 Good afternoon everybody Welcome to the the second session This session is on promising business models. I'm Brian Hall from ubiquity press and we have three very interesting Sets of speakers to guide us in this topic I'm going to let each of them introduce each other I'm going to play a very minimal role here because I think we've got relatively long presentations And we want to have as much time as possible for discussion Obviously Business models are something which are very very important as we move into the open access e-book world people want to know Not only that their content is going to be open access, but they want to know that it's going to be better disseminated They want to know that it's going to be an affordable model that prices are going to come down because I'm also an archaeologist I know very well from my own field that the book prices are very very high and more often than not people Even they even cite the reviews of books rather than the books themselves because they can't afford to get access to the actual book So hopefully with with new models of dissemination We'll also be able to see prices coming down and that might be an interesting part of these presentations So I'm going to let each of the speakers introduce themselves for about one minute each and then we're going to go into 15 minute presentations At the end of each of those will will allow one burning question if it's specific to the talk that was given And then we'll have time for more questions at the end So we'll start off with Francis Is it working? I'm Francis Pinto a long-time academic publisher with my own company Setting up Central European University Press also more recently Bloomsbury academic In between I worked for the Soros Foundation where I worked with libraries and set up Eiffel electronic information for libraries library consortium and I've been obsessing over the problems of academic monographs for many decades So I'm going to be talking to you about knowledge on latched My latest initiative I'm Carrie colder. I'm director of market development at Palgrave McMillan at Palgrave I'm responsible for our marketing and communications strategy, but also our open access initiatives Which is what I'm going to be talking through today prior to joining Palgrave I was at by med central for almost nine years. So really started in the open access STM environment with journals and now applying that to monographs My name is Martin Eve. I'm a lecturer in English Literature at the University of Lincoln And I'm also a certified computer programmer certified perhaps mean the good word in that sentence Along with Caroline, I'm co-founding the open Library of Humanities project that we're going to talk about today And I'm Dr. Caroline Edwards. Yep co-founder of the open Library of Humanities. I'm a lecturer at the University of Lincoln I specialize in 21st century literature, and I'm shortly moving just down the road to the Birkbeck University of London Okay, thank you very much and so we'll actually go straight on into the presentations now So we'll start with With Caroline and Martin talking about the digital library of the humanities Okay, great So I'm just going to talk you through a little bit of the background specifically to our project the open Library of Humanities and how this relates to monograph publishing in the humanities and I mean in terms of some of the presentations that we've already heard particularly from Rupert Gatti and Jean-Claude Gaydon our approach to rethinking scholarship at the open Library of Humanities is what you might call on the kind of left wing of Open access publishing. We're considering this in terms of building a prestigious reputable platform for monograph journal and Mega journal publishing And we're going to have a kind of phased introduction in order to gently coax all of our colleagues with us into this digital future Our priority then is to evaluate current forms of publishing and what forms of labor are involved Which I guess is why we're on the business models panel We're not here to deny the realities of publisher labor Particularly with so many publishers in the room, of course, we don't want to alienate anybody But we would like to think through quite carefully how we might make those costs more transparent Okay, so just to start off with them It's probably worth reminding ourselves of the primary definition of open access the removal of price and permission barriers from research achieved through online dissemination and I suppose we're thinking here about an old tradition and a new technology as Peter Suber has described it which have converged to make possible this unprecedented public good and I want to draw out that old tradition in particular as an academic myself and with Martin We're very aware of the way in which humanities scholars conceive of their work in a public spirited gesture of disseminating research, but also there are certain sort of Traditional criteria if you like to building prestige, which are very relevant to building academic careers and hiring and tenure committees in particular Okay, so just to draw you on then to this cereals crisis, which has been well documented The graph that you can see up here then shows with the red line Serials expenditure as categorized by the American Association of Research Libraries It's up 380% and the green line is the UK commodities price index or CPI which closely mirrors US inflation up 80% So broadly speaking as I'm sure many of you extremely aware over the past 40 years subscription prices have substantially risen faster than inflation and Library budgets up to 300% above inflation since 1986 and this really affects all of us It's not just you know the top-end institutions are affected as our Institutions around the world. There's a very unequal share of research funding perhaps in different areas of developing world and their research budgets I suppose there's also worth mentioning as Kathleen Fitzpatrick has written the dot-com bubble sort of Exasperated this problem particularly over in America and endowments were severely affected So I guess we can all agree that there is a crisis going on and we want to think how the crisis in Journal publishing relates to monographs, which is why we're here today Okay, so just to say something about what we're calling this exclusionary and APC model if you like article processing charges I just want to emphasize that the Open Library of Humanities is proposing that a gold route to open access Does not have to be synonymous with article processing charges We are looking for an APC free solution. So the authors are not prevented from where they