APPENDIX 111
Memorandum from the UK Higher and Further
Education Funding Councils' Joint Information Systems Committee
(JISC)
INTRODUCTION
The Joint Information Systems Committee is funded
by the UK Higher and Further Education Funding Councils. The JISC's
mission is to provide world class leadership in the innovative
use of Information and Communication Technologies to support education
and research.
The Information and Communication Technology
(ICT) requirements of colleges and universities are becoming more
demanding as staff and students increasingly exploit technology
to support modern ways of working. JISC's vision is one of ubiquitous
and reliable access to an integrated information and communication
environment, so that every userlearners, researchers, teachers
or administratorsis able to enjoy a world class infrastructure
provision in support of their work and study.
The JISC provides ICT infrastructure and development
programmes to support education and research. It is uniquely placed
to promote the joining up of activities to help achieve its vision.
JISC can help to bring cohesion across the education spectrum:
colleges, universities and wider non-compulsory education, so
that practitioners and students will be able to access materials
from different sectors of education, thus promoting a broader
understanding of subjects. The licensing terms and pricing of
publishers' current policies act as a barrier to achieving this
vision.
A summary of our response is below in the form
of an executive summary followed by a more detailed response to
the relevant questions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
What impact do publishers' current policies on
pricing and provision of scientific journals, particularly "big
deal schemes", have on libraries and the teaching and research
communities they serve?
For many years the increase in journal
prices above normal inflation has led to a reduction in the funds
available for other library purchases, particularly the provision
of undergraduate textbooks (please see chart attached as APPENDIX
1).
The "big deal" purchasing
schemes have led to a further distortion in library purchases,
increasing expenditure with the major international publishers
and reducing expenditure with smaller publishers.
The teaching and research communities
have been faced with regular cancellations of journals from smaller
publishers and restrictions upon the use of textbooks by students
in order to maintain the collections of journals available in
"big deal" packages.
As a result of high journal prices,
the potential impact of publicly-funded research is being restricted
both in the UK and abroad.
The long-term effect upon teaching
and research of restrictions on the journals and books available
to be read is difficult to predict but reading is being determined
by ease of access rather than by academic need.
Concern about the effect upon teaching
and research of the current structure of the journal publishing
industry has led to international initiatives such as SPARC, SPARC
Europe and the Budapest Open Access Initiative.
The JISC view is not only of the
problems with the current journal publishing model but also of
the opportunity to improve access to journal literature, using
the electronic networks to make research reports readily-available
to users at every educational level.
What action should Government, academic institutions
and publishers be taking to promote a competitive market in scientific
publications?
A competitive market in scientific
publications requires the availability of several sources for
the supply of the text of journal articles at differing prices.
At present all sources of supply
for published journal articles are controlled by publishers who
set the prices and licensing conditions for end-users, whether
the article is supplied directly by the publisher or through an
intermediary.
Publishers exercise this control
over supply through the transfer of copyright from the author
to the publisher.
Some academic institutions have copyright
policies recommending that academic staff should retain certain
rights and such policies should be encouraged.
When public funding of research results
in publication, publishers could be required to permit the posting
of a copy of the publication to a publicly-available web-site.
A Government statement in support
of open access to publications arising from publicly-funded research
would encourage the development of alternatives to the current
subscription model for peer-reviewed academic journals.
The development of alternative models
would provide much-needed competition within the present structure
for journal supply and also provide an opportunity for improved
access to the results of publicly-funded research with greater
public awareness of the value of scientific research.
The role of learned societies in
supporting scholarship in particular disciplines should be considered
in the development of new publication models.
The contribution that both commercial
and society publishers make to UK academic and economic success
can be maintained under an open access model.
What are the consequences of increasing numbers
of open-access journals, for example for the operation of the
Research Assessment Exercise and other selection processes? Should
the Government support such a trend and, if so, how?
