>Sandy Thatcher expressed very well the fear that
>self-archivingcould lead to a "tipping point"
which could cause
>massivedisruption to the scholarly publishing system.
Sandy
>suggeststhat, even without cancellations, it is possible
that
>highlyprofitable publishers could still decide to leave
the
>business. If even a few of the large players were to
leave the
>system, Sandy argues, journals would have no where to
go, as
>university presses such as Penn State do not have the
resources
>to pick upall these journals.
Nor do even the largest presses on the scale I'm
hypothesizing.
>The silver lining in this scenario: if even a few of
the
>large,highly profitable publishers were to suddenly
decide to go
>intoanother business - then libraries and universities
would
>haveplenty of cash left over from subscription budgets
they
>could nolonger spend , and this cash would then be
available to
>helpscholars transition their journals, some through
newly
>resourceduniversity presses.
Ah, but that assumes that universities could react quickly
and
deploy resources differently in a short period of time-a
huge
assumption! One major difference between universities (even
those
that try to models themselves after corporations) and real
corporations is that the latter can move on a dime, whereas
the
latter rarely move faster than a snail's pace. Consider, for
example, how many decades it has taken to move the
tenure-and-promotion system even one inch to adapt to major
changes in the system! My worry if that, even with major
resources freed up, universities are not well organized
enough to
make the changes needed to avoid major disruption to the
system,
in the short term. And even large subscription budgets
couldn't
come close to paying the bills needed to construct the kind
of
very sophisticated technological infrastructure that
well-heeled
corporations have been able to build. So, watch that you
don't
throw out the baby with the bath water!
>It is always possible, of course, that the few very
>highlyprofitable publishers, continuing to enjoy high
profits,
>wouldnot exodus the scholarly publishing system en masse
after
>all.
But of course my hypothesis is based precisely on the
assumption
that the big publishers will-in the face of FRPAA or
something
like it-calculate that they can NOT sustain those high
profit
margins, or even margins high enough to meet their corporate
goals, and will divert their capital resources away from STM
publishing towards other types of publishing or into another
type
of business altogether.
I am also assuming that society publishers will not have
capital
resources sufficient to fill the void quickly either. After
all,
their main sources of revenue now come from membership dues
and
journal subscriptions. Dues cannot be jacked up steeply
without
causing membership defection, and journal subscription
revenues
will be just as affected by FRPAA as commercial publishers'
revenues will.
And when is the last time you saw a university make ANY
major
investment in its press?
>For more detail, please see my blogpost, Transitioning
to
>OpenAccess: Beyond Fear of Change, at: http://tinyurl.com/ygyspt
>
>Sandy Thatcher's original post to Liblicense:
>http://tinyurl.com/ynddnr
Sanford G. Thatcher, Director
Penn State University Press
University Park, PA 16802-1003
http://www.psupress.org
|