“In its simplest terms and inspired by growing research funder commitment to open access (see Plan S), Libraria is proposing a Library+Funder (L+F) model that first of all harnesses the Gates Foundation’s strategy, in which the research funder pays the publisher directly for the cost of publishing the research it has supported. It then combines Gates’ direct-payment strategy with the success of SCOAP3, Open Library of Humanities, and Knowledge Unlatched in soliciting broadly based library support for sustaining open access journals.
To enable anthropology journals to convert from subscriptions to open access under this proposed L+F model, funding agencies that support the research published in the journals would be asked to cover their share of the publishers’ revenue which was previously derived from subscriptions. In addition, the libraries subscribing to the journals undergoing this conversion would be asked to cover the remainder of the revenue needed to replace the money previously collected through subscriptions. In the case of the 21 anthropology journals that we have examined thus far (data), funders have sponsored the work of roughly a quarter of the items published, which leaves the libraries to cover the other three-quarters. If only the leading funders participate in the initial roll out of the model, which seems like a reasonable starting point, their share would be smaller but the libraries would still pay less than they would for a subscription (with more of the details below).…”
“What follows below is Libraria’s proposed role in supporting, in the first instance, the Berghahn open access pilot in anthropology. The plan is set out in generic terms, directed toward all publishers that may be interested in such a move. Our intent is to work with Vivian Berghahn on #1-4 before the summer of 2019, with BOA journals going open access in 2020, if subscribe-to-open targets are reached during the fall of 2019. The results of the pilot will begin to be shared through 2020. During this time, Libraria members will continue to reach out to publishers, editors, societies, and funders about participation in further phases of a piloting and rolling out of the model (while inviting you to reach out to us to continue the conversation).
Encourage interested publishers to identify a set of titles, target numbers, and flip-thresholds for a pilot or in scaling up of this model for open access in anthropology and the social sciences.
Support publishers’ development of 3-4 options for OA materials (e.g.,different levels of detail), pitch, and pricing models.
Review, prior to release, proposed options with libraries, consortia, subscription agents, and content licensees.
As a result, devise subscribe-to-open marketing campaign, w/ sales strategies & targets.
Create a slide deck for presentation of pilot by publisher and Libraria members.
Work out general principles with publishers for third-party participation (e.g., JSTOR, EBSCO, ProQuest, Knowledge Unlatched).
For example, for subscription agents
Publisher’s current agencies offer materials for OA package and individual titles, as per prior agent agreements.
Other agents invited to list and sell package in non-exclusive offering.
Invite feedback on early sales responses and make adjustments to materials.
Options for those who license content from publishers
All-in from the outset: Licensee lets its subscribers know of “subscribe-to-open” pilot, while presenting publisher’s OA package as option, with small price reduction for rest of content from which package (or portion thereof) has been removed.
Wait-out-the-pilot: Licensee lets its subscribers know of pilot, while maintaining status quo with its content access and publisher agreement. If OA package continues beyond pilot, licensee will separate OA content from the rest, adjust price, and possibly offer OA package to clients as well.
Establish with publishers a number of measures for assessing the impact of open access (with release of parenthetical measures at the publisher’s discretion).
Proportion (and number) of libraries that “renew” previous subscriptions on OA basis.
Proportion (and number) of current subscribers that opt for OA package.
Proportion (and number) of new “subscribers” to OA titles or package.
Changes in readership numbers and geography and occupation (via pop-up question).
Changes in submission and acceptance numbers for pre/post pilot
Changes in authorship of submissions and publications for pre/post pilot.
Recommend technical upgrades for participating publishers.
Implement Crossref Open Funder Registry for tracking this potential source of support.
Promote ORCID registration for tracking author, reviewer, etc. participation impact on a global and local (library community) scale.
Develop library IP tracking to establish community usage to promote growth in library participation.
Track funders supporting research published in participating journals.
Identify leading funders of the published research.
The Open Access Publishing Cooperative Study was a two-year investigation, undertaken under the auspices of the Public Knowledge Project with the support of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. The intent of this initiative was to examine whether scholarly publishing models, involving cooperation between the relevant stakeholder, might provide a means of moving subscription journals to a sustainable form of open access publishing. The study explored potential cooperative associations involving disciplines, national initiatives, and regional models. It utilized a series of (a) three case studies, (b) a publishing industry/library survey and interviews, (c) a publishing internship, and (d) a number of related technical developments with Open Journal Systems.
Direct to Full Text Report https://docs.google.com/document/d/1COaY7PM8jXA97b9uMpSQ0a0vYhQGSaDrIooGvd8G2Jw/