Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

SCOAP 3 Forum ACRL 2009 - Seattle Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics Salvatore Mele CERN European Organization for Nuclear.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "SCOAP 3 Forum ACRL 2009 - Seattle Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics Salvatore Mele CERN European Organization for Nuclear."— Presentation transcript:

1 SCOAP 3 Forum ACRL 2009 - Seattle Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics Salvatore Mele CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research Background The SCOAP 3 model Fund-raising status Next steps Conclusions Background The SCOAP 3 model Fund-raising status Next steps Conclusions

2 The HEP publishing landscape 5000-7000 HEP articles/year, according to definition of HEP Practically all articles are available as arXiv OA pre/post-prints 90% of articles are in theory 80% of articles published in 6 leading journals by 4 publishers 62% of articles by not-for-profit (nor-for-loss) publishers SCOAP 3 is not limited to any set of journals but open to all high-quality HEP journals! Source: SPIRES, 2006

3 U.S. and European HEP journals Study of 11326 HEP articles published in 2005-2006 in PRD,JHEP,PLB,NPB,EPJC,PRL and NIMA Krause et al. CERN-OPEN-2007-014 OA solutions in HEP must be geographically global, in the same way HEP research is a global endeavor Origin of articles in U.S. journals Origin of articles in E.U. journals

4 Evolving publication habits Source: SPIRES Phases of stability alternated with fast growth/decline N.B. Only articles which appeared in the six largest HEP journals are considered.

5 arXiv (Cornell library), the archetypal repository Discovery and first plateaus Steady state & constant output (Green) Open Access, second nature: posting to arXiv before even submitting to a journal is common practice –No mandate, no debate, no advocacy. Author-benefit driven –Author-formatted peer-reviewed revisions routinely uploaded –All publishers allow self-archiving. APS hosts an arXiv mirror! Conference contributions

6 Journals are almost entirely available on arXiv Fraction of articles available on arXiv Year

7 (As many scientists as analyzed here go straight to arXiv) arXiv 82% Publisher server 18% 30,000 clicks (choice between arXiv and journal) What do readers do when offered a choice between an arXiv pre-/post-print AND journal?

8 HEP and its journals Journals are on the way to lose (lost?) a century-old role as vehicles of scholarly communication Still, evaluation of institutes and (young) researchers is based on high-quality peer-reviewed journals The main role of journals is to assure high-quality peer-review and act as keepers-of-the-records The HEP community needs high-quality journals, our interface with officialdom Libraries implicitly support this role by purchasing subscriptions:~80-90% of HEP scientists read arXiv Fertile ground to experiment at cross-roads of Open Access and journal-administered peer-review against unique background of complete self-archiving Pilot and lessons can be exported to other fields

9 A strong request from the scientists "We strongly encourage the usage of electronic publishing methods for our publications and support the principles of Open Access Publishing, which includes granting free access of our publications to all. Furthermore, we encourage all our members to publish papers in easily accessible journals, following the principles of the Open Access Paradigm." ATLAS; approved on 23rd February 2007 CMS; approved on 2nd March 2007 ALICE; approved on 9th March 2007 LHCb; approved on 12th March 2007 4 experimental groups 7000 scientists from 54 countries ~1000 from the US

10 Open Access business models in HEP Hybrid model: Per-article OA fee on top of subscriptions –Negligible success in HEP. Author FAQ: why pay something (peer-review) you can get for free (the library pays subscriptions) SPONSORED ARTICLE Author-pays: No subscriptions. Authors (institutions) pay per- article journals processing fees –Model in its infancy in HEP. Author FAQ: why pay something you can get for free elsewhere (the library pays subscriptions) Institutional membership: for a (small) fee in addition to subscriptions, all articles with at least one author from the institution are OA –Leading laboratories and the entire France trying this scheme. –Authors like OA without financial barriers in high-IF journals (<<1%) (~4%) (and percentage of HEP literature)

11 Recent Open Access developments in HEP While waiting for SCOAP3 to become operational publishers offer some no fee Open Access solutions! –Springer: experimental HEP articles and letters in Eur. Phys. Jour. C –EPS: HEP articles in Europhys. Lett. –Elsevier: HEP articles from the LHC –(In addition, SISSA/IOPp institutional membership implies 20% HEP is OA) Seminal articles describing construction of LHC are published OA in SISSA/IOPp Journal of Instrumentation –7 articles/1600 pages/8000 authors. Large-scale OA publishing operation –60000+ downloads from journal site in two months! 3000-scientists CMS collaboration at LHC votes to privilege SCOAP3-friendly journals for its articles

12 The SCOAP 3 model A consortium sponsors HEP publications and makes them Open Access by re-directing subscription money. Five core journals: PRD, JHEP, PLB, NPB, EPJC –Carry a majority of HEP content: aim to convert entirely to Open Access Two broadband journal: PRL, NIM –10% & 25% HEP: conversion to Open Access of this fraction Other, lower-volume, high-quality HEP journals –conversion to Open Access of the HEP content Today: (funding bodies through) libraries purchase journal subscriptions to (indirectly) support the peer-review service and to allow their users to read articles. Tomorrow: funding bodies and libraries contribute to SCOAP 3, which pays centrally for the organization of the peer-review service, through a call for tender, which determines a price- per-article. Articles are free to read for everyone. SCOAP 3 is not limited to any set of journals but open to all high-quality HEP journals!

