Newsletter on Serial Pricing Issues 106 (February 7, 1994) URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/serials/nspi/nspi-ns106 ISSN: 1046-3410 NEWSLETTER ON SERIALS PRICING ISSUES NO 106 -- February 7, 1994 Editor: Marcia Tuttle CONTENTS 106.1 THE JOURNAL AT THE CROSS ROADS, Elisabeth Davenport 106.1 THE JOURNAL AT THE CROSS-ROADS: A ONE-DAY SEMINAR FOR LIBRARIANS, PUBLISHERS, SUBSCRIPTION AGENTS AND THE READERS OF SERIALS Elisabeth Davenport, Indiana University, iulis@ucs.indiana.edu. [Reprinted with permission from _NASIG Newsletter_, 8:5 (Dec. 1993).] Jointly organized by the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers and the United Kingdom Serials Group, London, 22 September 1993 This conference attracted one hundred and twenty-six attendees from pub- lishing, industry, academe, and libraries to hear speakers and panelists "explore radical shifts in practice and policy" when faced with a "throng of technological, academic, and commercial innovations that are re-shaping the old collective assumptions" (in the words of the seminar prospectus). The opening remarks of the Chairman, Gordon Graham, identified forces which will shape the future of publishing: the market, the power of large consor- tia, and consumer revolt, each of which must be considered in a context of stabilizing or contracting sales. The first speaker, Professor BERNARD DONOVAN of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, ("Why and How a Journal is Published; the Author, the Editor and the Review Process") focussed on the relation- ship between authors and editors, which he believes shapes the quality of science both in terms of subject area and quality control. New journals are produced to fill niches or to present material that falls between existing fields, and editors decide what goes where. Donovan reported the results of a recent survey of STM publishing in the United Kingdom, which will be published in November. Contributors had been asked, among other things, why they published (dissemination, career considerations, research funding, and egotism were given as reasons, in that order), and how they chose journal titles to publish under (prestige, specialization, a previous paper accep- ted in that journal, know the editor, in that order). The responses imply that the status quo is likely to be maintained. Donovan observed that time- lag, often invoked by proponents of electronic publishing as a reason to shift media, was of concern to fewer than 5% of the respondents. He offered a defense of anonymous refereeing as a system that works, and said that though most rejected papers are admittedly published eventually, they ap- pear in fifth-rate journals; most of the authors in the study had not per- severed beyond the third submission. Donovan finished with a caveat against the total electronic environment (albeit an extreme vision) proposed by Swinnerton Dyer in a recent issue of _Serials_.(1) The journal as a form gives learned societies a coherent identity, and editors like to work with journals in hand. In addition, the reaction of the scientific community to electronic publishing has not been, to date, encouraging, and secondary services would be a "nightmare" in that environment. ROBERT WELHAM ("The Role of the Journal Publisher"), described the publica- tion process in the Royal Society of Chemistry. The review system involves the coordination of over two thousand participants across the world; it costs the Society as much to reject as to accept a paper. Welham commented on the fact that referees want to be rewarded, though in the case of the RSC, royalties would not yield more than a token payment per paper. The Society validates and adds value to more than twenty thousand pages of A4 text per year. The checking process covers chemical compounds, the accuracy of figures and statistics, and the language since neither the majority of readers nor the majority of authors has English as a first language. The RSC runs a tight publishing operation: its objective is to promulgate the results of research and it is registered as a charity; the peer review process is Society driven, and even with delivery costs to librarians of one pound sterling per document, it runs at a surplus. The material pro- duced by the Society feeds into _Chemical Abstracts_, and because of the high standards of bibliographic information which the Society requires of its contributors of primary information, the Society can ensure high quali- ty access through Chemical Abstracts. Welham observed that Internet may upset the status quo in two main areas: it opens up exchange, and it chal- lenges the way in which the corpus is sustained. Though unpredicted things can happen (like the reactions in the 1980s of academic librarians in the United States to non-US publishers' prices because of unfavorable exchange rates, among other things) Welham's advice was: "Don't shoot the publisher until there is something to put in his place." JOHN COX of B. H. Blackwell Ltd. ("Can Dinosaurs Survive? the Future of Publishers, Vendors, and Librarians") perceived dramatic change throughout the publishing chain. Information is increasing in a purchasing environment that is static, or contracting. He quoted some worrisome statistics: a 50% increase in his firm's activity in the last year but not in revenue; a 15% increase in prices for 1994 and a cancellation rate of 8% higher than the past year. Cox noted the rise of single article supply