Live-blogging the 2009 Vancouver PKP Conference

 “There is no way we can succeed in the eradication of poverty if the developing world is not part of the knowledge creation, its dissemination and utilization to promote innovation. Higher education is a critical factor in making this possible and must be part of any development strategy.” – Mamphela Ramphele

(as cited in the AJOL presentation – July 9, 2009)

 (source)

Introduction

The conference included a healthy representation of Africa-focused initiatives that were profiled in the following workshop sessions:

1. Establishing a new open access journal in Africa: the case study of the African Journal of Primary Health Care & Family Medicine (PHCFM)  – Pierre de Villiers (blogged by Tracy Scott)

2. Knowledge production through scholarly publishing in sub-Saharan Africa: a bibliometric analysis of the period 1996-2007 – Ezra Ondari-Okemwa (blogged by Jeffrey D.)

3. Online publishing education in Africa: a new program at KNUST – Lucy Ry-Kottoh, Eric Anane-Antwi, Samuel Smith-Esseh  CANCELLED

4. Open Journal Systems (OJS) software as used by African Journals OnLine (AJOL) – Susan Murray (blogged by Pam Gill)

5. Scholarly publishing in Africa: the online potential, the online challenge  – Samuel Smith-Esseh (blogged by Lauryn Oates)

In addition, several other sessions addressed open access issues in the developing world (or ‘global South’) more generally. The following synopsis is based on sessions #1,4 and 5.

Common Themes

–       Developed world scholarly journals are simply out of reach, in an economic sense, to the vast majority of academics and professionals in Africa;

–       The growth in interest, availability of data, partnerships and new OSS is growing exponentially, with new African institutions and partners steadily coming on board;

–       There is increased interest in African scholarship from the outside world, related to the new lines of access emerging: helping to instigate a two-way information flow. This has huge potential to change the dynamics of the information society and is about voice, representation, participation and leaving a unique cultural imprint;

–       Common values in sustainability emphasis and quality of information and presentation; not all viability issues are solved- further innovation is needed here- though ‘Family Medicine & Primary Healthcare’s’ experience show the viability of using an OA approach as a business model;

–       Relevancy of Creative Commons licenses to these new initiatives;

–       Multinational partnerships are often utilized to launch OA initiatives for developing world: international funding sources are leveraged with international expertise, local partners- truly networked;

–       Production costs for on-line publications are significantly lower than print;

–       Language accessibility is increasingly on the radar but no initiatives profiled were in indigenous African languages;

–       The sessions had a focus on software and information, with less emphasis on hardware, connection and physical accessibility challenges, for which there was little overall discussion;

–       Support to authors, African publishers and institutions will be critical for increasing local production.

Looking Ahead

In future PKP conferences, it will be valuable to continue following developments with the Africa initiatives, addressing emerging trends, challenges and opportunities. However, it will also be useful to draw in participants affiliated with other regions of the developing world. Specifically, considering access to scholarly journals in countries where internet access is restricted and the information environment is characterized by an authoritarian political environment could yield more sensitivity to the special challenges faced in such contexts and spur innovation that might address such challenges.

Some concluding notes from the AJOL session sum up well critical lessons learned and set forth some principles for future work:

1.     “Technological tools are just the vehicle”: relationships and communication are still the drivers of success.

2.     Choose partners wisely and work closely with them.

3.     Listen to the needs of your users and beneficiaries.

4.     OSS has matured.

5.     And for Africa- get a critical mass of African-published work on line.

Resources for Further Study

Aluka – Building a digital library of scholarly resources 
from and about Africa

Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa

African Studies Association

(source)

Presenter: Laura C. Botsford, Assistant to the Editor, Canadian Journal of Sociology, University of Alberta

Time: 4-5 pm, July 9th, 2009

Place: SFU Harbour Centre, Sauder Industries Room 2270

———————————————————————————————

Session Overview

Background

In the early days of the Canadian Journal of Sociology, a great deal of manual work was required to print the journal, from getting galleys to making notes in the margins, to cutting to appropriate size and pasting onto paper sheets, etc. The editors of the journal soon realized that they were susceptible to too many external factors and decided to move to typesetting and a mainframe computer. While this newer technology had its advantages, there were many codes to learn and all that could be seen was the markup language; not the end result. The lack of a preview often created surprises for the editors when the pages were printed. Eventually technology progressed and the journal got some computers with What You See Is What You Get (WYSIWYG) capabilities– but they still had to go through the whole printing process. Dr. Kevin D. Haggerty took over as editor in 2007 and within a few months, decided to go electronic and open access with the journal. While everyone involved had many questions and qualms, they ultimately ‘took the plunge.’

