Authors : Olivier Pourret, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Jonathan P. Tennant, Andrew Hursthouse, Eric D. van Hullebusch
In this communication, we look at Open Access (OA) publishing practices in geochemistry.
We examine a list of 56 journals and assess whether Article Processing Charges (APCs) and Journal Impact Factors (JIFs) appear to influence publication or not. More than 40% of articles in 2018-2019 were published OA, and about 70% of that portion in fully OA journals.
These had a mean APC of US$ 900, whereas the remaining were published in hybrid journals with a higher mean APC of more than $US 1,800. A moderate and positive correlation is found between the number of OA articles published in hybrids journals and their JIF, whereas there is a stronger positive relationship between the number of OA articles published in fully OA journals and the APC.
For OA articles published in hybrid journals, it seems that the proportion of OA articles tends to increase in journals with higher JIF.
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ringeo.2020.100001
Authors : Rosângela Schwarz Rodrigues, Ernest Abadal, Breno Kricheldorf Hermes de Araújo
The essential role of journals as registries of scientific activity in all areas of knowledge justifies concern about their ownership and type of access. The purpose of this research is to analyze the main characteristics of publishers with journals that have received the DOAJ Seal.
The specific objectives are a) to identify publishers and journals registered with the DOAJ Seal; b) to characterize those publishers; and c) to analyze their article processing fees.
The research method involved the use of the DOAJ database, the Seal option and the following indicators: publisher, title, country, number of articles, knowledge area, article processing charges in USD, time for publication in weeks, and year of indexing in DOAJ.
The results reveal a fast-rising oligopoly, dominated by Springer with 35% of the titles and PLOS with more than 20% of the articles.
We’ve identified three models of expansion: a) a few titles with hundreds of articles; b) a high number of titles with a mix of big and small journals; and c) a high number of titles with medium-size journals.
We identify a high number of titles without APCs (27%) in all areas while medicine was found to be the most expensive area.
Commercial publishers clearly exercise control over the scope of journals and the creation of new titles, according to the interests of their companies, which are not necessarily the same as those of the scientific community or of society in general.
URL : Open access publishers: The new players
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233432
Auteur/Author : Irini Paltani-Sargologos
Les accords dits « transformants », également appelés « négociations couplées abonnement / “APC” » (en anglais transformative arrangements, transformative agreements, journal agreements ou offsetting models) désignent un type particulier de négociation avec les éditeurs commerciaux.
Cette note présente le contexte d’émergence des accords “transformants”, définit leurs caractéristiques principales et dresse un état des lieux des accords “transformants” signés dans le monde.
Les risques associés aux accords dits transformants ainsi qu’un retour d’expérience au Royaume-Uni sont évoqués. Cet état des lieux se termine par la présentation de deux exemples d’accords réellement “transformants” dans le système de l’édition scientifique.
URL : État des lieux sur les accords transformants – 31 mars 2020
Original location : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02538844
Authors : Olivier Pourret, Andrew Hursthouse, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Karen Johannesson, Haiyan Liu, Marc Poujol, Romain Tartèse, Eric D. van Hullebusch, Oliver Wiche
Open Access (OA) describes the free, unrestricted access to and re-use of research articles. Recently, a new wave of interest, debate, and practice surrounding OA publishing has emerged.
In this paper, we provide a simple overview of the trends in OA practice in the broad field of geochemistry. Characteristics of the approach such as whether or not an article processing charge (APC) exists, what embargo periods or restrictions on self-archiving’ policies are in place, and whether or not the sharing of preprints is permitted are described.
The majority of journals have self-archiving policies that allow authors to share their peer reviewed work via green OA without charge. There is no clear relationship between journal impact and APC.
The journals with the highest APC are typically those of the major commercial publishers, rather than the geochemistry community themselves. The rise in OA publishing has potential impacts on the profiles of researchers and tends to devolve costs from organizations to individuals.
Until the geochemistry community makes the decision to move away from journal-based evaluation criteria, it is likely that such high costs will continue to impose financial inequities upon research community.
However, geochemists could more widely choose legal self-archiving as an equitable and sustainable way to disseminate their research.
URL : Open Access publishing practice in geochemistry: overview of current state and look to the future
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03551
Authors : Melissa H. Cantrell, Juleah A. Swanson
Article processing charges (APCs) are one method of many to ensure open access to research literature, but studies that explore the funding sources for such payments, especially as related to open access publications in the arts, humanities, and social sciences, have been limited.
This study seeks to understand the range of funding sources that are available and used by faculties in these disciplines to pay for APCs associated with publishing in open access journals, as well as attitudes towards and awareness of available institutional funds that may inflect future engagement with open access publishing.
The authors distributed a survey to faculty who had an open access journal article published in 2017 from three doctoral granting, high research activity universities in the United States.
Twenty-two scholars participated in the final survey, ten of whom indicated that they paid an APC for their publication. While the results cannot make generalizations about funding sources, they do suggest that both the prevalence of APCs as well as attitudes about open access engagement may be influenced by disciplinary self-identification.
This research contributes to discussions around the future of open access funding models as well as to disciplinary outreach regarding APC funding for journal publications.
URL : Funding Sources for Open Access Article Processing Charges in the Social Sciences, Arts, and Humanities in the United States
DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications8010012
Authors : Tasha Mellins-Cohen, Gaynor Redvers-Mutton
The release in September 2018 of Plan S has led many small and society publishers to examine their business models, and in particular ways to transform their journals from hybrids into pure open access (OA) titles.
This paper explores one means by which a society publisher might transform, focused specifically on the institutional set-price publish and read (P&R) package being developed by the Microbiology Society based on assessments of: the geographic diversity of our author and subscriber bases; trends in article numbers, article costs and revenues; the administrative complexity of the options; and the reputational and financial risks to the Society associated with the package.
We outline the process we followed to calculate the financial and publishing implications of P&R at different price points, and share our view that these kinds of packages are a stop on the way to new models of OA that do not rely on article processing charges (APCs).
Our hope is that in sharing our experience, we will contribute to a collective best practice about how to transform society publishing.
URL : Transformation: the future of society publishing
DOI : http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.486
Author : Sergio Copiello
This paper addresses the topic of the article processing charges (APCs) that are paid when publishing articles using the open access (OA) option. Building on the Elsevier OA price list, company balance sheet figures, and ScienceDirect data, tentative answers to three questions are outlined using a Monte Carlo approach to deal with the uncertainty inherent in the inputs.
The first question refers to the level of APCs from the market perspective, under the hypothesis that all the articles published in Elsevier journals exploit the OA model so that the subscription to ScienceDirect becomes worthless.
The second question is how much Elsevier should charge for publishing all the articles under the OA model, assuming the profit margin reduces and adheres to the market benchmark.
The third issue is how many articles would have to be accepted, in an OA-only publishing landscape, so that the publisher benefits from the same revenue and profit margin as in the recent past.
The results point to high APCs, nearly twice the current level, being required to preserve the publisher’s profit margin. Otherwise, by relaxing that constraint, a downward shift of APCs can be expected so they would tend to get close to current values. Accordingly, the article acceptance rate could be likely to grow from 26–27% to about 35–55%.
URL : Business as Usual with Article Processing Charges in the Transition towards OA Publishing: A Case Study Based on Elsevier
DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications8010003