ISSN: 1046-3410
NEWSLETTER ON SERIALS PRICING ISSUES
NO 255 -- February 1, 2001
Editor: Marcia Tuttle
Guest Editor: James Mouw
CONTENTS
255.1 REQUEST FOR SUBMISSIONS, James Mouw, Guest Editor
255.2 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS TO BEGIN ITS FIRST E-ARCHIVE,
LC Press Release submitted by Fred Friend
255.3 SPARC AND TRLN LAUNCH "DECLARING INDEPENDENCE:
A GUIDE TO CREATING COMMUNITY CONTROLLED SCIENCE JOURNALS",
Alison Buckholtz
255.4 RESPONSE TO "THE BIG ISSUE -- THE FUTURE OF ELECTRONIC PUBLICATIONS,
by Robert Michaelson," Kent Mulliner
255.5.1 A QUESTION TO ROLLO TURNER (254.4 SUBSCRIPTION AGENTS
REDUCE SERVICE TO LOW DISCOUNT PUBLISHERS), David Goodman
255.5.2 ROLLO TURNER RESPONDS, Rollo Turner
255.1 REQUEST FOR SUBMISSIONS
Since the beginning of the Newsletter our editorial policy has been to publish an issue when we have enough material to produce a reasonably sized issue. Although some articles have been commissioned for publication, we largely rely on you, our readers, to submit items for publication. With the fall round of meetings and ALA Midwinter now behind us this is a good time to review your notes for items of interest. Although the title of this publication includes the words "serials" and "pricing," the articles we have recently published indicate that our scope has expanded to include a much broader range of topics. We do continue to have particular slant toward cost models and how they affect our ability to obtain the materials needed by our clientele.
We look for submissions that discuss broad topics, but also those that provide an example of a new or different pricing model. The Newsletter does not routinely publish lists of price increases (or decreases) unless the method used to determine those prices illustrates a new cost model.
Many of our readers are outside the U.S. and Canada, and the scope of this publication was never intended to be focused on North American issues. The editorial board welcomes submissions from around the globe.
So, keep those cards and letters coming. E-mail me at mouw@midway.uchicago.edu
255.2 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS TO BEGIN ITS FIRST E-ARCHIVE,
LC Press Release submitted by Frederick J.Friend, Director
Scholarly Communication, University College London,
ucylfjf@ucl.ac.uk
[Received December 14, 2000]
COLLEGE PARK, Md., Dec. 13 - Early in the "real" millennium, the nation's premier library will take another huge step into the information age. That's when the Library of Congress (LC) will begin downloading its first complete set of an electronic journal archive. The subject of those journals even seems appropriate for this trailblazing effort; it is physics, which was largely responsible for the digital revolution.
The American Physical Society (APS), representing more than 42,000 physicists and a leader in the creation of e-journals, will soon begin [sending] the Library of Congress electronic information from more than a century of physics research --including much scientific history on the electron itself. The complete archives of eight of the world's premier physics journals will soon be freely accessible to all LC users. These archives will be constantly updated, creating an instant archive of both historic articles and the latest physics research.
"Electronic archives are like a living thing," says APS Treasurer Thomas McIlrath. "Not only is the information from a particular journal literally at your fingertips, but so are links to referenced research both backward and forward in time. Historians, for example, can easily see the impact of a paper on later scientific thinking." He points out that there are many other advantages of e-journals, including the reality that many things -- like moving images -- cannot be reproduced in print. The APS version of record for its scholarly journals is now the online version.
Considering such a valuable resource, LC's Associate Librarian for Library Services, Winston Tabb, explains that "publishers are attracted by the idea of having secondary sites for protection of their assets. At the same time, of course, libraries are concerned about saving memory as well as about making intellectual creation available for scholars."
The Library of Congress will not simply be accessing the data from an APS site, but will own a digital copy in their own archives. The Library will serve as a permanent repository of the journals that will be the property of the United States Government.
"This will assure that there will be a live copy of our archive available to the world, and preserved for future generations, in the event of a disaster," says APS Editor in Chief Martin Blume. He adds: "Librarians, as archivers of journals in the print world, have been concerned that digital resources might not be similarly preserved. This step with the Library of Congress should reassure them that access to our journals will always be available."