In principle the Research Assessment
Exercise (RAE) treats publications by academics in peer-reviewed
open access journals in the same way as publications in peer-reviewed
subscription journals.
At present there are insufficient
open access journals for publications from those journals to be
noticeable in the RAE.
Open access journals will feature
more prominently in the RAE as they become more numerous and acquire
high impact factor ratings.
A statement of Government support
for the even-handed treatment of peer-reviewed open access and
subscription journals would ease fears by academics that publication
in open access journals will harm their opportunities for research
funding.
The maintenance of the quality of
academic publication is essential but greater flexibility in publication
models may encourage the development of new ways of looking at
quality assessment.
How effectively are the Legal Deposit Libraries
making available non-print scientific publications to the research
community, and what steps should they be taking in this respect?
The Legal Deposit Libraries welcome
the deposit of non-print publications.
They are developing systems to improve
access to these publications.
The principal concern lies in the
cost of preservation of non-print publications, preservation which
is essential to ensure access for future generations of students
and researchers.
What impact will trends in academic journal publishing
have on the risks of scientific fraud and malpractice?
Academic journal publishing is currently
faced with three types of fraud and malpractice: illegal copying,
plagiarism and unauthorised changes to the publication.
Illegal copying ceases to be a problem
if publications are funded as part of the research process, enabling
open access for users across the world.
Plagiarism is no more serious a problem
for digital publications than for paper publications and easier
to detect through the use of technology.
Unauthorised changes can also be
detected through the electronic comparison of two texts and legal
action taken by authors as a breach of copyright.
Legal action of any kind in relation
to scientific publications is extremely rare and self-policing
by the scientific community resolves most problems.
DETAILED RESPONSE
1. What impact do publishers' current policies
on pricing and provision of scientific journals, particularly
"big deal schemes", have on libraries and the teaching
and research communities they serve?
1.1 For many years the increase in journal
prices above normal inflation has led to a reduction in the funds
available for other library purchases, particularly the provision
of undergraduate textbooks. The chart attached as an Appendix
shows the very substantial increases in journal prices, the growing
expenditure on journals by UK university libraries, and the declining
expenditure on monographs by the same libraries over a period
of ten years. It will be evident that libraries have not been
able to maintain their journal collections despite a higher expenditure
on journals, and that their purchase of monographs has fallen
even further behind the purchase of journals. As a result of these
trends, UK students and research staff today have poorer library
provision than ten years ago despite an increase in funding. It
should be noted that the UK situation is mirrored in countries
across the world, as libraries in even the wealthiest countries
have not been able to keep up with the increase in journal prices.
1.2 The major international publishers have
responded to this situation by offering "big deal" purchasing
schemes containing a wider range of journal titles. These packages
of journals have led to a higher level of expenditure with certain
publishers and have been justified on the basis of a lower cost
per title. The deals have led to a further distortion in library
purchases, increasing expenditure with the major international
publishers and reducing expenditure with smaller publishers. An
analysis of journal expenditure in Scottish university libraries
in 2002 showed that 64% expenditure was going to 10 publishers,
leaving 36% spent with approximately 3,000 publishers[439].
While the effect of these "big deals" has been to increase
market share for the major publishers, the small publishersoften
publishing a single journal of considerable academic valuehave
faced a decline in subscriptions.
1.3 The teaching and research communities
have been faced with regular cancellations of journals from smaller
publishers and restrictions upon the use of textbooks by students
in order to maintain the collections of journals available in
"big deal" packages. While library users have had more
journal titles available to them as a result of these deals, it
is not clear that the additional titles have been more valuable
to teaching and research than the titles from smaller publishers
cancelled to pay for the "big deals".
1.4 As a result of high journal prices,
the potential impact of publicly-funded research is being restricted
both in the UK and abroad. Within the UK knowledge transferparticularly
to FE institutions, schools and socially-disadvantaged groupsdepends
on the ready availability of academic content, and high journal
prices form a barrier to availability. The public understanding
of science is also distorted by what members of the public can
afford to read. Outside the UK, awareness of the vital research
conducted by publicly-funded institutions is restricted by what
can be afforded, and benefits to individual and community well-being
are not being realised.