might be able to publish I guess it's worth sort of reminding ourselves that open access isn't the same thing as free access As John Wolinsky describes then we're not we're not trying to deny these economic realities But we are interested in increasing access, you know for more people Right, I was just going to talk you through then a couple of the options perhaps since we're here talking about business models What could the possibilities be for open access monographs? Well the first option then Would be to have free labor and free submission This is happening in the journal sector as we see small niche academic journals relying on the open journal systems the OJS This vastly reduces publication costs, but as far as we're concerned on our project We need to think about upscaling that we need to find ways to connect with other open access publishers And think about a kind of more large-scale project Another option might be advertising revenue where you would have free submission for authors But this seems extremely unfavorable to us. We wouldn't want to be publishing an article on eco criticism only to find that You know an advert for Shell Oil was on the opposite page The article processing charge then the author pays mechanism, which as we've heard already There are various different kind of banded prices being released by publishers So that's you know kind of one format that we could face and then finally the one that we that we kind of favor the Library partnership subsidy model if I have a no, sorry if I have a slide about that and Library partnership subsidies then as far as we're concerned Would involve a large number of libraries contributing a small rate so that everybody can access material for free We have been advised that we should ban this rate depending on the size of the research library budget But it would average out perhaps at around 600 US dollars I'm going to speak to that a little bit more But first I wanted to come back to what I talked about an old tradition of scholarship This is extremely important for monograph publishing and we're calling this the prestige trap Academics confer authority on the particular publishers that they choose to publish with and the particular journals that they choose to publish with So in that sense, there's a kind of legacy of print culture that There's a certain sort of gatekeeper model which is rooted in printer economics in which Because of the cost that you know the expensive costs of paper production mailing and you know sort of sending out Journals and things to your subscribers Okay, so this logic of exclusion then doesn't seem to be applicable anymore in a digital realm And I'd really like to kind of highlight that we shouldn't just be transferring traditional models into the digital realm I very much agree with the perspective that actually this is a transformative moment that we could use to try and change the Way that we do scholarship in the way that we share it And that brings me to the question of implicit standards of peer review So we're thinking about this on our committees which are currently having discussions on the open library of humanities and on the website You can see published anonymized transcripts of those discussions We would like to see some sort of new thinking developing a long ideas of peer review As your uncle gave on and Raymond Siemens have noted then we should be thinking about Distinguishing the distinction phase from the publishing phase As they've cited in the credibility of electronic publishing. So what is it that creates the prestige of a monograph? And and how could we rethink that? Questions about blind peer review an open review or post publication peer review our models that we're also looking at as well But I'll move on swiftly To our monograph pilot So I mentioned that we run an mega journal as well as a open access monograph scheme at the open library of humanities I'll just talk you through that a little bit Because of the importance of prestige amongst the academic community we have Found ourselves some high-profile partners We felt that was very important in the launch phase of the LH to distinguish what we're doing and so that academics Particularly younger academics. I know there's a question earlier about younger academics will trust that this is a safe space in which they can publish Although we agree with Jean-Claude that a book needn't be thought of as a bound codex Authors do value the editorial input of book editors, which is why we wanted to partner and gain, you know the editorial expertise of high-profile University presses of which we have three currently in very close discussions with us who are interested in joining our pilot scheme As well as one born open access publisher So that will help us to get a sense of what the costs are involved in bringing a monograph, you know From conception from the moment when an author submits it to the publisher right through to production Our rationale then is to try and break the prestige trap I've just discussed and to give legitimacy to our project and we know the authors academics and scholarly authors value Editorial experience, so that's why we're working with those partners Moving on then the financial model So as I mentioned earlier at the moment a lot of libraries pay money so that everyone can kind of rent material Scholarly material becomes a property even in library consortia, which you know brings down perhaps the numbers of Journals and monographs that are being sold. This is still the case So we would like to see a lot of libraries paying a small amount In this sense there are two routes as we see it and I'll be very interested to hear Francis talk a little bit later The first would be to build a library consortium as knowledge unlatched is in the process of doing as I understand it And the second then would be perhaps to coordinate directly with libraries the library partnership subsidy model that we're looking at and at the I will h we're in the sort of discussions phase of both of those projects Just to talk you through then the monograph we see the mega journal in the style perhaps of plus But in the humanities on a slightly smaller scale, I guess cross subsidizing our monograph pilot study We think the two things are integrally bound In terms of our pilot then each publisher that we're working with would receive Around 25,000 pounds per year in order to Participate in the study and they would agree to release their costs to us Which we could then publish in an open format so that everybody could see how much it is actually costing us They would be publishing a minimum of three books per year during the