APPENDIX 88
Memorandum from the Royal Astronomical
Society
INTRODUCTION
The Royal Astronomical Society (RAS) has the
aim, as expressed in its charter, of "the encouragement and
promotion of astronomy". Those aims have been extended to
embrace geophysics, solar and solar-terrestrial physics, and planetary
sciences (as well as the `new astronomies', such as astro-particle
physics, astrobiology, etc.), and are pursued through a range
of activities, including:
the publication of astronomical and
geophysical research, in the RAS's journals;
regular meetings, in London and elsewhere;
the award of modest grants in support
of research and study;
educational activities at all levels;
and
the maintenance of a comprehensive
reference library
The membership consists of Fellows and Associates.
Fellowship brings many benefits, and is open to any person over
the age of eighteen whose application is acceptable to the Society;
the Fellowship consists of primarily professional astronomers
and geophysicists, based in the UK and elsewhere, with a significant
number of students, advanced amateur astronomers, and others with
an interest in the geo- and astro-sciences.
The following evidence consists of two parts:
first an explicit response to the questions asked by the Committee,
and second a short essay summarising the Society's perspective
on the current state of, and good practice in, scientific publishing.
PART 1: RESPONSE
TO THE
COMMITTEE'S
QUESTIONS
Q1. 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?
A key structural feature of the market for scientific
journals is that libraries have limited budgets for journal subscriptions.
Thus the range of journals purchased by libraries is sensitive
to marginal changes in subscription costs and is usually reviewed
each year. Some publishers have been exploiting this feature by
offering "big deals" that offer a range of journals
in a single bundle with guaranteed prices several years ahead,
but lock libraries into purchases over those several years (thus
excluding the publisher's journals from these annual reviews).
For some libraries this can be cost-effective, but for others
can lead to a situation in which they have to cut purchases of
non-deal journals regarded as essential by their users. This problem
is now recognised in the library and research communities and
the ensuing debate is generating opposition to the continuation
of such deals. We expect that this debate will continue and that,
as a consequence, the take-up of big deal will be restricted to
those institutions for whom it offers real benefits. Ultimately
this is an issue for library management to choose between the
flexibility to manage their purchases year-on-year and the financial
benefits of the big deal.
What action should Government, academic institutions
and publishers be taking to promote a competitive market in scientific
publications?
The market in scientific publications is a global
market in which journal quality, not cost, is the key driver.
Scientists want to publish in high-quality journals with world-wide
distribution as that gives the greatest visibility for their results.
To maintain and promote competition on quality it is important
to raise awareness in the research community at both group and
individual level. The research community are the players who drive
the quality of scientific publishingas authors, reviewers,
editors and readersbut often have only a hazy perception
of their key role. Government and academic institutions should
encourage activities that raise researchers' awareness of their
role in scientific publishing, eg training on the nature of the
publication process (including IPR issues) and encouraging researchers
to participate as reviewers and editors. The scientific societies
can make a major contribution to this process by engaging their
members in the debate about scientific publishing and by intervening
in the market to promote quality, eg through existing and new
publications. Such actions are a natural part of the societies'
role to promote their science.
It is also important to consider the role of
financial issues as a basis for development of the market, eg
the ability to invest in new journals (as new scientific subjects
emerge), in electronic publishing and in value-added services
that can be built on electronic publishing, eg access to cross-references,
citation searches and data. Commercial publishers can play an
important role here as they have good access to capital resources
needed to develop these services. But to provide the long-term
solutions needed to advance science they must work with the scientific
community. A key issue for the latter is inter-operability or
open standardsthe ability to link electronic services provided
by different organisations. Publishers should work together to
promote such inter-operabilitythe CrossRef initiative [http://www.crossref.org]
is a good example of what can be done.
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?
