Diane Fulkerson, Director of Library Services, University of South Florida, began with the history of OA initiatives and their common goals. OA began with the Budapest OA initiative in 2002, and there were two others that followed in 2003. Goals of OA include removing price and copyright barriers and limiting the requirements only to attribution. We now have five types of OA, article publication charges (APCs), and predatory publishers using OA. Next steps should be support for faculty to encourage them to publish in OA journals and identifying those journals with high impact. About 14.3% of OA articles are published as gold OA: they are freely available after publication; APCs can be up to $5,000. Author’s institutions do not typically fund those charges. The major downside to OA publishing is that predatory publishers are using it.
Julia Gelfand, Applied Sciences and Engineering Librarian, University of California-Irvine, said that today about 30% of articles are OA. Here are some of its advantages:
OA will influence libraries in several ways, as shown here.
Increasing efforts are being made to share in discovery systems. Institutional repositories (IRs) will continue to be important. Libraries are providing management and software to enable building IRs and are defining themselves as publishers. The role of funders is important.
Kevin Sayer, Advisor, ProQuest, noted that books are in the early stages of OA, but there are many shifts in OA costs. Publications and brands play a significant role in OA, and a robust workflow has been established. More prestigious journals have more rigorous standards. Author recognition, financial security, and rewards are at stake. OA has impacted publications and brands, but not the goals of scholarly communication.
Savings in publication are offset by editorial costs so APC charges were instituted. Authors seem willing to pay the fees, and libraries are starting to adjust their cost factors and services.
Mehdi Pour, President and CEO, IGI Global, said that for example, one university has spent $13,884 on APCs and publisher charges for OA books. 53% of their total spending went to three publishers and resulted in 965 articles published. OA is therefore an expensive process. IGI has created a possible solution to high OA prices by creating deposit accounts for their subscriptions to their journals which allows librarians to reinvest their journal costs in the OA movement to benefit them, their users, and their institution as well as the publishers. This model creates an additional source of APC funding and preserves them from using predatory systems like Sci-Hub. Quality content means it must be validated which incurs costs. Here are the details of the model and how it works:
There has been a large positive response to IGI’s program.
Don Hawkins blogs about conferences for Information Today and Against The Grain. He also maintains the Conference Calendar on the Information Today website and is the Editor of Personal Archiving: Preserving Our Digital Heritage, published by Information Today in 2013, and Co-Editor of Public Knowledge: Access and Benefits, published by Information Today in 2016. He received his Ph.D. degree from the University of California, Berkeley, and has worked in the information industry for over 45 years.