pilot and we have agreed that they would be Co-branded the open library humanities and the publisher And I'll hand over to Martin Okay, thank you Caroline. So I Want to think through what the deliverables might be for this kind of costing study stroke pilot period of a monograph initiative We need very traditional formats in some senses Although we want to go beyond what the book is the bound codex cannot be the standard for too much longer in a world of digital Dissemination this always has to be a phase transition remodel. So we're looking at damned PDF as it's known in some circles However, the way of getting beyond the damned PDF is to make sure that we have open intermediary formats that we can translate into new Mechanisms so for that reason we've agreed that XML formats have to be key to this process and our partners have agreed that they will Give us the source XML and that's vital for a reason of digital preservation. I'm going to come back to as well We need to be working all the time in open formats when we're online because we can't foresee where our futures take us Try and open Apple works document on your new Mac and your struggle the PDF will go the same way at some point We need to be able to forward my great content And of course we should be using born digital web technologies HTML should become a fundamental standard of how we read We just need to find ways of emulating the reading experience of the codex so that we get that But as technology matures in the e-reading world HTML can become a more viable proposition there And of course if we have open formats There may be formats beyond those that we haven't thought of that we can transition to not even beyond e-pub for example By the way should it mention also that we've agreed CC by as a condition of that as well I think the open licensing is an incredibly important part of this for reasons of translation and digital forward migration So that's part of the deal I've mentioned digital preservation briefly and I'm going to mention it again It's crucial to me that scholarship exists beyond the length of a human lifespan if I get run over by a bus tomorrow It's crucial that my journals keep going and how noble is that of me to say Locks and clocks are the standard formats for that. They're not particularly flexible But nonetheless they do a very good job of preserving that content It seems to me also that we could leverage a community effort open access activists tend to be Involved types why not use peer-to-peer protocols for digital preservation as well there? So that's something we're thinking about So those are the hard deliverables you might say part of this project that we're putting together on the monograph side Is to actually get books out there and buy books. Okay. I'm talking quite traditionally in some senses We can move forwards into experimental territory later The second part though as Caroline mentioned is this focus on labor that I want to bring to the fore It seems to me that what open access tries to do is move us into a service Provider model of publishing Publishers are telling us a range of figures for how much it costs to produce a monograph in when they're giving us a PC figures But at present we've got no way of seeing through that veil One publisher tells us eleven thousand another says five thousand nine hundred Are we supposed to simply look at the outcomes and say well they produce a better book on the basis of a single book? There is no typical book. So you can't really do that Furthermore, could we just say well obviously Manchester have a better model than Palgrave? That was a harsh thing to say. I'm sure you can refute that later Probably not, but I want some kind of indication of what those fees are doing So I think it's important that the second deliverable of this project is a costing study I'm going to very very quickly talk you through that So a breakdown there would include labour time publish a labour time Which would have to include proposal review internal manuscript review external reader payments Proofreading typesetting copy editing marketing now some of those aspects can go I'm pretty sure That internal model of review is not necessarily something that has to hold and there are benefits to breaking that down in alternative models of peer review But we need to think it through for the moment because these are the costs that we're being given Secondly technological costs. I'm not going to go into the details there DOI assignment digital preservation It all has to be paid for somewhere Hard copy revenues How could those offset the cost that we're being asked to pay up front and if we're cross subsidizing can they still sell them? Secondly, partnership evaluation. Can this work? Can an academic led mega journal system cross subsidize University Press low revenue return book generation Probably, but we need to see if that pans out and last but not least because we're running to the end of time Is there a digital symbiosis with the hard copy object every study? I've seen where academics and the humanities surveyed on what they like. They say the hard copy book I've got to even admit it's quite nice when I saw the green volume inside your handouts today with something that I wrote And it's something tangible about it. That's nice, but I'd far rather you're able to read it online Does it detriment the sales of that hard copy object by putting it online? I guess not and there are preliminary results coming through from various surveys perhaps open UK that show it may not We need that data to be concrete so that we can say for sure. This is a good thing Digital and the print can work together So that's what we're planning You can ask the question now because I'm sure we've had to skirt over some of that stuff But that's the base of our monograph efforts and please come and talk to us more at any point. Thank you Thanks very much Martin and Caroline Does anybody have a burning question that's specific to that particular presentation at this point? Nobody's burning Okay. Good in that case. I will ask Francis Pinter to come forward and speak about the Knowledge Unlatched project looking around the room about half the people in here have heard me talk about knowledge unlatched Please don't go to sleep because I have some new news to give you But before then I'm going to talk a little bit about open monograph models generally I Borrowed this slide from OAP and about a year ago and then adapted it for our purposes and It's a it's a fairly good very good collection of the way things are being done now and Just running quickly through them The first one you're familiar with this is