1.5 The long-term effect upon teaching and
research of restrictions on the journals and books available to
be read is difficult to predict but reading is being determined
by ease of access rather than by academic need. Students and academic
staff use those journals most readily available, normally those
titles to which their university or college library has a subscription.
The inter-library loan system and document delivery from the British
Library continue to provide valuable routes to journal articles
not available in the user's "home" library but the time
taken to obtain an article and the cost make these routes unsuitable
for most needs. If students and academic staff are largely reading
those journals available in their "home" libraryie
those available from a reducing number of publisherswhat
will be the long-term effect upon scholarship? The answer to that
question is not clear but changes in the journals market could
have educational consequences.
1.6 Concern about the effect upon teaching
and research of the current structure of the journal publishing
industry has led to international initiatives such as SPARC[440],
SPARC Europe and the Budapest Open Access Initiative[441].
Organisations and individuals in the UK have supported these developments
and have welcomed the statement by the Wellcome Trust as an early
sign of the recognition by funding agencies of the opportunity
for change in journal publishing.
1.7 The JISC view is not only of the problems
with the current journal publishing model but also of the opportunity
to improve access to journal literature, using the electronic
networks to make research reports readily-available to users at
every educational level. It is difficult to see how publishers'
current policies could enable a quantum leap in accessibility
without a quantum leap in expenditure from the public purse.
1.8 Finally the policy of publishers licensing
access to e-journals is a significant shift from the print environment.
Subscribers to e-journals, particularly academic libraries whose
core business depends on being able to cite and ensure future
access to published works, are now deeply concerned with guaranteeing
provision for archiving and continuing access to licensed e-publications.
Further consideration of this issue is given in our response to
question 4.
2. What action should Government, academic
institutions and publishers be taking to promote a competitive
market in scientific publications?
2.1 A competitive market in scientific publications
requires the availability of several sources for the supply of
the text of journal articles at differing prices. Each journal
article is unique in content and a new competitor for the supply
of a journal article has to have the right to supply that unique
content.
2.2 At present all sources of supply for
published journal articles are controlled by publishers who set
the prices and licensing conditions for end-users, whether the
article is supplied directly by the publisher or through an intermediary.
Any new supplier entering the market as a supplier of journal
articles already published has to seek the permission of the primary
publishers. This situation militates against effective competition.
2.3 Publishers exercise this control over
supply through the assignment of copyright from the author to
the publisher. Authors submitting manuscripts to most academic
journals are presented with a copyright transfer form for signature
before the publisher agrees to publish the article. Some authors
are able to negotiate changes to the copyright transfer agreement
but most authors are in a weak negotiating position, particularly
if they wish to be published in the high-profile journals.
2.4 Some academic institutions have copyright
policies recommending that academic staff should retain certain
rights and such policies should be encouraged. Most academic institutions
do not exercise their right to employer's copyright, wishing to
leave copyright with their academic staff, but increasingly universities
and colleges safeguard the use for internal purposes of journal
articles written by members of staff, requiring authors to amend
publishers' agreements if necessary. One key right universities
may wish to retain is to post to the institutional web-site a
copy of any journal article written by a member of staff.
2.5 When public funding of research results
in publication, publishers could be required to permit the posting
of a copy of the publication to a publicly-available web-site.
Some publishers already permit this right (various publishers'
policies are accessible on the web-site http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ls/disresearch/romeo/index.html)
but many do not. Government could require this right to be exercised
as a condition of public funding. If adopted, the posting to a
publicly-available web-site would introduce competition into journal
supply, users choosing either the copy on the publicly-available
web-site or the copy to which the publisher has added value, such
as links to related material.