Related Information Re: Printing Processes

Click here for a printing press demonstration on Youtube

A more recent version of the printing press:

(source)

Using the Open Journal System (OJS)

Moving to electronic publishing has reduced many of the traditional problems involved with the printing process and OJS has features that are very helpful, such as its functionality for the second review– the system automatically generates a list of reviewers and filters out those who have already declined in the first review.

However, OJS still poses many problems for users, so patience and technical support is absolutely critical.

Session Questions

Comment: There are currently seventeen journals running on the University of Alberta website, but the Canadian Journal of Sociology has been the most conversive, and questions have really pushed the development of OJS forward.

Question: What was the driving force to move to online and open access? We were becoming aware of the new generation of scholars coming up, and they are expecting to see their info on the internet. Also, printing and mailing is becoming increasingly expensive.

Question: How many copies were being printed prior to moving to electronic form? Answer: 1000

Question: How has converting from print to open access impacted the finances of the journal? Answer: It was a subscription journal, but the journal has been anomalous. We had some money in the bank, and received money from aggregators who have continued to contribute. One of the reasons for moving to open access was that subscriptions were dwindling– libraries were declining because they were lacking space and funding.

Question: Any plans to digitize back files? Answer: Yes. We haven’t tried it yet, but are definitely planning to.

Question: What is your business model? How much does it really cost to run the journal? Revenue stream? etc. Answer: Revenue stream usually from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and aggregators, but we also had money in bank that was invested. We also benefit from non-monetary things that the university provides, such as office space, release time from teaching for Dr. Haggerty, etc.

References

Taking the plunge Haggerty, K.D. (2008). “Taking the plunge: open access at the Canadian Journal of Sociology” Information Research, 13(1) paper 338. [Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/13-1/paper338.html]

Related Links

• Taking the plunge: open access at the Canadian Journal of Sociology
• Canadian Journal of Sociology
• Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC)
• Open Journal System (OJS)
• University of Alberta
  

Presenter: Sara Fuchs, Digital Initiatives Library, Department of Scholarly Communication & Digital Services, Georgia Institute of Technology

Sara Fuchs

Time: 4-5pm, July 9th, 2009

Place: SFU Harbour Centre, Sauder Industries Room 2270

———————————————————————————————

Abstract

Session Overview

Background

The Georgia Tech Library Department of Scholarly Communication & Digital Services set up an institutional repository in 2004 in hopes that faculty members could self-submit. Although they had always had a repository, it was usually set up after conferences had occurred. The department later decided to provide more support and began to help faculty create, store and view their papers, especially since nobody else on campus was offering similar services. The service provides both conference and journal support, as well as the uploading of any video recordings (of lectures as well), and digital archiving on the centralized repository for Georgia Tech authored materials, known as SMARTech. Submission onto SMARTech requires that the authors grant a non-exclusive license to Georgia Tech for non-commercial uses– mainly to raise awareness about open access to graduate students and supporting scholarly collaboration. SMARTech is now one of the largest institutional repositories in the United States and 35th in the world according to the Ranking Web of World Repositories, a project by the Spanish public research body Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC).

Lessons Learned with Open Conference Systems (OCS)

OCS works well for what it is supposed to do. It was a low pressure situation for the department because there was no need to maintain the OCS software, as everything was eventually going to end up in the repository. They found that clients enjoyed using OCS much more than the normal email workflow.

However, there were still challenges. With OCS, the process of accepting and rejecting proposals was more difficult– conference calls seemed to be much easier, and there is always a time lag in uploading presentations. Another challenge surfaced while setting up the Open Repositories 2009 Conference, mainly because they were working with two different websites. It made it very difficult to collect and retrieve conference papers. The Access Services Conference was the first time the payment function of OCS was used. Again, it was difficult to synchronize across two websites and this required going through multiple steps.

Customization

Clients wanted something more slick and streamlined, and wanted to use the more interactive parts of OCS, such as giving comments directly to authors, etc. In order to do this, all .css and template files had to be modified. New headers needed to be created, as well as modification of some menus, journal layout, and downloading of specific plug-ins. This proved to be very time-consuming, and this took design changes out of the hands of journal managers/editors. That being said, clients were highly satisfied and this became a showpiece of the department’s collaboration with faculty.

