Transcript Document
Access to Literature and the Progress of Science
Rosalind Reid
Editor, American Scientist Symposium Scientific Publishing: What Does the Future Hold?
Lehigh University • November 12, 2005
Grown-ups never understand anything by themselves, and it is exhausting for children to have to provide explanations over and over again.
The Little Prince
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
author copyright reviewer shortages institutional repositories library budget crises journal proliferation who is maintaining the archives?
big, costly databases large profits high article charges?
T E X, PDF, MathML self-archiving arXiv preprints ethics issues: fraud, plagiarism, drug money, conflict of interest “ impact factor ” resistance to granting credit for online publication new NIH policy survival of disciplinary societies developing-country issues duplicate publication
author copyright reviewer shortages institutional repositories library budget crises journal proliferation who is maintaining the archives?
big, costly databases large profits high article charges?
T E X, PDF, MathML self-archiving arXiv preprints ethics issues: fraud, plagiarism, drug money, conflict of interest “ impact factor ” resistance to granting credit for online publication new NIH policy survival of disciplinary societies developing-country issues duplicate publication
Scientific publishing: an industry in flux
Internet publishing can be cheaper Dual systems now functioning to serve traditional needs + heightened expectations Publishers (especially commercial publishers) have invested in wonderful but costly systems for rapid online delivery and broad searching Archiving responsibilities not yet sorted out Excess revenues make society membership affordable and support other vital society activities
canonical market economy producer
sells goods
firm
sells goods
producer
sells services
traditional publishing writers
(content producers) gather knowledge or create literature
also:
register and defend copyright
agents
market work to publishers $
publishers
screen and select work for value add value: edit index typeset print bind distribute invest in plant and equipment to increase quality and efficiency of manufacturing return excess revenues (profits) to investors
also:
advertise solicit and manage subscriptions or orders register and defend copyright $$
libraries
purchase for readers maintain archives $$$$
booksellers newsagents
display, market to readers distribute, collect sales, pay taxes
origins of scientific publishing scientists
gather knowledge share as letters or lectures
academic libraries
purchase for readers maintain archives
scholarly societies
hold conferences collect and publish letters
Knowledge
article:
theory results replication falsification
20th-century scientific publishing
$$
scientists
do research (gather knowledge) prepare results screen and select work for value referee illustrate typeset
libraries
purchase subscriptions bind and maintain archives $$$$
publishers
screen and select work for value add value: edit index typeset print bind distribute invest in plant and equipment to increase quality and efficiency of manufacturing return excess revenues (profits) to investors
also:
advertise solicit and manage subscriptions or orders register and defend copyright
today’s scientific publishing
$$
scientists
do research (gather knowledge) prepare results screen and select work for value referee illustrate typeset
libraries
purchase subscriptions bind and maintain archives $$$$
publishers
screen and select work for value add value: edit index typeset print bind distribute invest in plant and equipment to increase quality and efficiency of manufacturing return excess revenues (profits) to investors build and serve databases and search services
also:
advertise solicit and manage subscriptions or orders register and defend copyright
LIBRARIES FUNDERS
$$ $$
professional rewards, advancement of science, meetings SCIENTISTS
3. Producers of Goods $$
PUBLISHER
Issues
This is an expensive way to do business!
Access for scientists Access for the funding public
From:
Harold Varmus
Date:
Nove mber 10, 2004 10:02:15 PM EST
To:
Subject: URGENT support for NIH public access policy
Dear Open Access Supporter, On September 3, 2004 the NIH posted for comment an "Enhanc ed Public Access Policy." This policy would require the recipients of NIH research grants to provide to the National Library of Medicine a digital copy of the final accepted manuscript (or the published version itself) of every published report resulting from NIH -funded research, so that the research results can be made freely available to scientists and th e public through PubMed Central within six months of publication. We are writing now to urge you to submit a comment in support of this proposal right away. The deadline for comments is just a few days away - November 16th. The text of the proposal is available at:
U.S. research funding, FY2006 (Administration proposal): NIH $28.8 billion • NSF $5.6 billion
LIBRARIES FUNDERS
$$ $$
professional rewards, advancement of science, meetings SCIENTISTS
3. Producers of Goods $$
PUBLISHER
publicaccess.nih.gov/overview.htm
Meanwhile, in the UK (policy adopted June 28, 2005)
High costs under current system
Cornell University Libraries report (2004): Open access might increase costs to elite research university (or its funders) CU paid (2003): $1.7 million to Elsevier $1.3 million to other “big” commercial publishers $1 million to other publishers CU authors published 3,636 articles Cost per author if CU paid by article: $1,100
High costs under current system
CUL report: “The question of author and even reader empowerment is a complex one... The need for Open Access and the consequences of publishing in this mode may vary significantly by academic discipline...” Incentives, market dynamics differ radically in alternative systems. “Author pays” works only with funded research in an environment where funder support for publication is consistent.
Alternatives
Scientific publishing: an industry in flux
Internet communication of research can be cheaper. First copy costs are very high in elite journals. But much of current costs are in maintaining elite services while continuing traditional publishing.
Current setup provides no rewards for maintaining archives and encourages divide-and-conquer strategies and journal proliferation to maximize publisher revenue. Who is building and maintaining the Cathedral of Learning?
Scientific societies could (should?) maintain archives, but they need a new, sustainable model to support meetings and other important functions.
What publishing strategy best achieves these goals?
traditional (“reader pays”) moving wall (access restriction funds access) author pays self- or institutional archiving open access (directly subsidized)
efficient communication within fields preservation of the record of knowledge broadest, fastest access to literature quality peer review and publication international communication and equity
Some URLs www.sciencecommons.org
Peter Suber’s newsletter www.arl.org/sparc/soa/ American Scientist Open-Access forum amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/ American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html
I showed the grown-ups my masterpiece, and I asked them if my drawing scared them.
They constrictor, answered, so the “Why be grown-ups scared could of a hat?” My drawing was not a picture of a hat. It was a picture of a boa constrictor digesting an elephant. Then I drew the inside of the boa understand.
The Little Prince