R3. The bodies that assess research output (eg
through the RAE and Research Council grant reports) need to monitor
the development of both open-access journals (and other journals)
in order to be able to judge whether papers have been published
in high quality journals. This judgement will need to be tailored
to each area of science by the panel assessing that area. In parallel
authors need to be aware that their choice of journals for publication
will influence how assessment bodies judge those publications.
This can be addressed as part of the training discussed in R2.
We believe that Government should not seek to
promote particular models of journal operation, but rather it
promote the concept underlying open accessnamely that there
should be widespread dissemination of scientific papers. This
is a must for authors (especially young authors) as it ensures
that their work is known to and considered by their peers. Thus
the Government should encourage competition amongst current business
models, including open-access, to see which can best achieve that
dissemination. We believe that the present open-access model will
have to evolve to allow a range of solutions while maintaining
its underlying concept of maximum dissemination. These are likely
to include solutions similar to the present RAS business model
where the scientific society runs the editorial process while
publishing is contracted out to a commercial partner thus giving
access to the management skills and capital resources that this
partner can provide. It is central to this solution that the society
is the owner of the journal.
To encourage competition amongst the current
business models, the Government could ask the holders of IPR on
scientific publications to make a clear and public statement of
the purpose for which they hold the IPR and the value that they
drive from it. Authors asked to transfer IPR to these holders
should be in a position to assess whether they find this acceptable.
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?
In our experience, the use of these Libraries
as a source of journal articles for the mainstream research community
(universities, public and private sector research institutes)
has declined significantly in recent years. They may still be
an important source for researchers outside that mainstream.
What impact will trends in academic journal publishing
have on the risks of scientific fraud and malpractice
The present trends will have no adverse impact
if present methods to mitigate this risk are maintained and developed.
The key safeguards against fraud and malpractice include: (a)
rigorous peer review (which includes checks on the consistency
and novelty of results), and (b) the tradition of spirited debate
within the scientific community through which all scientists can
expect their results to be challenged and require open and transparent
justification. Electronic publishing has the potential to improve
such checks by encouraging authors to make their data and detailed
analyses available on-line through links from published papers.
This greatly extends the ability of the community to carry out
both formal and informal peer review and is a development that
should be strongly encouraged.
PART 2: A SOCIETY
PERSPECTIVE ON
SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL
AND MEDICAL
(STM) PUBLISHING: "GOOD
PRACTICE" AT
THE ROYAL
ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
1. Publishing is a core activity for most,
if not all, learned and professional Societies; it lies at the
heart of their mission. These Societies developed as those working
in the field concerned recognised their common interest. Meetings
that began as relatively informal discussions led to the establishment
of organisations as it became clear that what was being discussed
was worth recording and publishing for the benefit of those unable
to present in person. This process, which still occurs today,
led naturally to the development of learned publications. Learned
Societies' involvement in STM publishing arises because it is
central to the organisational mission to advance the respective
field of learning.
2. As practiced by Societies such as ours,
the primary functions of STM publishing are to inform those active
(or aspiring to be active) in the field of current results and
developments, and to act as a repository of what has already been
learned. For both purposes, it is important that STM journals
are widely distributed and easily accessible to interested readers.
It also follows that the exercise of some form of quality control
over what is published is required; to that end, the system of
peer review was established and has been widely adopted. Peer
review does not, as is sometimes claimed, ensure that all that
is published is "correct"; rather, it ensures that the
literature is of value to its users, as a clear statement of current
thinking, free of obvious error, insignificant ephemera or excessive
duplication. Peer review also seeks to ensure that the originators
of ideas are given due credit. Learned and professional Societies
are well suited to supervising this process, being independent
of government and commercial interests. From this perspective,
the question around which recent debate revolves is, at its heart,
how best to cover the costs involved in the processes of peer
review, article preparation and distribution.