Questions

(Ran out of time)

Comment: Some of the difficulty in syncing between two websites might be easier if you upload/download directly from OCS instead of another location.

Related Links

• SMARTech
• EPAGE
• Information Technologies & International Development (ITID)
• IPPW-6 International Planetary Probe Workshop
• Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy 2009
• Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)

July 9, 2:30 PM – Sauder Industries Room 2270

Presenters

Devon Greyson, Information Specialist with the UBC Centre for Health Services and Policy Research

Donald Taylor, Electronic Resources Librarian at Simon Fraser University

Session Abstract

Background

The presentation provided an overview of a recently completed, quantitative study on the compliance of Canadian University libraries, as well as their concomitant research offices, with legislated funder mandates. Canadian research projects must provide open access versions of their findings as a condition of receiving financial support. The two presenters, Devon Greyson and Donald Taylor, outline the model used to determine relationships amongst all relevant parties, the guiding research questions, their methodology, the results and areas that require more investigation.

Session Overview

Devon Grayson at the PKP Conference (with permission)

Devon Greyson began the presentation by providing an overview of the study, which will be available through open access, on funding mandate compliance. Essentially this was a group project that created a common conceptual model of how research works in Canadian universities.

Scholarly Research Cycle (posted with permission of authors)

Open access has changed this research model, particularly because of Open Access Mandates instituted by Canadian research funders. The CIHR (Canadian Institute of Health Research) requires open access to peer reviewed articles within 6 months of publication, which places significant “impetus on the researcher” to publish results on line, or else funding will be curtailed. Similar policies in other Canadian organisations in the health sector, such as the Genome Project, are in place.

The Study’s Methodology

The study focussed on Canadian universities as a whole, which was represented by the libraries and research offices of each institution. The researchers used to following questions to guide their study:

(1) Are the various research agencies aware of open access funding mandates?

(2) Do they view the mandates as part of their purview?

(3) What is the extent of coordination between the libraries and research offices at each university?

Although there have been similar studies before, the survey questions used did not suit the Canadian context. Consequently new questions were drafted that applied to the research model above. The study concerned itself only with members of the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) and separate surveys were given to the respective libraries and research offices involved.

Donald Taylor pic

Overview of the Results

Donald Taylor at the PKP Conference (with permission)

Donald Taylor continued the presentation by reviewing the preliminary results. Surprisingly, only forty eight percent of research administration offices returned surveys, but sixty seven percent of libraries responded. Only thirty seven percent of the universities involved completed both surveys.

Sense of Mandate (posted with permission of authors)

Activity (posted with permission of authors)

Awareness (posted with permission of authors)

The three slides above illustrate that libraries are far more aware of the open access funder mandates than their counterparts. All of the libraries are aware of the mandates, compared to seventy eight percent of research offices. It is clear that libraries have a clearer understanding of their mandate to provide broad education on open access issues, whereas research offices recorded low numbers across the spectrum of questions. Furthermore, libraries were far more willing to engage in open access related activities or plan future endeavours than their research offices. Lastly, sixty percent of universities and research departments were aware of the other’s activity.

Conclusions

The results and responses tend to paint a picture of a lack of coordination and collaboration between two parties, with a few exceptions (some universities planned to include cooperation with other departments). It is also clear that there is an awareness lag between librarians and research administrators. It would seem that the two divisions have different views of their roles with regards to the mandates.

Follow-up Questions

(1) Is there overall compliance with mandates?

(2) Do authors want to participate in OA activities?

(3) How do we change the attitudes of researchers?

Analysis

This study illustrates that there is a distinct lack of understanding and cooperation on behalf of research offices to comply with legislated funding mandates, which explains Geist’s assertion that many universities are agonisingly slow to adopt open access initiatives (2007). These mandates have been instituted to ensure that researchers self archive their work and make it freely available in the associated institutional repository, which benefits the research community as a whole. It would seem that some research is being stalled as a result of a lack of compliance and that many journal publications resent having their economic domains infringed upon.

Related Links

Devon Greyson articles on Scientific Commons

Donald Taylor articles on Scientific Commons

Canadian Mandates Explained

Developments in Canadian Funding Mandates for OA

References

Geist, M. (2007). Push for open access to research . BBC News, Retrieved July 9, 2009, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6404429.stm

July 9, 11:30 AM – Earl and Jennie Lohn Room 7000

Presenter

Glenn M. Hymel, Professor and former Chair of the Department of Psychology at Loyola University New Orleans

Session Abstract

Background

This session covered the development of an online, open access, peer reviewed quarterly: The International Journal of Therapeutic Massage & Bodywork (IJTMB). The journal is intended to support practitioners in the field of complementary & integrative medicine (CIM).