people have been doing this for some time the print or ebook book Monograph Pays for all of the origination costs and posting the book online free of charge usually on a creative commons license At Bloomsbury academic the figures that are coming out from there from the books that I set up that were published on open access Yeah, the figures are showing that not only did we sell at least as many as we would have on a clothes model But in some cases considerably more. So that's good news Then we have the institutional support for the press Here a couple of examples the World Bank the Way up on high the World Bank decreed that all their publications should go Open access and the publisher had to scratch his head and figure out very quickly how to do it And it's being done by getting the money from the various departments that are producing the content a Newer initiative and it's typical of some of the ones coming out of Particularly American Universities is Amherst College. This is a very wealthy very wealthy liberal arts college It's decided to set up open access free to the world. How's it paying for it? Well the library Two people Retired so they decided instead of hiring two more librarians. They would hire people to run the publishing Well, that's fine until the next fashion comes along and the President of the college says well, I'd rather have more librarians than publishing. So It'll be very interesting to see what happens, but these sorts of initiatives are still at the very early stage Another way is the library press collaboration and the the the really very excellent results coming out of M Publishing Michigan is certainly something to look at not every university can do this But it's a model that is creating a lot of interest in the cross subsidization and Then we have the funding body side publication fee and there are several organizations Particularly on the continent, but also the welcome Trust here in the UK that have funds earmarked for paying for the publication of monographs And then we have the author side publication fees and we've heard about how much they are So I won't go into any detail there and then finally the library consortium concept, which is what knowledge on latched is doing But Peter Subur has put together a list of all sorts of different ways of funding open books and Peter talks very eloquently about why books are so different to journal articles from a Publishing perspective and also from an author perspective as his argument is authors I used to making a little bit of money out of books and they certainly go into every book project Expecting to make a lot of money. So the way that one handles the life of the article Open access article is it's very very different from from open books and There is another thing which I will refer to a couple of times and I call it the mother-in-law syndrome the Reference was made to what I'm talking about, but I talk about it slightly differently ever since e-books started being thought about Authors academic that I've been publishing said I've got to have a beautiful book to give to my mother-in-law and You know an awful lot of money gets spent Making it possible to get those six free copies to the author so that least one can go to the mother-in-law another one to the mother less important, but the mother-in-law and So this is being perpetuated and it's I I don't mind. I you know, I'm I Am a mother-in-law so I But it's for the Academy. It's for the funders to decide whether or not this is going to continue So Knowledge unlatched and the goals It's the day sustainable path to open access for humanities and social sciences We want to ensure that the HSS long-form publications are as accessible as open-access science journals We want to enable other formats to be available too, but that shouldn't be paid for from the funds that are The origination funds and we want to find ways of making library budgets go further so our vision is Libraries and publishers working together to lower the risk for both libraries and publishers Risk lowering risk actually saves money. You can't imagine how expensive it is to keep things closed You may want to know that in your study and a global consortium sharing the fixed costs to create the first digital file is what we're trying to achieve and the global support is not just For the traditional publishers the network This is very important the network that we're creating is not just for the traditional Publishers in the first round of the pilot which is going to be happening this autumn We are dealing with the traditional publishers Why because we had to get the street credibility from the libraries and we did that by Engaging with the credible long Traditional publishers much the same way as to why you're engaging with three prestigious Company, so you can't take No matter how radical you want to be you can't take your foot out of the old camp To get to the new camp. That's the point. I want to make with that So we are we'll be open to for business to work with the new Publishing operations and I've had discussions with some of you already about that So we're organizing the payment of fixed costs in exchange for open access In a digital version Meanwhile publishers will remain to free to sell the print copies other digital versions They may charge the author for the mother-in-law copy. I don't know so People say well, what are the fixed costs? I hope I'll be part of your study Because the publisher I know what those fixed costs are and I know I think I know Why there are the differences between the Paul Graves Springer model and the Manchester one? It's very evident on the website The Paul Graves Springer ones are CC by Anybody can make money out of that content The Manchester one is CC by NC Manchester anticipates making some money out of the print and the e-book through other channels and therefore it Can reduce the cost That is charging for open access. There may be just one reason. There are lots of reasons why these costs are different a Midwest company Midwest University Press has lower costs than a company located in central London So you know, we can't generalize we do need to study the key is to try and make this transparent Without running into antitrust difficulties So this is a summary of what knowledge and latched is doing and it's really very very simple We're working with publishers to collect titles The publisher sets what I call the title fee, which is this fixed costs including overheads associated with that Knowledge on latched collates the titles and libraries select the titles and pay a Make a pledge and then pay for the title fee. We manage the process