THE SOCIETY
MODEL OF
STM PUBLISHING
3. Traditionally, institutional libraries
act as proxy users, and their organisational subscriptions are
in effect pooled by Society publishers to provide a steady base
of revenues to cover the bulk of costs. The objective of ensuring
that journals are widely distributed and their content easily
available to interested parties has been addressed primarily by
setting subscription prices at a point intended to maximise circulation
without exposing the Society to excessive risk. Additional copies
are made available to members of the Society (and often, members
of related Societies) at low prices (often, near or even below
marginal cost), and to the libraries of key institutions that
cannot otherwise afford them at suitably reduced prices (not infrequently,
gratis). To further extend the reach of individual articles, offprints
are printed and distributed through the Society or its agents
at prices commensurate with the cost of providing that service,
and provided to authors, to allow them to respond to the requests
of colleagues. Contributions to costs are also raised, to an extent
that varies considerably between countries and disciplines, from
authors (especially where special services such as the reproduction
of colour figures are requested), from interested third party
sponsors such as government or industry, and where considered
necessary or desirable by the membership, from Society reserves.
This long-standing model has proved unexpectedly robust in the
face of the upheavals arising from electronic distribution. The
main modifications have been associated with the development of
searching and indexing systems associated with delivery of content,
and that the distribution of offprints has been replaced by informal
dissemination via the Internet.
4. We cannot over-emphasize the role of
Societies' memberships in maintaining their journals' focus on
the key issues of wide distribution, accessibility and user value.
The memberships are composed of both authors and readers, and,
in many cases, other members of the relevant STM community who,
whilst they do not use the journals routinely, appreciate the
value of this activity. Where journals are fully controlled by
Societies, those responsible for its publishing activities are
under constant pressure to develop circulation and minimise prices.
Within the RAS, the Council itself takes the final decisions on
journal pricing. Discussion of these issues is invariably lively
and well-informed, because the scientists of which that body is
composed include not only authors and readers, editors and reviewers,
but those involved in the administration of their employing organisations
with responsibility for setting or disbursing the library or research
budgets that finance journal charges. Some members act in all
these roles, so have a very clear perspective on the publishing
process. This strong and very valuable feedback mechanism is unique
the Society publishing model and provides its special strength.
It is no accident that most of the top-ranking, widely-circulated
STM journals are owned by Societies, or that the aggregate value
of such journals to the community, even when expressed in the
simplest cost-per-page terms, is substantially higher than those
of journals controlled by commercial publishers.
5. The so-called "crisis in journals
publishing" is widely described as the long-term consequence
of the establishment of many niche journals from the 1960s onwards.
In many cases, commercial publishers responded to the requirements
of emerging disciplines more quickly than did existing Societies.
Library budgets expanded rapidly so that institutions could acquire
access to the full range of research results on offer. Such expansion
could not continue indefinitely, and during the 1990s, the rate
of growth of library budgets began to be restricted. Librarians
cancelled subscriptions to those journals they considered less
valuable, and some smaller publishers (both commercial and non-profit)
found themselves in financial difficulties. Commercial publishers
assembled large portfolios of titles through takeovers, most notably
beneath the Reed-Elsevier imprimatur, and this, plus the low marginal
costs associated with electronic publishing, has enabled them
to offer the "Big Deal"access to a wide range
of additional titles at low cost in return for a long-term commitment
to maintain existing subscriptions. Librarians find themselves
forced to choose between maintaining and extending their range
of subscriptions through the Big Deal, and giving up subscriptions
to important serials elsewhere in their collections. This is placing
at risk some journals that are not part of the Big Deal or similar
packages. We do not demur from this analysis. However, we are
conscious that the Big Deal is not the mere exercise of monopoly
powerwe accept that some librarians find that the value
achieved for their institutions by adding a wide range of new
titles at small cost more than outweighs the value lost by giving
up some non-Big-Deal journals. Rather, it is the consequence of
complex structural issues within the STM marketplace.
6. The Big Deal and similar offers have
been enabled by development of electronic distribution systems
via the Internet, which reduce the marginal cost of servicing
an additional subscription almost to nil. However, this capability
is not uniquely available to commercial publishers, and it is
being exploited by forward-looking Society publishers. Many Society
publishers have made electronic access to their journals available
to members at low cost; in the case of the RAS, free of charge.
