Transcript Publication Title

OPEN ACCESS
INSTITUTIONAL
REPOSITORIES
The views of a society
publisher
Robert Campbell
Blackwell Publishing
ABOUT BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
MISSION STATEMENT
Partnerships in learning, research and professional
practice
• Our mission is to provide an expert publishing service to
•
•
•
other experts - authors, editors, librarians, researchers,
teachers and their students, societies and professionals enabling them to do their jobs better.
We aim continuously to improve the quality and
effectiveness of our products and services.
Just as we support the advance of knowledge and learning,
we are constantly developing our own professional skills
too.
We strive to align our goals and values with those of our
clients and customers. In partnership with them we are
making an important contribution to society.
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
2
ABOUT BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
• 2004 Sales
– £187M (£153M journals, £34M books)
• 755 journals
• Working with 600 societies
• 65 additional journal titles in 2005 including
37 new partnerships (societies)
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
3
HOW ARE SOCIETY JOURNALS DIFFERENT?
Pricing and citation
• Three-quarters (148) of top 200 and twothirds (345) of top 500 ISI ranked titles are
owned by Societies or other non-profits
• 25% of the 148 are contracted out to another
publisher
• 35% of the 345 are contracted out
• Average price per page is lower than
commercial equivalents
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
4
ISSUES FOR SOCIETIES
•
•
•
•
•
Members join for conference and journal
How many members will be lost with Open Access?
Will self-archiving undermine subscriptions?
Many societies dependent on publishing income
Authors like having a PDF but how should their use of
this be controlled?
• Switch from CAF (Copyright Assignment Form) to
ELF (Exclusive Licence Form) has some appeal
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
5
ISSUES FOR SOCIETIES (continued)
• Don’t seem too concerned about Green
status
• Fairly aware of NIH story
• Most see need for embargo to protect journal
• Impact Factor is very important
• Not interested in being associated with preprint servers
• Capable of changing their minds very quickly
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
6
THE VERSION QUESTION
At the Publisher
Submitted
Accepted
Online Early
Online
Print-on-paper
12/11/04
10/12/04
23/12/04
21/1/05
28/1/05
At the Institutional Repositories
Pre-print
Post-print – author’s version of the accepted work
PDF (publisher’s version)
Other authors’ versions on other IRs
Final author’s version at PubMedCentral
?European counterpart to PubMedCentral
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
7
ISSUES FOR CROSSREF IN ITS
RELATIONSHIP WITH IRs
Mission
• To provide services that bring the scholar to authoritative primary content,
focusing on services that are best achieved through collective agreement by
publishers.
Status
• 350 members (2/3 not-for-profit), 1400 publishers
• 10,833 journals
• 4,640 books
• 11,000 conference proceedings
• $3M annual turnover
• 326 depositors: 285 linkers
Issues
• Match rate (successful linking up from 18% in 2003 to 27% in 2004)
• Multiple Resolution
• Relationship between Google and CrossRef Search
• New content (spreading out from STM)
• Relationship with Institutional Repositories but lack of clarity on their role
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
8
HOW DO WE GO FORWARD?
• As the IR system becomes more
•
•
comprehensive and efficient so we could see
more protection of the subscription base
What might the balance be?
If a journal offers free access after 12
months and insists on a self-archiving
embargo of 12 months what need of selfarchiving? Why not simply link to publisher?
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
9
LONG-TERM ISSUES FOR JOURNAL
PUBLISHING
• Widespread increase in R&D funding
– UK: science budget £2.4 Bn 03/04, £5 Bn 13/14
– Europe: goal for R&D 3% of GDP, UK currently
•
•
•
•
•
1.9% GDP, aiming for 2.5%
– Developing countries: DFID policy, eg Pakistan
More funding means more papers (1.5M papers going
up to 3M papers per annum over 10 years)
Geography of authorship (RoW: 25% in 1983, nearly
50% in 2003)
Will the Impact Factor pattern change with greater
volume?
Technology in place for production and in
development for discovery
What models will partner this technology?
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
10
CHANGING PATTERN OF IMPACT FACTOR
Science Citation Index
Social Science Citation Index
2003
1997
2003
1997
Range
No. of titles
%
No. of titles
%
No. of titles
%
No. of titles
20 & over
24
0.41%
11
0.22%
0
0.00%
0
10 to 19
62
1.05%
39
0.79%
2
0.12%
1
5 to 9
178
3.01%
114
2.30%
14
0.82%
9
1 to 4
2495
42.24%
1686
33.97%
490
28.59%
314
below 1
3148
53.29%
3113
62.72%
1208
70.48%
1348
Total
5907
4963
1714
1672
%
0.00%
0.06%
0.54%
18.78%
80.62%
-
Open Access Institutional Repositories – 26 January 2005
11