and the light publishers when they get to First digital file Make it open access We're working on preservations and we're facilitating member discount and this for librarians in the room is very important We don't expect double dipping if you want what I call a premium version But you know, there's a lot of different ways of referring to this. It's the either the print or the Collect the book in the collection that you prefer to have and there's a there's a lot of scope there for Libraries to choose only to unlatch pay for the open access or if they want more they get the premium version and This is what libraries want Academics want a lot of that's not meant for you to read that's just meant to show that there's a lot of scope for added value and Libraries want things authors want things everybody wants the publishers to do more but it's distinguishing that added value and Figuring out what it is that people really want to pay for So here's an example of what happens I've used this in dollars ten thousand fifteen thousand dollars You're gonna ask me what what's the price of books coming in at knowledge unlatched To be unlatched and it's between six seven thousand dollars and fifteen thousand dollars depending on the length and the complexity and the publisher But it demonstrates what happens to the monograph the more participating libraries the lower the cost per library and I'm gonna run out of time very quickly, but I'd like you to bear with me. Can I just go through three minutes? I just really want to go through what stays the same and I want to say something about the pilot project What stays the same publishers undertake selection peer review production etc? They decide on the formats and pricing and libraries make selections the way they used it This is keeping the foot in the old camp in order to bring them into the new world and These are the publishers that we're working with now About a dozen of these will have titles for the first round of books Which will be offered for unlatching in the autumn and we have lots of partners Slides will be circulated. I won't read them out But I do want to pay tribute to Tom Cochran who is here who was our first supporter from Australia and Ralph Schimmer who's also been very very helpful in Germany and Lorena Stell who's here from just collections probably forgotten some people, but we're getting tremendous support These are the subject areas that we're starting with We're going to start with a single collection Rather than title by title because we can go with a single collection to each library and get one check next year We'll start working with subject collections and single titles But it's it's more complicated and we have to start somewhere and we're trying to make it as easy and friction-free as possible so in 2014 we review results begin metric studies iron-out bugs and Scale up and that's when we can start working with the non-traditional publishers. Now. How are we going to be sustainable? first three years we have our grants that will cover our costs and Thereafter we'll be taking a tiny slice of the title fee So what's different about knowledge unlatched well it spreads across costs across many institutions We are global and we have gone to the library community for the funding if we may go to other communities later on I would like to talk to Sally about Learned societies because there may be something we can be helpful to her there We want to retain a market element by market. I mean the academics the libraries this We should not just be shoving stuff out there that nobody wants We hope to be minimally distraught Disrupted we hope to we will be drawing on established funding pools. The whole idea came when I thought to myself Who's funding monographs now? Well 90% of it is Coming from library budgets We're distanced from university politics lots of blood baths around on that We we hope not to enter into that Etc. So there's one slide that I want to finish with I hope I'll do it in one minute. It's the battle fronts To mandate or not to mandate that is the question now personally, I can't see humanities and social sciences long-form publications Disadvantaged when physical sciences are motoring along with a much faster pace of research being disseminated and Us staying closed There has to be a way of dealing with this and I hope that mandates will be covering monograph soon Not that necessarily the blockbuster trade book, but monographs and Research I hate the word monographs so research findings. I agree. They will all be different They'll have different names costs hidden or not so hidden what will be acceptable costs We do need the transparency and I I applaud those efforts new versus traditional publishers It's for the Academy and for funders to decide Who is providing a respectable service and a service that meets the needs of Scholarly communications if that's finally at the end of the day what we're all about So I could go on for hours. I have a wonderful team here They're five of us from knowledge and latched here over the next two days, and I hope you'll all talk to all of us. Thank you Thank You Francis Does anyone have a burning question for Francis? Is anyone exploding with? Okay, in that case next up is Carrie Kuller from Paul grave McMillan Hello, so I'm going to be talking about monograph publication charges. This is the model that I think is Probably most familiar to people for one reason because it more closely resembles what we've seen happen in journals publishing But also because it seems to be the most contentious model as well, and we've already had a few comments about it today I'm going to take you through pal grave McMillan's evolution with open access Then look at the publication charge model Specifically looking at the publishing process what's included how the model works what the charges cover and Then get on to the hotly debated topic of how much had they compare I've got our pricing along with some other publishers to share with you I'm going to talk about why we chose this model Who we think should pay how we see it working And really how sustainable it will be for the future So very briefly pal grave McMillan for those of you that don't know is one of the largest Publishers of monographs in the humanities and social sciences. We publish or will publish 1700 titles this year We also publish a midform Format which we launched last year and we published 60 journals including a number of society titles So we really do like to think that we we offer a format a length for For every researcher within humanities and social sciences Qualities really at the heart of our publishing service We like