexibility and responsiveness by negotiating contracts on a 3-year basis
  • Providing equitable service and access to information for all our library users….”

2019 Big Deals Survey Report: An Updated Mapping of Major Scholarly Publishing Contracts in Europe

“The Second EUA Big Deals Survey Report is an updated mapping of major scholarly publishing contracts in Europe.

Conducted in 2017-2018, the report gathers data from 31 consortia covering an unprecedented 167 contracts with five major publishers: Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, Wiley and American Chemical Society. Readers will discover that the total costs reported by the participating consortia exceed one billion euros for periodicals, databases, e-books and other resources – mainly to the benefit of large, commercial scholarly publishers.

The report provides an overview of Big Deal negotiations across Europe, focusing on topics such as the organisation of negotiations, provisions on Open Access and transparency of contracts and costs. It also offers information on the consortia and focuses specifically on periodical Big Deal contracts with the five large publishers selected for this survey. Finally, the report addresses the costs of Big Deal contracts, offering conclusions and policy recommendations on the negotiation of contracts….”

Isn’t Leakage Good for Libraries? – The Scholarly Kitchen

“In recent weeks, I have argued that content leakage is reducing the value of the subscription big deal. The syndication model might enable publishers to recapture much of this leakage, a model that Springer Nature has begun to pilot with ResearchGate, indicative of the strategic dilemmas that syndication poses. For libraries, syndication offers the opportunity to provide dramatically improved experiences for their users — with a number of risks as well, including the prospect of substantially reducing their leverage at the negotiating table….

What kinds of levels of usage increases can libraries anticipate? Elsevier has calculated [PDF; slide 10] that ScienceDirect usage stats would increase by 4-5% if Mendeley usage was counted and that adding versions of record to SSRN for entitled users would provide at least another 1%. But ResearchGate is by far the biggest prospect, and it would not surprise me to see at least some publisher usage numbers grow by 10%, 25%, or more for major library customers — once versions of record are distributed there to license-entitled users….

I’ve made the case that leakage has allowed groups of libraries to walk away from subscription big deal bundles in recent years. The platforms through which content is leaking most extensively — ResearchGate and Academia perhaps more than any others, but also pirate sites and institutional and disciplinary repositories — have afforded libraries the greatest leverage in their big deal negotiations. To the extent that leaks are plugged up, we must examine how this affects publishers’ and libraries’ negotiating positions….

I have already explained why Elsevier fears ResearchGate as a syndication hub and Springer Nature would like to embrace it….”

 

Open access to research remains focus for UC after end to Elsevier negotiations | Daily Bruin

The University of California reaffirmed its commitment to promoting open access to research by terminating its negotiations for a new contract with a scientific journal publisher, UC negotiators and students said.

The UC’s previous contract with Elsevier, a publisher of over 2,500 scientific journals, expired Dec. 31. The UC ended negotiations with Elsevier on Feb. 28, after they had been ongoing for eight months.

Last year, the UC paid more than $10 million in subscription costs to Elsevier. Researchers also paid $1 million per year in additional fees to publish their work in certain Elsevier journals that make articles available to the public for free.

The UC hoped a new contract would reduce costs, make free access to UC research the default and combine subscription costs to read Elsevier journal articles with those extra author publishing fees, said Jeffrey MacKie-Mason, the co-chair of the UC Journal Negotiations Task Force and university librarian at UC Berkeley, in an email statement.

Elsevier offered to meet these terms in exchange for an 80 percent increase in fees, or approximately $30 million more over three years compared to the previous contract, MacKie-Mason said. The negotiators told Elsevier the price increase was still far from their target cost, he said….”

TRANSFORMATIVE AGREEMENTS – ESAC

Transformative agreements are those contracts negotiated between institutions (libraries, national and regional consortia) and publishers that transform the business model underlying scholarly journals from subscription to open access. As the vast majority of scholarly publishing and expenditure of any given institution tends to be concentrated in journals produced by a relatively small number of publishers, implementing transformative agreements with these publishers constitutes a high-impact strategy: many institutions and consortia find that by negotiating such agreements with fewer than 10 publishers, they can achieve immediate open access for the vast majority of their outputs.

They have a variety of configurations that reflect the diverse and fluid landscape of scholarly communication, starting with “offsetting” through to the recent “Publish & Read, or PAR” model, and more.

Agreements continue to evolve as they are increasingly adopted around the world and the body of evidence on their impact grows….”

 

TRANSFORMATIVE AGREEMENTS – ESAC

Transformative agreements are those contracts negotiated between institutions (libraries, national and regional consortia) and publishers that transform the business model underlying scholarly journals from subscription to open access. As the vast majority of scholarly publishing and expenditure of any given institution tends to be concentrated in journals produced by a relatively small number of publishers, implementing transformative agreements with these publishers constitutes a high-impact strategy: many institutions and consortia find that by negotiating such agreements with fewer than 10 publishers, they can achieve immediate open access for the vast majority of their outputs.

They have a variety of configurations that reflect the diverse and fluid landscape of scholarly communication, starting with “offsetting” through to the recent “Publish & Read, or PAR” model, and more.

Agreements continue to evolve as they are increasingly adopted around the world and the body of evidence on their impact grows….”

 

Norwegian research institutions have decided not to renew their agreement with Elsevier

“The offer from Elsevier is a long way from fulfilling the Norwegian requirements for open access to research articles. There is also no movement in transitioning the agreement from paying to read to paying for open publishing. The agreement with Elsevier will therefore not be renewed for 2019. The rectorates at the universities of Bergen, Oslo, Tromsø and Trondheim all support this decision….”

Norwegian research institutions have decided not to renew their agreement with Elsevier

“The offer from Elsevier is a long way from fulfilling the Norwegian requirements for open access to research articles. There is also no movement in transitioning the agreement from paying to read to paying for open publishing. The agreement with Elsevier will therefore not be renewed for 2019. The rectorates at the universities of Bergen, Oslo, Tromsø and Trondheim all support this decision….”