This section identifies the main business models currently used in open access publishing, and some of the key pros and cons of each model.These were presented at the OPERAS Conference in Athens in June 2018.
This section identifies the main business models currently used in open access publishing, and some of the key pros and cons of each model.These were presented at the OPERAS Conference in Athens in June 2018.For monographs and journals in the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (AHSS) we see a different picture.Tags: Photo Essay FamiliesThesis Writing ToolsUseful Spanish Phrases For EssaysPower Of One Film EssayDramatic Essay MarkGood Topics For Argumentative Research EssaysResearch Papers In Language Teaching And Learning
Examples of use: Meson Press, Mayfly Press, Language Science Press Pros: Such publishing ventures seek to address the issues of profit-making by commercial publishers by taking publishing back into the academic community Cons: Scale, resource, and lack of funding and publishing skills can pose a challenge to such operations Grants to launch or support new open access ventures and projects are one of the ways publishers and coalitions fund their OA activities.
Examples of use: Open Library of the Humanities, and many US initiatives who receive Andrew W.
Some publishers and publishing service companies such as Knowledge Unlatched, operate library funding schemes to secure library contributions to make books and journals available OA at the point of use.
Examples of use: Open Library of the Humanities, Open Book Publishers, Knowledge Unlatched, OAPEN Pros: integrates well with existing library purchasing workflows and distributes funds in a manner similar to subscriptions, therefore makes for an easier transition for libraries.
Article processing charges (APCs) or book processing charges (BPCs) are made to the author (or their funder or institution) to cover the publishing costs.
Different publishers seek to cover different costs, depending on their model and their other sources of income, therefore APCs/BPCs vary greatly from publisher to publisher.A large share of scholarly communication in science takes place in journal articles, mainly in Science, Technology and Medicine (STM).Accordingly, the majority of open access publications in these fields continues to be article based, many of them paid by the authors via article processing charges (APCs).This paper addresses the main business models currently used by open access publishers, with a particular focus on the situation of European publishers in the social sciences and humanities, especially monographs.What is apparent is that while the APC or hybrid model has come to dominate in OA journal publishing, OA monograph publishing in SSH is demonstrating a greater range of business models, creating a patchwork landscape.Examples of use: Commercial publishers, university presses Pros: Aids recognition of the costs involved in quality publishing Cons: Lack of funding available in AHSS, different levels of financial resource at different institutions makes for an uneven and unfair situation for academics, inefficient, high administrative burden for institutions and publishers, additional burden for academics Publishers (or service providers) make one online version free, and charge for other formats and additional functionalities, e.g. Examples of use: Open Edition, OECD, Open Book Publishers Pros: The Freemium model shows some promise and can provide revenue for the publisher or the service provider, to cover all or some of the costs Cons: This model is still somewhat experimental and has not been proven at scale By joining forces, institutions and organisations can bring different skills and funding sources together to boost OA publishing.This can be at subject level, library level, national level, and international level e.g. Examples of use: Lever Press (USA), TOME – Towards an Open Monograph Environment (USA) Pros: Bringing together participants with a common interest is an excellent way of sharing services and infrastructure for the common good, of raising funds for a larger-scale collective project, or of bringing together stakeholders from different parts of the academy to find common solutions.As described in the introduction, many publishers and service providers use a mixture of these models in an effort to raise enough funds to cover their operating costs.These models also include ‘in-kind’ support in the form of shared resources at an institution such as professional services (human resources, finance, IT, marketing and communications), use of institutional repository as platform, library staff, and scholarly communications services.The models identified include library crowdsourcing or partnership subsidy, institutional crowdfunding, book processing charges (BPCs) paid by the author or their institution or funder, grants, national and EU funding, revenue from commercial activities such as print sales or service provision, community volunteering (replacing paid labour costs) and institutional funding.Several open access publishers use a combination of these models.