to think and it's at the heart of the the output that we produce and to that end we won 30 publishing awards last year Our relationship with open access is fairly short because really as we've all acknowledged Open access in the humanities and social sciences is really only evolving over the last couple of years and we are solely focused on this market We undertook our first open access survey a few years ago Which interestingly for us really revealed that researchers were interested in having an OA Outlet and actually they said to us the only reason that they weren't publishing that route is because there wasn't many formats available for them We then launched following that our hybrid offering on a number of journals in 2011 but really Further to that started really thinking about bigger than than just journals. What else could we do with open access? following Finch and the AHRC announcements Last year we knew that we really had to make some changes But rather than just go as far as to comply with the mandates We thought actually let's be consistent across all of our formats and offer CC by not just in our journals But actually for Pell Gray Pivots our mid-form offering and monographs And all the while we are really trying to continue speaking with our market because Well as we've already heard today that I don't think there's any easy answer for for how open access is going to work in humanities and social sciences So just to clarify our position really on open access is that we were committed to giving our market a choice Be that in length and format or in business model But what we really want to do is find a model that's sustainable both for our market, but also for us as publishers So the publication charge model what I've crudely put together in this This cycle is what I see is the monograph publication process And if I take you through how it works with traditional monograph publishing The researcher undertakes their their work they Submit an abstract proposal to the publisher Who then sends out for peer review if it's accepted the researcher goes away completes their work Further checks are done when it's handed over to the publisher They I should say sorry after the initial peer review once it's accepted. That's when they engage in their contract with the publisher They hand over the the final work to the publisher Then copy editing formatting Advanced notices for sales are sent out Marketing starts taking place It gets distributed through the various sales channels And then the content is consumed. That's our traditional publishing life cycle of a monograph and Under the monograph publication charge model the process is largely the same The only real difference in what we're offering is where we where we take the money And so once a researcher submits their work if it's been accepted after peer review at the contract stage We would then ask them to sign an open access contract with us rather than the traditional contract It goes through all of the same standards. The publishing service is exactly the same. We're able to send advanced notices out We offer all of the same Marketing one of the questions that was raised this morning is if something's open access Would publishers be obliged to market it was far as we're concerned That's very much part of the service that we offer So everything is exactly the same the book is made available on our ebook platform connect on Amazon But the difference is when it's been paid for to be open access. It's freely available on all of those outlets So what does the charge cover? There is a cost to publishing and You know where we're publishers were not just printers And so the cost is much more than just producing the final print version of the book And so the what the cost covers with palgrave this 11,000 pounds that has already been mentioned Really is exactly the same as our traditional service It covers the editorial costs that editors work closely With our authors helping improve the manuscript giving feedback support in Production it will include copy editing all the various formats that the Research gets produced into It involves customer service. This can be author services helping with launch materials launch events Marketing can be anything from sending review copies out which gets done for every single one of our monographs And this still takes place under open access attending conferences and promoting Titles at palgrave. We attend over 160 academic conferences a year. These aren't trivial activities They all really do contribute to the wider dissemination of the book The dissemination through bibliographic services is really key for any title really getting found and read Reaching library suppliers bookshops online retailers like Amazon we supply mark records to libraries And we include long-term preservation really as part of our responsibilities. So All of this together is how we we costed this up and this is how we came up with our pricing Karen might and some of the open guys might recognize these Pictures we were part of the open project where we were asked with post-it notes to write down all the different elements that were involved in Publishing a monograph and I thought they're a nice illustration to show just how many bits there are And to publishing a book that we felt that we were involved with So the highly anticipated slide Which actually you can't read I Would say that and this is available on our website palgrave.com forward slash open And I'll first apologize because this by no means covers all of the the publishers that are really experimenting with open access right now, but what we try to do is Look at some of the major publishers that were offering open access monographs with a publication charge and pull them all together So we could really compare and see what was included in the different prices Because it's it's not easy to compare and the simple reason is because nobody is offering exactly the same thing There's been a few comments on the offerings of different publishers I would say that right now palgraves the only publisher that I'm aware of that is actually offering CC buy Springer open offer CC buy on their journals, but CC buy and see on their monographs We're also the only publisher right now offering free e-pub version of the books, which means It's freely available on Amazon for one But also means it's compatible with all mobile devices meaning it's more accessible to actually people maybe in developing countries That don't have a strong access to the internet But our prices aren't at the the cheapest end of the The scale there either there really is a range of what people are