While this is somewhat uncharted territory, libraries are feeling a growing pressure to deal with the ever-increasing volume of digital information, and all involved agree that someone needs to take the first steps.
"The best way to make progress is to enter into pilot-like agreements to test the benefits, costs, policies, and procedures of various models," concludes Tabb. "We need to get started doing things rather just than worrying about them, and this pioneering agreement with the American Physical Society marks a major step in the right direction for America's national library."
Contacts: Randy Atkins, American Physical Society, (301) 209-3238, atkins@aps.org, Guy Lamolinara, Library of Congress, (202) 707- 9217, glam@loc.gov
255.3 SPARC AND TRLN LAUNCH "DECLARING INDEPENDENCE: A GUIDE TO
CREATING COMMUNITY CONTROLLED SCIENCE JOURNALS"
Alison Buckholtz, Association of Research Libraries,
alison@arl.org
[Received January 3, 2001]
SPARC and the Triangle Research Libraries Network (TRLN) have launched DECLARING INDEPENDENCE: A GUIDE TO CREATING COMMUNITY- CONTROLLED SCIENCE JOURNALS, a how-to handbook and web site that guides editors and editorial board members of scientific journals toward responsible journal publishing. To see the site or download a PDF version of the handbook, please go to: www.arl.org/sparc/DI.
Many editors and editorial board members of STM journals are unaware of the serials crisis; more to the point, they are unaware they may be part of a journal whose high cost and unsatisfactory policies contributes to the problems in scientific communication. DECLARING INDEPENDENCE presents this issue in a straightforward way to researchers who may wonder what their responsibilities are and how best to change the status quo.
DECLARING INDEPENDENCE is divided into three sections: the first helps researchers determine whether or not their journal serves its community; the second presents alternative publishing options; the third guides researchers through an evaluation process of these alternative options. There are also extensive web resources and journal pricing charts included in the appendices, along with a bibliography.
Our goal throughout was to back up librarians' excellent educational efforts on campus. DECLARING INDEPENDENCE is a complement to the work many librarians have already undertaken vis a vis SPARC and the Create Change campaign.
The handbook will be mailed (via traditional post) to about 1400 editors and editorial board members of STM journals (based on the Create Change database of the 100 most expensive journals, located at www.createchange.org/resources/journal.htm ). We are also distributing it through scientific associations and at ALA. Each SPARC and ARL library will receive five copies; any institution can order up to 50 additional copies, free of charge, by sending an email to pubs@arl.org
[Received December 22, 2000]
While I fully concur with Michaelson's conclusion about encouraging
publishing with "respectable journals," I do have to argue with his
comments about publishers' bundled electronic packages (citing
Elsevier and Academic Press as examples) and about the role of
selectors.
Implicit in his argument is that the job of a selector is to ration
the information to which his/her users will have access. And, I
wonder, how does one evaluate a selector's performance: against
some platonic "quality in the titles selected or against what the
users actually want and use? Having offered, via OhioLINK, the
Elsevier, Academic Press (AP), and other packages for a number of
years, I have access to detailed statistics on use.
These statistics reveal that of 2,252 titles used 7/99-6/2000, we
had subscriptions to only 21%. Titles tracked are from Elsevier,
AP, Kluwer, Wiley, MCB, Springer-Verlag, American Physical Society,
and IOP. And of 36,670 articles downloaded, we had subscriptions to
titles offering only 42%. I have great faith in our selectors, but
their selected titles offer less than one-half of the articles that
users actually downloaded. I should add, due to lack of easy access
to the numbers and to save embarrassment to selectors, substantial
numbers of titles to which we have paid subscriptions were used
(electronically) only once or not at all.
I suspect that Mr. Michaelson and I have different approaches to
the world of knowledge. As a gatekeeper, I think a librarian's job
is to open the gate as widely as possible, not to restrict access
to far fewer titles. Certainly it is fine to offer advice as to
quality, the end-user best knows his/her needs. Actually, these
bundles offer unparalleled opportunities to evaluate selectors (and
for selectors to evaluate themselves and learn)-- are they choosing
what users really want or only what the selector or impact factor
says they should want?
I think that a comment by David Kohl (Library Dean, University of
Cincinnati) at the Charleston Conference merits some attention. He
pointed out that prior to entering into the OhioLINK bundled
agreements, we were all paying more for fewer and fewer titles.