Session Overview

Glenn Hymel (Source)

Professor Glenn Hymel began the session by outlining three objectives for his presentation: (1) to address recent developments and the progress to date of the IJTMB (2) to provide a journal editor’s perspective regarding policy decisions and procedural guidelines in the context of open access publishing (3) to provide a potential model that other independent journals could use. Subsequently, the professor described the journal as an open access, peer reviewed quarterly publication that reflects the Massage Therapy Foundation’s (MTF) mission to promote research, education as well as current best practice in the field of massage and bodywork. The MTF is a non-profit charity, but it does charge its members fees to cover operating costs.

Professor Hymel proceeded to discuss the scope of the IJTMB, which encompasses editorials, research, education, practice sections, commentaries, book reviews and announcements that are relevant to the massage profession. The journal’s board of trustees, comprising an e-Journal committee, an editorial board, an editor in chief and a manuscript review board, have final control of the budget, as well as its membership. The board had a number of key decisions to make during the formative stages of the journal, such as the software to use, the peer review process to follow and the stylistic requirements needed. Ultimately, the trustees agreed to use multi-Med (A Canadian Company) for publishing, a double blind review protocol that includes evaluation from a medical review board and style guidelines consistent CIM and allopathic journals. Lastly, the organisation chose to use creative commons licenses as their copyright policy.

Hymel concluded his presentation by discussing the issue of citation and accreditation. The journal uses the Google Analytics service to obtain quantitative input (web stats) that determines the IJTMB’s impact. The credibility derived from frequent web hits has been hampered by a lack of successful manuscript submissions, which demonstrates a need to make the review process more efficient, improved authorship guidelines, reader input through comment features and more extensive use of supplementary, multi-media files to augment entries. It was also suggested that the journal develop a plug-in “to enable continuing education activities related to journal articles”.

The professor answered a few questions at the end of the period. His responses reaffirmed the IJTMB’s intent to improve its effectiveness, as well as its immediacy by being quicker to release submitted articles between quarterly issues. Hymel hoped that this would increase availability. The professor also explained that that they have had to outsource contracting in order to reduce costs.

Analysis

The point of view of an independent online journal striving to serve its members and gain credibility as a reputable, authoritative resource is a profoundly recurring theme within the open access community. The challenge of balancing costs, yet maintaining a high quality journal is also significant. Furthermore, it is particularly interesting that professor Hymel advocates improved user friendly controls that promote interactivity and a more robust reading experience. The ability of members to possibly change or influence the original document and leave their comments potentially diminishes the reliability of such a publication, which is one of the established goals of the IJTMB. The tension between using the technology in a new and exciting ways, while maintaining traditionally defined authority, is problematic for all online journals. Can this paradox be resolved?

Related Links

The International Journal of Therapeutic Massage & Bodywork

The Massage Therapy Foundation

Loyola University New Orleans

July 9, 11:00 AM – Fletcher Challenge Room 1900

Panellists

Barbara Cohen, Director of Humanitech, University of California, Irvine.  Steering Group, The Open Humanities Press.

Gary Hall, Professor, Media and Performing Arts, Coventry University, UK.  Co-founder of The Open Humanities Press.

Marta Brunner, Librarian for English and American Literature and Comparative Literature at the Charles E. Young Research Library at UCLA

Shana Kimball, Publications Manager in the Scholarly Publishing Office (SPO) at the University of Michigan Library

Session Abstract (Not Applicable)

Logo (source)

Background

This question period followed a series of presentations related to the Open Humanities Press and two libraries that are supporting their new endeavours of producing single monograph titles. The questions from the audience have been quoted as exactly as possible with the condensed responses from the panel provided underneath.

Relevant Sessions

Part 1 – On Open Humanities Press: A Panel Presentation by Members of the OHP Steering Group

Part 2 –  On Library Publishing and the Open Humanities Press: A Panel Presentation by the UCLA Library and the University of Michigan Library’s Scholarly Publishing Office

Session Overview

Question 1: How is the OHP dealing with the lack of representations of many cultures and the issue of concentration of media control, such as Thomson Scientific?