13 Guesstimating the budget envelope Physical Review D (APS) income ~3.9M$/year (31% of arXiv:hep) Journal of High Energy Physics (SISSA/IOP) income ~1.3M$/year (19% of arXiv:hep) HEP Open Access price tag: 13M$/year A published PRD article costs APS ~2000$ 6-8 leading journals publish 5000-7000 articles a year (/$ exchange rate of April 07) [no money changes hands on the basis of this guesstimate] The final price-tag for SCOAP 3 will be known after a call for tender for the peer-review and other editorial services will be placed with publishers

14 SCOAP 3 financing SCOAP 3 to be funded through a fair-share model based on the fraction of HEP articles per country: the more a country uses the system the larger its share. Figures are very stable over time. Allowing only SCOAP 3 partners to publish Open Access would replicate the subscription scheme and not solve the problems. Make a 10% allowance for developing countries who at the beginning might not contribute to the scheme. The model is viable only if every country is on board! Success through consensus and unanimity, not majority. Not a weakness: a strength! Krause et al. CERN-OPEN-2007-014

15 SCOAP 3 funding mechanism Funding partners identify country-by-country schemes to re-direct journal subscriptions to SCOAP 3 Countries pledge their contribution to SCOAP 3 Countries with centralized structures for licensing join through their national consortium Countries where subscriptions are paid by HEP funding agencies join through these agencies In the U.S., single institutional and consortial partners join SCOAP 3 directly, at Pledges conditional to contractual conditions with publishers in line with the SCOAP 3 objectives (unbundling, Open Access, author rights...) Broad worldwide consensus, signified by the pledges, indispensable before the next phase can commence (Governance, Tender, MoU, contracts,...)

16 Status of the SCOAP 3 fund-raising 60% of the SCOAP 3 budget envelope has been pledged by libraries, consortia and HEP funding agencies worldwide 16 Discussions and negotiations in progress with all countries not yet in the consortium, in Europe, Asia and the Americas. Austria Belgium CERN Denmark France Germany Greece Hungary Italy Netherlands Norway Romania Slovakia Sweden Switzerland Spain JISC (UK) 51 US partners (>60%) -consortia (NERL,CDL,GWLA,OhioLink...) -laboratories -individual libraries Israel, Turkey Australia 7.8M$ 5.2M$ Canada

17 Fundraising in the U.S. De-centralised structure of U.S. library funding implies: 1.Re-direction of subscriptions of DoE-laboratory libraries 2.Re-direction of subscriptions of individual university libraries, not organised in consortia 3.Re-direction of subscriptions by library consortia US HEP share = 24.3% SCOAP 3 contribution = 3.5 Mln$ 7 Libraries of DoE national labs (Argonne, Berkeley, Fermilab, Los Alamos, Pacific Northwest, Thomas Jefferson, SLAC) 38 Individual universities (10 in CDL, 18 in GWLA) (UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UC Irvine, UCLA, UC Merced, UC Riverside, UC San Diego, UC San Francisco, UC Santa Barbara, UC Santa Cruz, Caltech, Emory University, Baylor, Colorado State, Iowa University, Kansas State, Rice, Arkansas, Colorado-Boulder, Hawaii, Houston, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska- Lincoln, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern California, Utah, Washington State, Johns Hopkins, Lewis and Clark College, Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois- Urbana-Champaign, Wisconsin-Madison, Tulane) 6 Consortia (MaineINFONet, NERL, OHIOLink, TRLN, VIVA, FCLA) 2.1 of 3.5 M$ (60%)

18 Next steps for SCOAP3 U.S. libraries (through their consortia) pledge to re-direct HEP subscriptions to SCOAP3 by filling the U.S. online Expression of Interest at [no money changes hands] Negotiations advance in a few outstanding countries which pledge their contribution to SCOAP3 through a countrywide Expression of Interest [no money changes hands] Once a sizeable fraction of budget is pledged, reflecting the international character of SCOAP3 –SCOAP3 formally established, with international governance –SCOAP3 can issue a tender to publishers [no money changes hands] Publishers answer the tender quoting a price-per-article and agreeing to unbundle packages, removing SCOAP3 titles, and reducing prices accordingly [no money changes hands] SCOAP 3 international governing board adjudicates contracts [no money changes hands] Contracts with publisher are signed and funds are transferred to SCOAP3 [payments happen]

19 Next steps for SCOAP3 1.Expression of Interest - Not yet a commitment to pay, gauges interest in joining SCOAP3 should it deliver. Indispensable to move forward. 2.International Governance - Representing countries and US institutes of all kinds/sizes - To be established when level of support grows - Decision-making body on Call for Tender and adjudication procedure. Oversights running of SCOAP3 - Supported by CERN legal and administrative infrastructure (Experience from 9bn$ worth of contracts for the LHC) 3.Call for Tender - Publisher response (Price & conditions) - Go/No-Go decision (Unbundling and other conditions) 4.Memorandum of Understanding - Partner accession to SCOAP3, if satisfied with publisher conditions. Commitment to transfer money to SCOAP3.