This is a more substantial benefit than might at first appear.
Electronic access is generally offered to institutional subscribers
on the basis of internet address; to access the journal, the address
of the computer used must be within the range owned by the subscribing
institution. Individual password-based access makes the journal
available to the Society member from any computer, for example,
from her home computer or whilst visiting an institution which
is not subscribed.
RAS PUBLISHING
7. The Royal Astronomical Society (RAS)
owns and controls three journals, The Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society (MN), Geophysical Journal International (GJI),
and Astronomy & Geophysics (A&G). GJI is co-owned by the
German Geophysical Society. MN and GJI are leading primary research
journals in astronomy and geophysics respectively. A&G is
a "news and reviews" journal aimed at professional workers
in those fields; it is distributed to all members without additional
charge, and is listed in the Science Citation Index. Peer review
and acceptance of articles for publication in all three is managed
entirely by members and staff of the Society. Production, delivery,
marketing, subscription maintenance &c are contracted out,
presently and through much of the journals' recent history, to
the Blackwell organisation. Academic standards are of the highest
levels. Throughout, authors receive considerable assistance to
help them present the results of their research effectively, and
the standard of production of both paper and electronic materials
is extremely high. Although the number of primary journals is
small, their volume (12,500 pages per annum for MN and 4000 for
GJI) and status are such that this constitutes a science publishing
operation of moderate economic size and high scientific impact.
8. Publishing policy is set by the RAS Council,
which has consistently taken pricing decisions in respect of the
two primary research journals consistent with the principle of
maximising circulation without exposing the Society to significant
risk. In cash terms, this has led to an average price for each
published page of about £0.20, which is comparable with that
of most non-profit publishers of similar material. Almost all
institutions engaged in astronomy or solid Earth geophysics, worldwide,
subscribe to the relevant RAS journal. Charges are levied on authors
only when they wish to publish colour figures in the printed journals;
these charges are set to recover the additional costs incurred.
All journals are made available to all members online as part
of their membership package. The primary journals are offered
to members of the RAS and related Societies at a price that recovers
the cost of printing and forwarding the additional copies. Copies
are offered to student and younger members at a further discounted
price; that is, at a price below the cost incurred. The publishing
activity normally generates a surplus, which is used to support
the other activities of the Society, including the organisation
of scientific conferences and meetings, a scientific library,
and activities relating to the public understanding of science,
such as the publication of guides to UK activity in astronomy
and geophysics.
9. As a publishing organisation of moderate
scale, the RAS gains many benefits from contracting the non-specialist
aspects of this activity to a larger operator, including access
to economies of scale and specialist expertise in areas such as
production, subscription handling, finance and marketing. The
RAS has worked with the Blackwell organisation for many years,
but the contractual arrangements are subject to regular review,
and alternative partners considered. In the past, the relevant
contract for A&G has been placed with another provider.
10. The RAS normally asks authors to transfer
copyright in their papers, but an alternative form (similar to
that recommended by ALPSP) giving the Society permission to publish
the material is available to accommodate those authors whose employers
are unable or unwilling to transfer copyright. This intellectual
property is viewed by the RAS as a gift held in trust on behalf
of the author and her institution, to be used for the advancement
of science, and to be made available as widely as possible, consistent
with recovering the costs of publication. In addition to paper
publication, electronic versions of papers are published through
the Blackwell Synergy online document delivery system and similar
systems operated by subscription agents. These systems provide
sophisticated facilities for searching, viewing and managing papers,
speeding the process of research. Non-subscribers can gain immediate
access to articles and supporting facilities on payment of a per-article
fee. Authors are provided with electronic images (.pdfs) of their
published papers so that they can distribute copies to interested
parties; they generally make these available through their organisations'
own web sites. At an interval following original publication (presently
three years), .pdfs of all MN papers are provided to the NASA
Astrophysics Data Service which serves them to all at no cost.
