TRENDS IN E-PUBLISHING
Frederick J. Friend
Director Scholarly Communication
University College London
f.friend@ucl.ac.uk
www.ucl.ac.uk/scholarly-communication/
Change is happening in both journal and book
publishing!
 All major publishers now make content available electronically,
although print format still commonplace
 Print likely to persist longer for books than for journals (unless
move to break up books into chapters accelerates)
 Peer review and copyright still perceived to be important in
electronic environment
 Availability of electronic format leading to changes in business
relationships between authors and publishers, between publishers
and agents/aggregators, between publishers and librarians and
between publishers and readers
 Parallel changes in relationships between other stakeholders in
scholarly communication - e.g. between authors and employers and
between librarians and users
New initiatives reflecting changes in
relationships




Author-driven initiatives
Commercially-driven initiatives
Librarian-driven initiatives
Collaborative initiatives
Author-driven initiatives
 E-print services : Los Alamos, PubMedCentral, etc. (aim to
supplement conventional publication and increase access)
 Self-archiving : e-prints.org software (Steven Harnad), Free Online
Scholarship Movement (Peter Suber) (aim to open access to journal
literature by freeing authors from publishers’ monopoly)
 Influencing commercial publishers: Public Library of Science (aim to
use author-power to make commercial publications freely available)
Commercially-driven initiatives
 BioMed Central (“immediate free access to peer-reviewed
biomedical research” using new model to cover publication costs)
 CrossRef and publisher-linking services (aim to give better value
from commercial publication by linking to related content)
 New aggregation services (aim to provide access to wide range of
content using “one-stop shop” principle)
 New e-book companies (aim to change business models and access
routes to monograph literature)
Librarian-driven initiatives
 Consortia (aim to bring about change in business models - e.g.
ICOLC “preferred practices”)
 Projects - e.g. digitisation (aim to create new content in electronic
format)
 Lobbying on copyright (aims to raise awareness amongst authors
and to protect fair use)
Collaborative projects
 SPARC (Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition)
programmes involve authors, publishers and librarians
www.arl.org/sparc/
 Open Archives Initiative also involves various stakeholders
www.openarchives.org
SPARC programmes
 SPARC Alternatives programme: Supports lower-cost, directly
competitive alternatives to high-priced scientific, technical, or
medical journals in important fields (e.g. Organic letters)
 SPARC Leading Edge programme: Supports ventures that obtain
competitive advantage through technology use or innovative
business models, and/or address the information needs of an
emerging or fast-growing STM field (e.g. New journal of physics)
 SPARC Scientific Communities programme: Supports development
of non-profit portals that serve the needs of a discrete scientific
community by aggregating peer-reviewed research and other
content (e.g. BioOne)
SPARC Europe
 Before SPARC Europe was formed, SPARC staff had already formed
good working relationships with European librarians and publishers
 European activities became so important that they needed a
separate focus
 Financial support for SPARC coming mainly from US while benefits
world-wide
 JISC, SCONUL and CURL arranged meeting to gauge support for
SPARC Europe office
 LIBER became umbrella organization for SPARC Europe, with
funding provided by organizations across Europe
 Managed by SPARC Europe Steering Committee
 SPARC Europe Director to be appointed shortly
SPARC achievements
 Reduction in price of journals when a SPARC alternative is
established (shows benefit of competition)
 Savings for libraries even when library subscribes to both original
journal and SPARC alternative
 No sacrifice of academic quality: Organic Letters has exceeded
Tetrahedron Letters, the main commercial competitor, in impact
factor according to the 2000 ISI Journal Citation Reports
 “Create Change” and “Declaring Independence” have raised
awareness of scholarly communication issues in many universities
 Several editorial boards have left high-cost publishers
Open Archives Initiative
 Mission statement : “The Open Archives Initiative develops and
promotes interoperability standards that aim to facilitate the
efficient dissemination of content. The Open Archives Initiative has
its roots in an effort to enhance access to e-print archives as a
means of increasing the availability of scholarly communication...
The fundamental technological framework and standards that are
developing to support this work are, however, independent of the
both the type of content offered and the economic mechanisms
surrounding that content, and promise to have much broader
relevance in opening up access to a range of digital materials.”
 People involved in OAI come from a wide variety of information
backgrounds
Conclusions
 Technological changes in publishing and in access to information
are leading to changes in relationships and business models
 Many different forms of new relationships and new business models
are being explored by all stakeholders in the information world
 Some will succeed and others will fail
 Those working in a collaborative way, or at least taking into account
the interests of a variety of stakeholders, are most likely to succeed