20 SCOAP3 Expression of Interest - 1 This form expresses the intent of the consortium or institution named below to join SCOAP3, the consortium facilitating Open Access publishing in High Energy Physics (HEP), with the objectives as outlined in the SCOAP3 Working Party Report We understand the yearly cost of the SCOAP3 operation will be determined by the number and the prices of contracts awarded following an invitation to tender, which will be reissued regularly. We understand that the maximum annual budget for the SCOAP3 operation is currently estimated at 10 million Euro with the goal for the US contribution to this budget is approximately $3.6 million It is understood that the maximum US consortium/institutional annual share of the budget represented by this expression of interest is based on the current amount that can be identified and extracted from current consortium or institution licenses for the journal titles identified in the SCOAP3 Working Party Report, factoring in each title's HEP content ranging from 10% to 100%.

21 SCOAP3 Expression of Interest - 2 The current estimate of the amount that can be extracted for the SCOAP3 titles from the consortium or institution licenseis [....] This is the amount that my consortium or institution intends to commit to SCOAP3. This amount will be kept confidential and only presented in an aggregated form. It is further understood that SCOAP3 will be formally established through a Memorandum of Understanding formalizing, inter alia, the individual contributions of each consortium or individual library and defining the consortium governance. The Expression of Interest is not a commitment to pay. It gauges interest in joining SCOAP3 should it deliver. Indispensable to move forward.

22 SCOAP3 tender requirements - I (p. 25-26 The articles shall be made available on an irreversible OA basis There shall be immediate free access to the publisher- formatted articles and the corresponding metadata; Publishers shall deliver to a repository designated by SCOAP3 the final version of the articles as well as the corresponding metadata and interoperable usage statistics There shall be free transfer of the articles and the corresponding metadata to any further repository, through the intermediary of the repository designated by SCOAP3 There shall be free extraction and re-using of figures, tables and numerical data included in the articles and free use of the articles and metadata for text- and data-mining applications Authors shall be free to post pre-prints and post-prints to subject and institutional repositories; Publishers shall pro-actively support publisher-independent long-term preservation through repositories and libraries

23 SCOAP3 tender requirements - II (p. 25-26 In the case of journals that are part of a large journal licence package, the publisher will be required to un- bundle this package and to correspondingly reduce the subscription cost for the remaining part of the package. In the case of existing long-term subscription contracts between publishers, libraries, and funding agencies, publishers are required to reimburse the subscription costs pertaining to OA journals or to the journal fractions converted to OA. Those are the guiding principles. Exact requirements to be formulated by SCOAP3 international governing board based on conditions of the SCOAP3 members

24 The SCOAP3 tender concept - 1 Publisher of Journal A Publisher of Journal B Publisher of Journal K Publisher of Journal Z... ? ? ? ? 1500 $ 2500 $ 2000 $ 1800 $ SCOAP3

25 The SCOAP3 tender concept - 2 Journal K Journal Z... 2000 $ 1800 $ Quality K Quality Z Journal K Journal A Journal B Journal C... Journal Z 1 2 13 26 3 Journal A Journal B 1500 $ 2500 $ Quality A Quality B Journal C 4000 $ Quality C Rank by a combination of (high) quality and (low) price

26 The SCOAP3 tender concept - 3 Journal K Journal A Journal L Journal R... 2000 $ 1500 $ 2000 $ 1800 $ Journal Z 1800 $ Journal F 4000 $ Journal Q 3000 $ Journal P 800 $ Journal W 5000 $ 1300 2000 1000 300 200 50 100 2.6 Mln $ 3.0 Mln $ 2.0 Mln $ 1.8 Mln $ 1.2 Mln $ 0.6 Mln $ 2.6 Mln $ 5.6 Mln $ 10.6 Mln $ 12.4 Mln $ 7.4 Mln $ 8.6 Mln $ 13.0 Mln $ Journal Price Volume Contract Expenditure Ranked by (high) quality and (low) price...

27 Novelties of the SCOAP 3 model A sustainable Open Access alternative to the subscription model meeting the expectations of researchers, funders, libraries and publishers. Link, through its call for tender, price and quality. Correlate through its contracts volume and price. This is not the case in the subscription model. Eliminate author-pays fees, in competition with research funds which appear as a barrier for Open Access in HEP. There is no such competition in the SCOAP 3 model based on re-direction of subscriptions. Experiment for journal-administered peer-review services against a unique background of complete self-archiving of research articles.

28 "La seule chose promise davance à léchec, cest celle que lon ne tente pas. (*) Paul-Emile Victor (French Polar Explorer, 1907-1995) Thank you! (*) There is only one thing certain to fail: the one we do not attempt

Download ppt "SCOAP 3 Forum ACRL 2009 - Seattle Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics Salvatore Mele CERN European Organization for Nuclear."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google