offering with licensing what formats they're offering and What I think is just really important is for publishers to just be really transparent with What they're offering and that's why I wanted to explain our service We by offering CC buyers was acknowledged by Francis We priced our monographs on the basis that actually we don't stand to make any other additional revenues And so we really when coming up with our price it was looking at the full cost and no more But it makes it hard if actually some of the other publishers if that's not what they're doing and they're standing to make other Revenues, then it is very hard to compare and so what's the true cost of publishing? Why we chose this model We felt it was sustainable and future-proof and I say that from a publisher's point of view We wanted to come up with a model that wasn't necessarily reliant on print revenues If we're looking to the future and talking about how formats might and technology might evolve Then we have to say that further down the line and print revenues Could also decline and so we wanted to have a model which really wasn't relying on having print to prop up the business We wanted a model which was transparent. So I thought it was funny I'm a bit in conflict with Martin on this But I felt that by us saying hands up This is what our costs for publishing is and this is what our publishing services Then actually people can make a decision With which publisher they want to go with Yes, we which I'll talk about in a minute haven't really published many or any monographs this route right now But actually by offering exactly the same service as we do with all of our other Monograph publishing you can make a comparison of what the service is. So we felt it was transparent I also felt that This business model associates the true cost of publishing in the rightful place. So Whilst there is a cost to producing Even doing handling of print-on-demand titles and there is a cost for producing EPUB versions and enhanced version of books They're not the only costs in publishing and if you if you start charging people just for those extra bits I think it can send out a confusing message and for us Having a simple price to our market say this is what our costs are in their entirety Seemed the right way to go We wanted to be consistent and as simple as possible Open access is confusing enough if it's not something that you talk about day in and day out and Being a publisher of cross different formats We felt that it was right that actually we have the same consistent pricing model that we can explain For our journals for our mid-form palgrave pivot and for monographs But who pays that is the one of the big questions here I it's still very much to be determined for us. This has always been about offering choice I don't think it's necessarily going to To have the same impact that we've seen so quickly in STM. I'm at the funds just Simply aren't there Some some monies are there Certainly, we've had a lot of queries from researchers So I'm looking to see if they can find it in their grant funds, but the funds just aren't as much Some funders as Francis mentioned Are looking to cover open access publishing and the welcome trust certainly that's for me He's guaranteed that we probably will have more open access monographs next year than than we'd previously forecast because they will be mandating Open access and providing funds for gold and Some institutions we think may help cover the cost certainly a number of institutions have got Central open access funds which include monographs as well as journals It's just that they currently have a journals cap on them. So it may not be all of the monies that's actually needed so lastly Take up and the future The interest is definitely there. This is why that we wanted to move into open access And we were having lots of queries, but the take up is slow. As I said, we have published to date Zero open access monographs, but then we only did announce this at the end of January and actually producing the monographs It's a long process If I was forced to guess and because somebody will probably ask me anyway I will say that I would think that we'll publish one open access monograph by the end of the year and I would predict about 10 next year But funding is a challenge That's what we're seeing is we've had a lot of engagement with researchers and then them having to go and speak to their funders or Institutions who might be keen, but actually there's no process in place It's just logistically quite hard to to push things through And I think really conferences like this are the best thing that we can do. I think we all have to Engage experiment talk to each other Not be competitive with the different models. We've got and actually just see what we can see what we can do Thank you very much Carrie so We have about 10 minutes now for questions and since everybody's been holding them and all the way through. I'm sure we have plenty So do we have any questions for the panel? Yeah, we can all talk about as Authors whether the editorial support from the publisher is actually where the value comes I mean I would argue it comes from other academics who are Coopted to be a series editors and that sort of thing and similarly with marketing the Question would surely be how good is it when we're only selling say 500 copies of each book But what I wanted to ask you was a question was that last one you listed preservation long-term preservation as a cost borne by Publishers could you give me some details of what work is done by Paul Grave Macmillan in that area? Thanks The monographs that we publish are made Available on Palgrave connector ebook platform and that's archived in portico So that would be the same for the open-access monographs, and we do think that it's part of our job as publishers certainly if If touch wood I mean for some reason the power wasn't around in the future That it's our job to make sure that the the outputs that we publish are made long-term available Sorry, so our ebook platform is supported. Is it portico hazel? Yeah We're talking here about keeping things going for decades hundreds of years. Are you suggesting there's something the publisher is doing? Yes, this is sorry portico where all of our all of our content is archived in that There are a number of companies that provide Long-term preservation, and I mean thinking down the line when various digital formats are changing time and time again portico is one of them clocks locks is one of them and most of the Publishers that you would know of are preserving their content in one or the other or even both They're taking preservation