The primary reason that similar action has not been taken in respect
of GJI is that no similar, globally recognised, archive repository
for the geoscience community has yet been established. MN and
GJI papers continue to be available via Synergy indefinitely and
users continue to benefit from the additional features available
through that service.
11. The effect of the above approach is
that articles lodged with the RAS for publication in its journals
are readily available to almost all members of the relevant research
community via Synergy and similar systems. Other interested parties
who are unwilling or unable to pay the per-article fee to access
recently-published articles through Synergy meet only a low practical
barrier to obtaining electronic copies of these papers. Titles,
authors' identities and contact details, and abstracts are freely
available from Synergy and many other sources. This information
can be used to obtain copies of the .pdf images either from the
authors' web pages or on application to the authors by email.
THE SOCIETY
AND OPEN
ACCESS PUBLISHING
MODELS
12. The "Open Access" approach
to STM publishing has developed as a response to the soaring cost
of journals and the perception that commercial publishers are
deriving excessive profits from these activities. High prices,
a restrictive approach to alternative distribution of material,
and the effect of the Big Deal on lower-circulation journals which
are nevertheless of great value to their readers, have led some
to seek an entirely new way of doing things. However, this feeling
is not universal. The traditional publishing system continues
to function satisfactorily in many well-established disciplines,
including those serviced by the RAS journals. In these fields,
the core journals are, for the most part, owned and controlled
by Societies who operate on the principle of seeking to maximize
access rather than profit. We recognize, however, that there are
fields, not least biomedical science, in which the cost of access
to the literature forms a real barrier to participation in, and
deriving benefit from, research.
13. The principal objective of the "Open
Access" approach is no different to that of Society publishingto
make the results of research readily available to those who will
derive benefit from them. However, advocates of the Bethesda model
of "Open Access" insist that this is achieved through
a very specific route; that is, the abandonment by authors and
copyright owners of practically all copyrights other than the
moral right to be identified as author; copies of materials are
to be deposited with an archive meeting specific conditions immediately
in publication. The Bethesda Statement was drawn up and agreed
by representatives of the biomedical sciences and publishing organisations
active in that field. That said, we note that not all publishing
organisations claiming adherence to the "Open Access"
model follow the stringent requirements of the Bethesda Statement.
Whilst the RAS is in agreement with the overall goal of the open
access movement, and regards itself as an "open access"
publisher in the general sense of seeking to ensure that access
to the research literature is open to all interested parties,
both authors and readers, we consider that the immediate adoption
of the Bethesda model by all publishers would be damaging to the
areas of science that we serve.
14. The present Society-sponsored arrangements
for publishing in astronomy and geophysics meet the needs of both
the active research and wider communities:
The peer-reviewed results of current
and recent research published in the core journals of these fields
are available to all interested parties at realistic cost, or,
with little or no effort, at no cost beyond that of delivery
Furthermore:
The peer-reviewed literature is readily
available to most active researchers through powerful systems
that offer searching and document management facilities tailored
to specialist research needs.
The authoritative source of any peer-reviewed
article is clear and traceable;
Authors have a substantial choice
of journals with which to place the results of their research;
Authors need not pay to have their
work published;
Published papers are archived on
a variety of media in libraries throughout the world;
Authors are protected from misquotation,
misattribution or the distribution of otherwise inaccurate representations
of their statements;
Society publishers take steps to
ensure that their journals and the results they contain are well
and positively marketed to the relevant audiences.
15. Finally, it is worth noting that the
cost to funding agencies of publication through the present Society
publishing model is similar to that of publishing through the
Bethesda model; "Open Access" journal charges levied
on authors are typically in the range $500 to $1,500, most commonly
a flat fee of US$1,000. This is indistinguishable from the cost
of publishing a typical paper in one of the RAS journals.
February 2004
|