and observed that key technologies for alternatives to subscription-based journals are al- ready in place: fax, CD-ROM, and the Internet. He predicted an order-of- magnitude increase in capacity by 1995 and suggested that several players might be involved in the delivery of documents at the level of the article rather than the journal: subscription agents, research libraries, or docu- ment utilities like Bath ISI Data Service (BIDS), RLG, and CARL. Cox quoted specifics for the CARL UNCOVER service (now acting in a cooperative venture with Blackwell): delivery of an article for less than $20 [outside the US -ed.] plus royalty individually negotiated with the publisher, within twen- ty-four hours. Such services, far from being a threat, are a way of gener- ating income from an existing resource, with service and cost benefits to the reader, and income to publishers from royalties. Cox offered two buzz- words that will characterize the future: "interconnectivity" and "transpar- ency" (which refers to a transition across systems and software so smooth that the user is unaware of the special effort involved in resolving incom- patibilities across systems). He suggested that the following were trends to watch: the move to customized computing, shifts in alliances in the tele-industry, and software which blends content and structure. He believes analogies for document delivery should be sought in the world of mass media applications. Cox concluded with a plea to resist the UK Government's pro- posed value-added tax on publications, which will impose further burdens on the acquisition budgets of research libraries around the globe. BERNARD NAYLOR, University Librarian of the University of Southampton ("The Implications of Current and Future Initiatives on Libraries"), observed that the journals that his library does not stock are the most important part of his budget as he relies increasingly on single article supply. Naylor presented a succinct economic model: libraries either pay up-front, which confers unlimited right of use (the journal subscription is the clas- sic instance, with payment to publishers), or they deliver documents to clients on a pay-as-you-use basis (with payment to the British Library Document Supply Centre, or similar body). Pay-offs for these contrasting just-in-case and just-in-time approaches have to be calculated; while a subscription for a heavily used journal is detrimental to a publisher be- cause more can be made from a payment per article unit, for a weak journal a subscription offers a measure of security. There is a conflict between the interests of the publisher and librarian in this area. Naylor offered the Bath ISI Data Service (BIDS) as an interesting case. Originally sup- plied on a subscription basis, the service was so heavily used that ISI is considering renegotiating the terms. Naylor commented on major shifts in academic funding in the United Kingdom; the Higher Education Funding Coun- cil proposes to localize budgets and allow academic departments to create purchaser/supplier relationships of their own with libraries (or any out- side supplier). This major shift in the power to spend on information will only be effective with improved end-user access and simplified methods of payment, but end-users will still require specialists to advise them. Nay- lor expressed misgivings about the trend to machine access ("There's some- thing egalitarian about print on paper") and asked, "Is research that can only be accessed on a high quality workstation really published?" He con- cluded with a reiteration of the main issue for libraries: just-in-time versus just-in-case, not holdings versus access or paper versus electronic. DAVID BROWN (DJB Associates)("New Innovations in Journal Publishing") com- mented on the "dogged resistance" of the journal. He addressed six areas: the imbalance between supply and demand, collection development policies, academic control of article ownership, research needs, telematics, and the complexity of the journal article process. Brown discussed levers of change: one is the over-exploitation of a finite resource (the library budget) by publishers and authors (Byrd's "tragedy of the commons" scenario (2)); a second is the increased screen literacy of authors, which means that some of the functions of the journal are migrating to the electronic world. Brown presented a list of innovations, including a spate of current alerting and individual article supply services. These services have nota- bly not come from publishers, with the exception of Elsevier, whose comput- er-aided production plus current awareness service (CAPCAS) makes business sense, because the publisher can increase revenue by supplying article headings and abstracts which lead into document supply. Brown also men- tioned a second important innovation: Internet lists, which offer files of articles and pre-prints that bypass publishers, though commercial operators are now involved. In an increasingly fragmented industry, publishers' re- luctance to invest heavily in innovation makes business sense because in- come from electronic publishing is not likely to be sufficient to counter- act the fall in subscriptions, and it is difficult to set prices for royal- ty. Much of what is written and stored would not be used, and it is likely that only large publishers could cope; little publishers may well want to contract with other agencies for storage. Brown revealed that the British