very seriously But the preservation is not access preservation is something else and of course in the states. There's the how to trust so And there's the internet archive. So there there are lots of ways in which preservation is being addressed Particularly the question of not just should a publisher disappear, but should the form digital format That is being used today Not be Accessible tomorrow, so everything has to migrate and that's what these companies publishers pay these companies To provide that service that they ensure they'll keep on migrating to the right New digital format when PDF is died and they know all that We have one more question the front from John Claude Thank you. Yes, I'm a little bit puzzled by all this big I'm a little bit puzzled by all this because a Fliberies don't take care of the preservation anymore and the meta data Admittedly welcome from the publishers as well And it seems to me that in the end the libraries are going to be the financing Support for publishers. They're going to pay the licenses and then just have to retire Is that is that the future you see for libraries? I think of And if you if you read the surveys on the future of the library that they come they come up with for their own basis They seem to be gesturing towards the library as a bidirectional information hub. So they have to do with Gluing things together from the publishing world. You have disparate publishers and they're about making sure that researchers aren't lost in the digital world when all there are different platforms as a hideous sort of analogy there, but They're about finding things They're about also I think the publication process itself and that there should be dialogue between publishers and libraries and researchers in a three-way triangle where they're They're helping guide us in ways that we don't cripple their budgets through our publication choices in some ways For 40 years we have been utterly complicit as academics in creating that serious crisis through setting up this hideous cycle of prestige If we'd spoken to libraries and knew the position that we were putting them in earlier on perhaps that wouldn't have occurred And I think they're a vital part of a triangular relationship there. That's my exception anyway Actually, this is Somebody from the British library summarized it very well saying that that libraries are moving from collecting to connecting and That seems to me to be Acknowledging that for each library to have duplicate collections of the library down the road it's just 20th century and no longer relevant or appropriate and to create a Web where everybody can find everything all of the time is the end game, isn't it? That's the end goal and we have to find ways of getting there, but with the Amount of content increasing at the rate that it's increasing at the moment all those pressures and being in times of difficult funding It's just taking a while to figure out how to get there, but it does have to be a partnership. I don't think Library press Publishing is the only solution I think it's part of a solution, but it will require people having Different skills and that will mean different people and And and we're inching all of us seem to be inching our way forward in this of course with monographs There's far less money in the system and there's far less profit in the system I was saying to Jean-Claude over lunch that there aren't publishers making 35% profit margin on monographs and he said well, what about Springer? But the point is that Springer doesn't publish very many monographs and the monographs seem isn't dominated by six large Journal publishers the monograph scene is One with a lot of small companies with a very small number of large companies But even you know your the book division of Paul Graves is still small compared to the big journal Divisions of the top six who have a stranglehold on journal publishing So, you know, we're looking at a very different environment here and monograph publishing is either making a tiny profit or no profit or or Even a loss in many cases particularly the American University presses Okay, we have time for one final short question Hi, I'm Julie Walker from in ASP I saw your sentence about it said applications from developing countries and Unfortunately, you didn't have time to go over that bit. I just wondered if you could explain how you're going to encourage the participation of developing countries Well, I wonder whether I could ask Martin Hall to say something about the idea that we're going to be working on Together Martin, where are you? Is he here? Oh, there you are. Would you be willing to say a word just it's slightly premature But it's much better coming from Martin Then we'll wrap up. So thanks Francis. I thought I was completely safe Yes, thank you We've been discussing this because we thought that there were some interesting opportunities in the knowledge unlatched model for connecting authors in the south with publishers in the north and the our observation is that that if you go outside the West and the north and you go into areas where People have not had access to any form of publishing resources. There are huge resources of knowledge That is as valuable to the north and west as it is in the south But it's just not getting out there and hasn't got out there conventionally and of course anybody who works in Special collections in libraries will know this is a massive so-called gray literature that's been sitting there for years We think that the digital publishing opportunity is given opportunity for the two-way benefit of that and to get away from the sort of Implicit almost neocolonial model that says that we're about publishing in the north and Distributing more cheaply in the south without actually having a flow back of knowledge creation in the south to the benefit of the north and by Developing the sorts of models that people have been talking out today to make those connections. We think it's possible to get the knowledge content Flowing both ways which of course is inherently More interesting to all of us than only having the knowledge flow one way and that's what Francis is talking about I'm sure that if we can get the sorts of models that have been talked about today to be viable One of the huge benefits of the digital publishing opportunities that we have will be to allow that Which is a far more democratic distribution of knowledge across the world Okay, I couldn't have said it better myself Okay, thank you very much We're we're now going to move on to to coffee for 20 minutes and we're back at 330 before that I'd like to thank the panel for their contributions