On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Arthur Sale <a...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
Christian Gutknecht <christian.gutkne...@bluewin.ch> wrote: > > I really like the idea to let researchers feel that subscription is an > outdated model. And an easy way to do that without upsetting them too much, > is to cancel subscriptions and get rid of the Big Deals. > > I don’t have access to the raw data now apart from knowing that we fulfill > 13,000+ requests a year, but the University of Tasmania has operated a free > unlimited-quantity service for 15 years, funded pay-per-view centrally (ie > in replacement for subscriptions). > Let me make sure I understand this, Arthur: Are you saying UTas has cancelled all journal subscriptions, and has just just pay per view? This page seems to suggest otherwise: http://rk9dr6cc2p.search.serialssolutions.com/?L=RK9DR6CC2P&tab=JOURNALS > It is very much used, and regarded as a keystone of library research > support. It simply is not true that academics are devoted to instant > access, and they are prepared to wait a day or two to read the papers they > think are relevant. > If UTas had indeed cancelled all journal subscriptions, as Christian suggested, then I would have asked: What about the papers they are not sure are relevant, or only want to skim quickly? Can UTas afford to pay (and authors afford to wait?) The answer means something different if this is the only way they can access content (apart from what is already OA on the Web) (because all UTas submissions have been cancelled) or if this is merely a supplement to UTas's subscription content <http://rk9dr6cc2p.search.serialssolutions.com/?L=RK9DR6CC2P&tab=JOURNALS>. (My guess is that if universities could keep their users happy cancelling all their journals, and it turned out that they could afford pay-per-view for all articles their users ever wanted, then this solution would not only be happening at UTas. But I'm ready to be proved wrong, if that's what you are saying.) > Of course they use alert services, metadata, etc in making the judgment, > but if they think a paper is worth reading in full (it may not be after > they have read it but nobody cares) they have no hesitation in using the > university’s service. The economics do stack up, and I am proud to have > introduced it in about 1998. > > See http://www.utas.edu.au/library/research/document-delivery and > http://www.utas.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/65611/Document-Delivery-Service-online-guide-v10.7.12.pdf > . > *"Does your results list include a hit for University of Tasmania? If so, please check our online catalogue before placing your request.* *If the journal title is not held in the University of Tasmania Library, click to request." * Stevan Harnad > For context, the University is in the top ten Australian universities for > research, and in student size modest (27,000 students, 18% of whom are from > outside Australia). > > If someone wants to mine the data, contact the University Librarian. > > > > Arthur Sale > > University of Tasmania, Australia > > > > *From:* goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] *On > Behalf Of *Stevan Harnad > *Sent:* Tuesday, 5 January 2016 02:24 AM > *To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > *Subject:* [GOAL] Re: Quo vadere? > > > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 6:15 PM, Christian Gutknecht < > christian.gutkne...@bluewin.ch> wrote: > > Stevan, > > > > *[ahjs] *… > > > > But I really like the idea to let researchers feel that subscription is an > outdated model. And an easy way to do that without upsetting them too much, > is to cancel subscriptions and get rid of the Big Deals. With the free > money the library then can create two kind of funds: One is the Gold OA > fund (incl. hybrid options but with a cap) and one is the fund for costs > resulting getting access to documents that are not longer available via > subscription (like costs for pay-per-view, document delivery, individual > subscription of a really important journal).. Because librarians constantly > overestimate the importance of their subscriptions and especially the Big > Deals where they buy/rent a lot of stuff that is never used by their > community. I think most libraries would find out that researchers would get > along quite well with this option > > > > Christian, I strongly suggest that you look into the actual costs of such > a proposal (replacing subscriptions by pay-to-view costs, per paper). > > > > We are in the online era, when scholars are accustomed to reaching content > immediately with one click, and browsing it to see whether it's even worth > reading. A scholar may look at dozens of papers a day this way. That's what > they do with their institutional licensed content. You are imagining > (without any data at all) that the cost of doing this via pay-per-view, at > the usual $30 or so per paper, would amount to less cost for an institution > than its current licensing costs. > > > > Please repeat this proposal once you have done the arithmetic and have the > evidence. (It won't be enough to find out the license costs and the > pay-per-view costs. You will also have to monitor the daily usage, per > discipline, of a sufficient representative sample of researchers. > > Until then, subscription cancellation is not an option for institutions > today. (But with universal immediate-deposit > <http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/04/28/inflated-subscriptions-unsustainable-harnad/> > it will be.) > > > > As Thomas mentioned it’s really easy these days to get to the papers by > simply asking the author. Also Researchgate and academia.edu close the > gap where IRs fail to provide access. > > > > The ease and immediacy of online access to which institutional authors are > now accustomed is for *licensed (+ OA) content*. Find the actual user > data for *unlicensed, non-OA* content. And prepare to discover that > copy-requests -- for which you have expressed pessimism when they are > Button-based -- may turn out to be much less immediate or reliable if they > must be mediated by email address search and waiting to see whether the > author responds then when they are requested. With immediate deposit and > the Button, the request is just one click for the user and one for the > author... > > > > *[ahjs] …* > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > >
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
