The scholarly monograph is a topic of discussion, as different stakeholders have different reasons for keeping or abandoning this particular form of publication. Texts in digital form are... Show moreThe scholarly monograph is a topic of discussion, as different stakeholders have different reasons for keeping or abandoning this particular form of publication. Texts in digital form are increasingly pervasive and pose a serious threat to the printed form. This essay aims to explore concerns from the perspectives of scholarly readers, scholarly authors, publishers of academic texts and their different models, and, finally, the perspective of libraries and consortia, to see if there is a possible future for the printed scholarly monograph. Show less
While open access publishing for journals is well established, open access monograph publishing is taking longer to gain momentum. This is in large part due to the financial challenges involved in... Show moreWhile open access publishing for journals is well established, open access monograph publishing is taking longer to gain momentum. This is in large part due to the financial challenges involved in publishing monographs. Publishers are concerned that the availability of a free open access edition will cannibalise print sales and therefore the publisher’s ability to recoup the costs involved in producing a book i.e. peer review, editing, typesetting, technological infrastructure, sales, marketing and staff. But is that really the case? Or does the availability of the open access version mean wider access to the book, all round the world and to new audiences, and in some cases increased print sales as a result of the greater visibility? This article will look at some statistics from the OAPEN-UK / Jisc project that has been investigating open access monograph publishing during the last five years. As part of its research, the project ran a pilot comparing open access monograph download figures with print sales of comparable books to assess what the effect on print sales actually is. It will also review the Knowledge Unlatched pilot, which made 28 books by a range of publishers available as open access, with some interesting results. The outcome of these pilots will be compared with UCL Press’s own experience since launching as the UK’s first fully open access university press in June 2015, along with some examples from other open access publishers. Show less
The rise of Open Access (OA) and its Gold business model – based on Article Process Charges (APC’s) – led to a new phenomenon that might be potentially damaging for the development of OA and the... Show moreThe rise of Open Access (OA) and its Gold business model – based on Article Process Charges (APC’s) – led to a new phenomenon that might be potentially damaging for the development of OA and the quality of academic publications: the predatory publisher. These publishers do not list positive peer-reviews as a criteria for their publications, but the fact that the supply side (i.e. the author, his/her institution, or a funding body) has paid for it. By taking on everything or even actively sending spam mail to academics, offering a chance to publish with them, these publishers create misconceptions about OA and, more importantly, may even devalue OA publications. The problem with modern technology is that everyone can build a website and pretend to be an OA publisher, which makes it even easier for these predatory publishers. So how to restore this trust and make sure that all OA publications are of a certain quality? Who will check the authority of these publishers, and how? Who will step up and protect authors, but also the concept of OA, from falling into the hands of these predatory publishers whose only goal it is to make money? Big OA platforms such as OAPEN Library and DOAJ only accept material that has been peer-reviewed. Others, like Jeffrey Beall, have made a blacklist of all potentially damaging publishers. In the end, a growing awareness seems to be one of the most important features to tackle this problem that is harmful on various levels. This paper will dive into the results – both positive and negative – of predatory publishers. Show less
