10 years of Open Access
at BioMed Central
Matthew Cockerill
Managing Director, BioMed Central
Technology changes business models
What is fundamentally different
about the Open Access publishing
business model?
Traditional research publishing
 The research community
transfers the rights to the
research to the publisher
 The publisher covers costs
by selling access to the
content
Open Access research publishing
 No barriers to access
 No exclusive rights
 Publisher receives payment for
the service of publication
About BioMed Central
 Largest publisher of peer-reviewed open
access journals
 Launched first open access journal in 2000
 Now publishes 199 OA titles
 >50,000 peer-reviewed OA articles published
 All research articles published under Creative
Commons licence
 Costs covered by 'article processing charge'
(APC)
Three key types of journal
 BMC-series (~60 titles)
–
–
–
–
–
Largely in-house editorial process
Systematic coverage of all areas of biology and medicine
Aims to publish all scientifically sound research
BMC Biology and BMC Medicine highlight top research
BMC Research Notes publishes incremental results, datasets etc.
–
–
–
–
External Editors-in-Chief
External editorial process (with option of in-house support)
Some are broad, some focus on a specific niche
Often society-affiliated
 Independent journals (~135 titles)
 Hybrid journals (~6 titles)
– In-house editorial process
– Commissioned content available to subscribers
– All research open access
BioMed Central revenue streams
 Publication fees
– From authors
– From meeting organizers
– From sponsoring organizations
 Subscription content (e.g. reviews)
 Services (e.g. Open Repository)
 Advertising / sponsorship
OA Publication Fees
Putting Open Access fees into
perspective
Top-down and bottom-up analyses
come to similar conclusion
Average publisher revenue per STM
article, under the traditional
subscription-based model, is around
£3000 ($4700)
What do OA publication fees cover?
 Open access publishing has most of the
same costs as the traditional system:
–
–
–
–
–
Editorial
Technical
Production
Customer services
Marketing (e.g. conference attendance)
OA publication fees ($US)








BioMed Central
Public Library of Science
Company of Biologists
Oxford University Press
Royal Society
Springer
Taylor & Francis
Wiley
$915-$2265
$1300-$2850
$2560
$3000
$2550-$4420
$3000
$3250
$3000
How do OA publication fees get paid?
 Authors may pay out of grant funds
 Some funders provide dedicated funds
for open access publishing costs
 Institutions may cover costs centrally
(via open access funds and/or
membership arrangements with OA
publishers)
 Some journals are run by organizations
which cover costs themselves
BioMed Central membership
 Prepay membership
– Institution pays funds into a deposit account
– Article Processing Charge is covered by funds from
account
– Discount depending on deposit amount
– Author does not have to pay
– Simplified administration/reporting
 Supporter membership
– Institutions pay a flat fee
– Authors pay a discounted Article Processing Charge
How are BioMed Central articles
paid for?
100%
80%
Discretionary waivers
60%
Low income country waiver
Promotional waiver
Full/prepay member
Individual APC (supporter)
40%
Individual APC (standard)
May-09
Mar-09
Jan-09
Nov-08
Sep-08
Jul-08
May-08
Mar-08
Jan-08
Nov-07
Sep-07
Jul-07
May-07
Mar-07
Jan-07
Nov-06
Sep-06
Jul-06
May-06
Mar-06
Jan-06
Nov-05
Sep-05
Jul-05
Mar-05
Jan-05
0%
May-05
20%
Not all publication fees come
from authors
 Author’s pay
publication
fee for
research
articles
 DFG funding
covers cost of
additional
articles
Some BioMed Central journals with
no author fees
Chinese Medicine
Chiropractic & Osteopathy
Italian Journal of Pediatrics
Journal of Biomedical Science
Journal of Brachial Plexus and Peripheral Nerve Injury
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Journal of the International AIDS Society
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and
Emergency Medicine
Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation, Therapy &
Technology
Making peer review more efficient
Peer review cascade
High
rejection rate
Moderate
rejection rate
Low
rejection rate
Advantages of peer review cascade
 Avoids delays for authors
 Avoids saddling academics with
repeated peer review of less interesting
papers
 Separates question of soundness of
research from level of interest
– Soundness determines whether to publish
– Interest determines where to publish
Increasingly widespread model




PLoS
Nature
Cell
Neuroscience Peer
Review Consortium
BioMed Central journal’s with
additional subscription content
And soon…
Examples of additional services
 A hosted digital
repository solution
 Integration ensures
articles published
in OA journals can
easily be included
Advertising
 Common question from would-be
journal editors:
“Can we support a journal entirely
with advertising?”
 Unlikely - advertising is small
fraction of revenue for BioMed
Central journals
Institutions, funders and open access
 Mandatory OA-deposit policies
from research funders
E.g. NIH, HHMI, UK PMC funder group
 Institutional OA-deposit mandates
E.g. Harvard, MIT, UCL
 Central institutional open access
funds
E.g. Nottingham, Newcastle, Calgary, Berkeley
Growth of BioMed Central
Growth in quarterly manuscipt
submissions
7000
6000
5000
Science Now
4000
Genome Biology
Independent Journals
3000
BMC Research Notes
BMC series
2000
1000
Ap
r-0
O 0
ct
-0
Ap 0
r-0
O 1
ct
-0
Ap 1
r-0
O 2
ct
-0
Ap 2
r-0
O 3
ct
-0
Ap 3
r-0
O 4
ct
-0
Ap 4
r-0
O 5
ct
-0
Ap 5
r-0
O 6
ct
-0
Ap 6
r-0
O 7
ct
-0
Ap 7
r-0
O 8
ct
-0
8
0
Which have been Biomed Central’s
most rapidly growing journals
BMC Genomics
BMC Evolutionary
Biology
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
600
500
400
300
Malaria Journal
200
100
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
350
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
300
250
Genome Biology
200
BMC Developmental
Biology
150
1000
100
800
50
250
0
600
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
200
400
150
200
100
0
50
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
0
2001
2002 2003
2004 2005 2006
2007
What do these journals have in
common?
Official Impact Factors
BioMed Central journals with official
Thomson Reuters/ISI impact factors
No. of journals
with
Impact Factor
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
‘New journals’ vs
‘Transfer journals’
BioMed Central proved the OA model
with new journal launches
The success of the model has led to
more and more journal transfers
Open Access publishing,
then and now…
2000
2009
And more…
A new industry association
Goals of OASPA
 Represents Open Access publishers
 Agree common definition of Open Access
 Establish and enforce good standards of
editorial and business practices amongst
members
 Identify guidelines and best practices for
publishers and institutions in managing
payment of publication fees
Springer’s acquisition
of BioMed Central
+
Springer acquisition FAQs
 Will BioMed Central’s policy of open access to all
research continue?
Yes – this was an obligatory condition for the deal to gain
approval by BioMed Central’s Board of Trustees
 Is BioMed Central profitable?
Springer bought BioMed Central because it is a healthy
publishing business, in a growing sector of the market
 Will BioMed Central APCs be increased to Springer
Open Choice levels?
There are no plans to change BioMed Central’s APC
pricing policy as a result of the deal
What does the acquisition mean for
BioMed Central?
 BioMed Central remains an autonomous
operating unit within Springer
 Springer’s global infrastructure and market
presence is helping BioMed Central to
expand its activities
 Springer has a wealth of experience in
society publishing
 As part of Springer, BioMed Central is
ideally placed to publish open access
society journals