Now we're still paying more but for many more titles.
The real question is which of those titles (and others outside the
bundles) are needed on a just in case basis or are cheaper in a
bundle than as document delivery. With meaningful usage data, we
have a basis to consider what the next generation of licenses may
cover. If we can indicate to the publisher that no one is using
specific titles (whether previously subscribed to or not), then
it's obvious that those titles have no value to us and have no
place in an agreement, other than occasional document delivery at
most. This analysis can be valid only because we have offered users
unhampered choice.
[Received Dec 21, 2000]
I notice ElsevierScience, Wiley, Springer, Kluwer, and Academic
Press/Harcourt are not on [the Association of Subscription Agents]
list [of publishers who have reduced their terms to agents].
Presumably that means that agents should be giving us a discount
for titles from those publishers, instead of charging us a fee, as
they now do. Among the agents in the Association are Ebsco,
Everetts, Faxon, Harrassowitz, RoweCom, Swets-Blackwell,
[Received December 22, 2000]
Subscription agents' abilities to charge less than they currently
do would depend on whether the level of discount from these and the
other publishers in the mix of journals to which you subscribe
through your agent or agents actually covers the cost of providing
you with all the services you enjoy.
Since the market for subscription agents' services is very highly
competitive at present and seems likely to remain so, then I would
suspect that in competing for your business they are bidding at
their lowest charges commensurate with the service levels which you
as a customer require of them. If the cost of providing these
services is greater than the discounts received there will need to
be a charge to the library which seems to me to be perfectly
reasonable given that agents provide a wide range of services to
the libraries (and also, by the way, to publishers, which is one of
the reasons they receive a discount in the first place).
I fail to understand why simply because most publishers seek to
support and encourage a healthy distribution system by providing a
discount to agents (however small at times) the agent should be
expected to pass on the discount, make no money and presumably be
forced to go out of business? This is surely hardly in libraries'
best interest.
To subscribe to the newsletter send a message to JOIN-
prices@listserv.unc.edu Be sure to send that message to the
listserver and not to Prices. To unsubscribe, send a message saying
"unsubscribe prices" to lyris@listserv.unc.edu You must send the
message from the e-mail address by which you are subscribed. If you
have problems, please contact the editor.
Back issues of the Newsletter are archived on two World Wide Web
sites. At UNC-Chapel Hill the url is: http://www.lib.unc.edu/prices/ At
Grenoble the url is: http://www-mathdoc.ujf-grenoble.fr/NSPI/NSPI.html
255.4 RESPONSE TO "THE BIG ISSUE -- THE FUTURE OF ELECTRONIC
PUBLICATIONS, by Robert Michaelson
Kent Mulliner, Collection Development Coordinator, Ohio
University Libraries
255.5.1 A QUESTION TO ROLLO TURNER (254.4 SUBSCRIPTION AGENTS REDUCE
SERVICE TO LOW DISCOUNT PUBLISHERS)
David Goodman, Biology Librarian and Co-chair, Electronic
Journals Task force, Princeton University Library,
dgoodman@princeton.edu
255.5.2 ROLLO TURNER RESPONDS
Rollo Turner, Secretary General, Association of Subscription
Agents and Intermediaries, rollo.turner@onet.co.uk
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Statements of fact and opinion appearing in the Newsletter on
Serials Pricing Issues are made on the responsibility of the
authors alone, and do not imply the endorsement of the editor, the
editorial board, or the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Readers of the Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues are encouraged
to share the information in the newsletter by electronic or paper
methods. We would appreciate credit if you quote from the
newsletter.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues (ISSN: 1046-3410) is
published by the editor through Academic Technology and Networks at
the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, as news is
available. Editor: Marcia Tuttle, Email: marcia_tuttle@unc.edu;
Telephone: 919 929-3513. Editorial Board: Keith Courtney (Taylor
and Francis), Fred Friend (University College London), Birdie
MacLennan (University of Vermont), Michael Markwith (Swets
Subscription Services), James Mouw (University of Chicago), Heather
Steele (Blackwell's Periodicals Division), David Stern (Yale
University), and Scott Wicks (Cornell University).
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++