Also recently mentioned on a listserv is Open J-Gate, which bills itself as the "World's biggest Open Access English Language Journals Portal" and includes 4386 journals. I feel like I must have known about this at one time, but there is just so much information out there that I cannot keep track of it all. I am more familiar with the Directory of Open Access Journals, which contains 3365 journals.
For any of you out there not affiliated with an academic institution, these are both great resources when doing research.
Showing posts with label journals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journals. Show all posts
Friday, May 16, 2008
Why Libraries Pay More for Journals
Just why exactly do libraries have to pay institutional prices for journals, which are often many times the prices of individual subscriptions? Why can't we just have professors/patrons who are already getting individual subscriptions donate them to us when they are finished?
There's been an interesting discussing on COLLIB about these very questions, and I have to confess that while I knew that this is what we did - pay institutional prices - I never knew exactly why. One of the posters on the listserv pointed out this great article about the reasons behind the institutional fees. Apparently journal publishers are using differential pricing to make up their necessary costs. That is, they cannot make enough money to sustain their business off individual subscription fees, so they make up the difference by also including institutional fees. So why don't libraries just try to pay the individual price? It would be considered fraud.
As to the question about professors/patrons donating journals, the article states that this is an acceptable practice. However, it's far less reliable - a professor make not have time to read each issue during busy semesters and may hold on to them for a while, issues may get lost before they can be donated to the library leaving the library with no recourse to obtain the issue, and so on.
So, good to know, but I'm still not sure the 10-15% increase we commonly see in journal subscription prices each year is necessary. And the higher the prices go, the more libraries will have to cut back on their subscriptions.. which will cause the prices to continue to skyrocket in a never-ending cycle. I know my library will be looking very seriously at its journal holdings this summer and making some significant cuts.
There's been an interesting discussing on COLLIB about these very questions, and I have to confess that while I knew that this is what we did - pay institutional prices - I never knew exactly why. One of the posters on the listserv pointed out this great article about the reasons behind the institutional fees. Apparently journal publishers are using differential pricing to make up their necessary costs. That is, they cannot make enough money to sustain their business off individual subscription fees, so they make up the difference by also including institutional fees. So why don't libraries just try to pay the individual price? It would be considered fraud.
As to the question about professors/patrons donating journals, the article states that this is an acceptable practice. However, it's far less reliable - a professor make not have time to read each issue during busy semesters and may hold on to them for a while, issues may get lost before they can be donated to the library leaving the library with no recourse to obtain the issue, and so on.
So, good to know, but I'm still not sure the 10-15% increase we commonly see in journal subscription prices each year is necessary. And the higher the prices go, the more libraries will have to cut back on their subscriptions.. which will cause the prices to continue to skyrocket in a never-ending cycle. I know my library will be looking very seriously at its journal holdings this summer and making some significant cuts.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Can't we all just share? For free?
I am getting really fed up with the astronomical costs of journal subscriptions. But then again, what librarian isn't?
Marc Meola has a very interesting post about the issue of open access for journals on ACRLog. Apparently, there is a group called PRISM who has created a PR campaign to oppose open access. They link open access "with lack of peer review, government censorship, and theft of intellectual property."
Where do they come up with this stuff?!
1. I do not see this causing a lack of peer review. There can still be peer review. Peer reviewers aren't paid in the first place. So what costs are really involved (and we all know these are all financial issues, so why not talk cost). A good example of this would be the world of computer science. I know a computer scientist or two, and they can get just about everything they want for free over the web. Sounds like open access to me! And it is still high quality stuff (well, I am told it is, I certainly don't understand any of it).
2. Government censorship? Wow, I'm lost. HOW is this government censorship. If anything it's the exact opposite of censorship - opening it up to a much wider audience.
3. Theft of intellectual property. Okay, that's just ridiculous. The researchers who write this stuff aren't even paid for it in the first place (okay okay, with the exception of grants). They certainly aren't paid for it's publication. Let's ask them if they want their stuff to be sold for extremely high prices. I think they'd want more open access. The more people their research reaches, the better, right?
I am also curious to know the extent to which library journals are open access. I'm sure this info is out there, but I do not have it. Are they just as bad as the rest of them?
Marc Meola has a very interesting post about the issue of open access for journals on ACRLog. Apparently, there is a group called PRISM who has created a PR campaign to oppose open access. They link open access "with lack of peer review, government censorship, and theft of intellectual property."
Where do they come up with this stuff?!
1. I do not see this causing a lack of peer review. There can still be peer review. Peer reviewers aren't paid in the first place. So what costs are really involved (and we all know these are all financial issues, so why not talk cost). A good example of this would be the world of computer science. I know a computer scientist or two, and they can get just about everything they want for free over the web. Sounds like open access to me! And it is still high quality stuff (well, I am told it is, I certainly don't understand any of it).
2. Government censorship? Wow, I'm lost. HOW is this government censorship. If anything it's the exact opposite of censorship - opening it up to a much wider audience.
3. Theft of intellectual property. Okay, that's just ridiculous. The researchers who write this stuff aren't even paid for it in the first place (okay okay, with the exception of grants). They certainly aren't paid for it's publication. Let's ask them if they want their stuff to be sold for extremely high prices. I think they'd want more open access. The more people their research reaches, the better, right?
I am also curious to know the extent to which library journals are open access. I'm sure this info is out there, but I do not have it. Are they just as bad as the rest of them?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)