2.6 A Government statement in support of
open access to publications arising from publicly-funded research
would encourage the development of alternatives to the current
subscription model for peer-reviewed academic journals. Many individuals
in the academic and publishing communities can see that the current
subscription model is becoming unsustainable as the spiral of
higher prices followed by cancellations tightens. The JISC is
already supporting a number of initiatives to develop alternative
models and Government support for such work would encourage other
organisations to invest in new business structures. Competition
could be introduced into journal publishing through varying publication-payments,
some publishers charging a higher publication-payment for a higher
level of service. At present there is no link between payment
and service to authors, removing effective competition on price.
2.7 The development of alternative models
would provide much-needed competition within the present structure
for journal supply and also provide an opportunity for improved
access to the results of publicly-funded research with greater
public awareness of the value of scientific research. Whereas
the subscription model places a price-barrier in the way of increased
public use of scientific publications, the open access publishing
model is designed to encourage widespread use of publications.
This type of model will become essential if the JISC and other
public agencies are to extend the availability of academic content
beyond the traditional university libraries into college and school
classrooms. Greater availability of scientific publications will
increase access to knowledge and taxpayers' awareness of the benefits
of academic research.
2.8 The role of learned societies in supporting
scholarship in particular disciplines should be considered in
the development of new publication models. There is no reason
in principle why learned societies should not continue to use
publication income under an open access model for academic purposes
as they do under a subscription model, but the transition from
one model to another has to be considered carefully if the society's
activities are not to be put at risk.
2.9 The contribution that both commercial
and society publishers make to UK academic and economic success
can be maintained under an open access model. The UK's publishing
industry is recognised as being of high quality, and quality will
ensure its success in a change to funding as part of the research
process. Authors and their funding agencies will continue to wish
to be published in the UK's prestigious journals. If UK publishers
are under threat, it is through maintenance of the current business
model which relies upon ever-declining subscriptions.
3. What are the consequences of increasing
numbers of open-access journals, for example for the operation
of the Research Assessment Exercise and other selection processes?
Should the Government support such a trend and, if so, how?
3.1 In principle the Research Assessment
Exercise (RAE) treats publications by academics in peer-reviewed
open access journals in the same way as publications in peer-reviewed
subscription journals. The HE Funding Councils provide guidance
to the academic subject panels reviewing the publications submitted,
and this guidance makes the Councils' view clear that the quality
of the publication rather than its format is the key factor. However,
it is understood that some subject panels favour publication in
recognised established journals and most open access journals
are new publications.
3.2 At present there are insufficient open
access journals for publications from those journals to be noticeable
in the RAE. There are several hundred peer-reviewed open access
journals (listed at www.doaj.org) by comparison with several thousand
subscription-based journals. The JISC arrangement with BioMed
Central for 2003-04 is proving successful in increasing the open
access publication opportunities for UK researchers, with an average
of 35 articles submitted per month. Quality has been maintained
under this arrangement, with a 43% rejection rate of articles
submitted. The JISC is providing further funding for open access
journals from 2004-06 in order to increase the availability of
UK scientific publications and Government support for such initiatives
would encourage publisher participation.
3.3 Open access journals will feature more
prominently in the RAE as they become more numerous and acquire
high impact factor ratings. Open access journals have yet to acquire
"critical mass" but as the number of articles on open
access increases, they will appear in RAE submissions. Open access
articles are generally read and cited more frequently than subscription-based
articles, and this higher use will feed through into high impact
factor ratings if academic quality is maintained.
3.4 A statement of Government support for
the even-handed treatment of peer-reviewed open access and subscription
journals would ease fears by academics that publication in open
access journals will harm their opportunities for research funding.
The inertia in the journal publishing structure is due to the
relationship between publication in well-established journals
and the academic reward system. It is difficult for a young academic
to take the risk of publishing outside the traditional journals
no matter how high the quality of alternative journals may be.
