Irene BarbersRetrospective and prospective study of the evolution of APC costs and electronic subscriptions for French institutions.
"The total cost of APCs has tripled in the period 2013-2020. The major driver is the growth of articles in Gold OA journals"
TashaMC@ibarbers As interesting as the financial information is, I would LOVE to know what the equivalent growth in article numbers is, and I've not been able to spot it in the report. Without that information the finances lack context!
@TashaMC
I think the answer can be found in figure 2. It's not in the poster nor in the summary on the website, but in the actual report.
https://hal-lara.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03909068/document
I think the answer can be found in figure 2. It's not in the poster nor in the summary on the website, but in the actual report.
https://hal-lara.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03909068/document
@ibarbers So costs tripling was matched by paid-for article output tripling? Doesn't seem as though anyone should be surprised by that!
@TashaMC
Yes, article output is a major cause for rising costs everywhere, not just in France. It seems the average APC has risen in some disciplines, too, but growth of output is the main driver. Not a suprise, but nonetheless a reason for concern, I think. Some publishers are very actively pushing for more output to generate more income.
Yes, article output is a major cause for rising costs everywhere, not just in France. It seems the average APC has risen in some disciplines, too, but growth of output is the main driver. Not a suprise, but nonetheless a reason for concern, I think. Some publishers are very actively pushing for more output to generate more income.
Norbert Holstein@TashaMC @ibarbers @academicchatter
#AcademicPublishing is a free market. It behaves as one. There is a high demand for uncritical, fast publishing -> #PredatoryJournals cover that. There is also a high demand for high visibility (marketed as "impact"). #Journal brands ("Nature", "Frontiers") accommodate that, of course for a price. High demand for a rare commodity drives profits. It's simple.
#AcademicPublishing is a free market. It behaves as one. There is a high demand for uncritical, fast publishing -> #PredatoryJournals cover that. There is also a high demand for high visibility (marketed as "impact"). #Journal brands ("Nature", "Frontiers") accommodate that, of course for a price. High demand for a rare commodity drives profits. It's simple.
@TashaMC @ibarbers @academicchatter A few years ago, there was a smaller market for #OpenAccess publishing and a lot of competition to establish brands. That kept prices low.
Now, journals, editors/reviewers even manipulate citation rates (fake articles, forced citations) and use aggressive marketing (cold calls for 'invited papers' just like spam phone calls) to harvest an endless supply: public money.
Now, journals, editors/reviewers even manipulate citation rates (fake articles, forced citations) and use aggressive marketing (cold calls for 'invited papers' just like spam phone calls) to harvest an endless supply: public money.
@TashaMC @ibarbers @academicchatter Next steps: flat rate contracts of publishers with institutions/countries to secure the profit stream (e.g. https://www.elsevier.com/open-access/agreements/jisc ) and to control/profit from the whole writing process (EndNote, Mendeley, Scopus, Web of Science). At the moment, publishers use heavy tracking of their users to analyse their behaviour to present "ready-made" products to market to universities etc.
grimmiges@dr_norb @TashaMC @ibarbers @academicchatter
Nice. The good old flatrate scheme.
I wonder whether JISC achieved their aim of spending less than the >50 M£ fed in 2021 to the Kraken
https://www.jisc.ac.uk/elsevier-sciencedirect-negotiations/about
And how much of point 4 they managed to negotiate regarding Elsevier's usual policies of "Data confidential/will be provided upon request" and ignoring authors' requests during proofing.