Library is working on an econometric model for this area. BOB CAMPBELL of Blackwell Scientific Publications Ltd. ("The Future of Journal Publishing") pointed out that journal publishing has now reached a steady state, though productivity will continue to increase encouraged by recommendations from the Higher Education Funding Council (ten publications a year, rather than two, is being discussed as a new productivity norm). He reviewed the contributions of the previous speakers, and said that a recent study by Shauder in Australia confirmed that prestige, rather than speed, is an important factor for producers when they choose where to publish. ADONIS, the subscription-based document delivery service, was wrongly priced, he observed, in the light of Naylor's presentation. Campbell ob- served that there is a common misperception that publishers are merely distributors; in fact cost-cutting could be achieved at different stages of the production process. Refereeing is a function which should be retained, as it may prevent the erosion of the publisher's position. The Shauder report confirmed the rise in single article use, and Campbell proposed a step-by-step development model for electronic services ("We don't need to lose millions like OCLC"); the database explored in different ways may offer a positive economic base for publishers. Campbell described several product/service groups (these he predicted would continue to expand): the traditional product group, the product in new formats, the document deliv- ery group, wide area network services like WAIS and SuperJANET, and secon- dary services. Catering for the personal electronic library would provide business opportunities. The speakers were joined by RUTH LAWRENCE of the Law Society, ELSPETH SCOTT of the Wellcome Foundation and DAVID WELLS of the Modern Humanities Re- search Association in a panel session open to questions from the audience. Pricing was the main issue: why can't publishers drop their prices, and why are there such price variations in quotations from subscription agents? What will happen to prices when the networks go commercial? A small pub- lisher asked, "if I hold subscriptions at the current rate for next year, am I mad?" One speaker observed that the interesting thing about this meet- ing was the frequency of occurrence of the word Internet. The writer of this review, who attended a comparable seminar (with an almost identical line-up of speakers) eighteen months ago, could detect a major shift in attitude from "It won't happen," to "It's happening and the electronic medium offers as many opportunities as threats." The discussion of fragmen- tation in the industry and descriptions of multiple innovative services seem to confirm Malone's predictions on networked markets.(3) The discourse of the speakers, however, was framed by the existing publishing system; there was little discussion of direct peer-to-peer publication, in the form of refereed "e-journals" on Internet. One minor frustration was allusion to material which was not formally de- scribed; the "Royal Society report," the "Shauder report," a "report in North America," the "British Library econometric study" all of which must be of interest to analysts of document delivery. Let us assume that they will be referenced and traceable when the material presented in the seminar appears in _Serials_. REFERENCES 1. P. Swinnerton Dyer, "A system of electronic journals for the United Kingdom," _Serials_ 5.3 (1992): 33-35. 2. G. Byrd, "An economic commons tragedy for research libraries: scholarly journal publishing and pricing trends," _College and Research Librar- ies_ 51 (May 1990): 184-185. 3. T. Malone, J. Yates and R. Benjamin, "The logic of electronic markets," _Harvard Business Review_ (May-June 1989): 166-170. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 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 Uni- versity 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 the Office of Information Technology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, as news is available. Editor: Marcia Tuttle, Internet: tuttle@gibbs.oit.unc.edu; Paper mail: Serials Department, CB #3938 Davis Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill NC 27514-8890; Telephone: 919 962-1067; FAX: 919 962-4450. Editorial Board: Deana Astle (Clemson University), Jerry Curtis (Springer Verlag New York), Janet Fisher (MIT Press), Fred Friend (University College, London), Charles Hamaker (Louisiana State University), Daniel Jones (University of Texas Health Science Center), James Mouw (University of Chicago), and Heather Steele (Blackwell's Periodicals Division). The Newsletter is avail- able on the Internet, Blackwell's CONNECT, and Readmore's ROSS. EBSCO cus- tomers may receive the Newsletter in paper format. To subscribe to the newsletter send a message to LISTSERV@GIBBS.OIT.UNC.EDU saying SUBSCRIBE PRICES [YOUR NAME]. Be sure to send that message to the listserver and not to Prices. You must include your name. To unsubscribe (no name required in message), 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 available electronically. To get a list of available issues send a message to LISTSERV@GIBBS.OIT.UNC.EDU saying INDEX PRICES. To retrieve a specific issue, the message should read: GET PRICES PRICES.xx (where "xx" is the number of the issue). +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ *****ENDOFFILE*****ENDOFFILE*****ENDOFFILE*****ENDOFFILE*****ENDOFFILE*****