3.5 The maintenance of the quality of academic
publication is essential but greater flexibility in publication
models may encourage the development of new ways of looking at
quality assessment. For example, the higher use of open access
publications may enable experimentation with online continuous
review of publications by a wider group of peers rather than a
small panel of reviewers.
4. How effectively are the Legal Deposit
Libraries making available non-print scientific publications to
the research community, and what steps should they be taking in
this respect?
4.1 The Legal Deposit Libraries welcome
the deposit of non-print publications. The recent legislation
will greatly assist the HE and FE academic communities in providing
a framework for long-term preservation of books and journals in
electronic format. However it should be noted that a substantial
part of the electronic research literature used by the UK teaching
and research community will be of international origin and outside
the remit of the new legislation. Significant uncertainties still
exist over guaranteeing the archiving and long-term access to
this material. JISC has commissioned a study on the archiving
of e-journals which highlights the need for archiving with trusted
third parties to be agreed between publishers and universities.
4.2 The Legal Deposit Libraries are developing
systems to improve access to these publications. The SUNCAT Project
funded by the JISC will enable particular journals to be located
and the British Library is expanding its use of electronic document
delivery. A national strategy to ensure that the research community
benefits from such systems and services will be developed as part
of the Research Libraries Network supported by the HE Funding
Councils. There is also scope to build on current pilot projects
to develop our digital infrastructure and collaborative activities
in areas such as electronic theses, archiving of web-resources,
and linking of publications to original primary research data.
4.3 The principal concern lies in the cost
of preservation of non-print publications, preservation which
is essential to ensure access for future generations of students
and researchers. It is known that some electronic publications
have already been lost by agencies outside the UK due to inadequate
procedures for their preservation, and while the UK is ahead of
many countries in developing structures to ensure digital preservation
(the creation of the Digital Curation Centre being a good example),
the costs have not been built into library budgets. The volumes
of published material (both print and electronic) continue to
increase. This together with rapid price inflation places library
budgets under severe pressure. There is a case therefore for specific
additional funding for libraries to address long-term access and
preservation of electronic publications.
5. What impact will trends in academic journal
publishing have on the risks of scientific fraud and malpractice?
5.1 Academic journal publishing is currently
faced with three types of fraud and malpractice: illegal copying,
plagiarism and unauthorised changes to the publication. Illegal
copying is not a major problem within the UK but UK publishers
do lose potential revenue through large-scale illegal copying
of their publications by individuals and institutions outside
the UK. Plagiarism is of great concern to the UK academic community,
as are unauthorised changes to the text of electronic publications,
although the latter is not believed to be a significant problem.
5.2 Illegal copying ceases to be a problem
if publications are funded as part of the research process, enabling
open access for users across the world. Open access removes the
need for publishers to maintain expensive security controls to
identify illegal copying when it occurs.
5.3 Plagiarism is no more serious a problem
for digital publications than for paper publications and is easier
to detect through the use of technology. The JISC offers a Plagiarism
Advisory Service to assist institutions in identifying plagiarism
by students and academic staff. When plagiarism is detected most
UK universities and colleges take disciplinary action against
the individual concerned.
5.4 Unauthorised changes can also be detected
through the electronic comparison of two texts and legal action
taken by authors as a breach of copyright. Digital signatures
and fingerprints can be used to confirm the provenance and integrity
of electronic documents. Scientific fraud and malpractice of this
kind is not believed to be common and academics working with colleagues
in the same subject discipline are able to identify major breaches
of copyright.
5.5 Legal action of any kind in relation
to scientific publications is extremely rare and self-policing
by the scientific community resolves most problems. Even publishers
rarely take legal action as most cases of malpractice are resolved
by direct contact with the individuals concerned.
February 2004
439 Confidential survey conducted for the Society
of College National and University Libraries (SCONUL). Back
440
SPARC is the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition,
www.arl.org/sparc/ and SPARC Europe is supported by the JISC Back
441
The Budapest Open Access Initiative www.soros.org/openaccess/
is an initiative of the Open Society Institute. Back
|