Hall replied that he has “huge problems with Thomson Scientific” because all journals have to be registered with them. Younger, less established researchers, or those who are marginalised, cannot publish due to the prohibitive cost. The high price for translating work into English is also impeding academics of other cultures from gaining their due recognition.

Question 2: How do you establish accreditation when the OHP is creating decentralising and destabilising force? Furthermore, if we are in a stage of transition how do we reassure our scholars about the credibility and reliability of open access journals?

Cohen lead the response of the panellists by asserting that we that we have to cope in times of change. We are still retaining some traditions as we move forward, which Bolter refers to as remediation when one media uses the prestige of another to gain credibility (Bolter, 2001). Cohen further asserts that the goal of OHP was to match print quality online: Now it is to surpass it. Kimball then added that experimental works, such as the liquid novel, provided authors with a wider range of options, which benefits everyone. Brunner contended that we need to enthusiastically embrace these trends in order to ensure innovation. Hall argued that the Press is conscious of forging ahead, but that “it also needs to bring people along with it”. Hall stated that there is a tension that exists between being innovative and reassuring scholars that online journals are credible, authoritative sources.

Question 3: How do we give credit and attribution to original authors? How is the author being redefined?

Hall answered that Wikis are collaborative, but there is software that can track input. Hall is actually disappointed in this scenario given that this is a regression of sorts to old traditional authorship. Academics are becoming increasingly involved in open access because it leads to greater prestige for authorship, but again this aligns with old customs that don’t suit the goals of new media.

Question 4: What are the business models for open access monographs? Is grant money part of this equation?

Cohen agreed that grants are important and that as the OHP moves to the monograph series they will be made available. Kimball answered that Michigan State is exploring new revenue streams, but they are operating on the traditional model of rewarding authorship. Hall added that authors are now paying in many cases. Kimball clarified that new alternatives, such as teaching relief, are needed to be offered to reward “gifts of labour” in this new era. Another idea would be to create graduate fellowships or scholarships to do valuable research assistant work. This would work well in libraries because many unknown collections still haven’t been processed. Hall suggested that we “could shift the library model” so that each one publishes its own work and then freely shares it. He concluded that there is no easy access.

Question 5: What are liquid books?

Hall re-established that liquid books are actually referring back to their original status as conglomerations of knowledge. A liquid is fluid and constantly moving, which is why it is an appropriate description for what books really are.

Analysis

The seminal question during this period exposed the issue of how the OHP has to negotiate the contradictory pressures to succumb to traditional models of academic endorsement in order to gain credibility, as well as to provide a vehicle for innovation, originality and modernisation. Furthermore, a press such as the OHP needs to have a business model in order to cover the costs accrued, which is anathema to the ideals of open access proponents. This tension between open and restricted access, or market oriented and non-profit motives, are creating a dialectic series of synthesises that will eventually lead to the pervasiveness of open access content (Schmidt et al., 2005); however, these changes will likely need to retain some features of the old models in order to maintain legitimacy.

Related Links

Liquid Books

Human Tech (Barbara Cohen)

University of Michigan Scholarly Publishing Office

Open Humanities Press

Gary Hall Discusses His Philosophy with regards to Online Content

References

Bolter, J. D. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schmidt, K. D., Sennyey, P., & Carstens, T. V. (2005). New roles for a changing environment: Implications of open access for libraries. College & Research Libraries, September, Retrieved July 9, 2009, from http://paws.wcu.edu/kschmidt/publications/CandRL.pdf

July 9, 9:30 AM – Fletcher Challenge Room 1900

Presenters:

Marta Brunner, Librarian for English and American Literature and Comparative Literature at the Charles E. Young Research Library at UCLA

Shana Kimball, Publications Manager in the Scholarly Publishing Office (SPO) at the University of Michigan Library

Session Abstract

Archived Video Stream of Session

Background

This session provided the library perspective as a follow up to the previous discussion on the Open Humanities Press (OHP) and its involvement with digital monographs, or “liquid books” (Hall). UCLA is working in partnership with the Open Humanities Press to fulfil a number of open access ideals, while the University of Michigan Library is working specifically to produce and distribute many of the works housed by the OHP online.

Session Overview

Marta Brunner at the PKP Conference (courtesy J. Miller)

Marta Brunner began the second half of the Open Humanities session by explaining her involvement with the online press. Originally she blogged the OHP and its endeavours prior to being contacted by one its founders, Sigi Jöttkandt, to be part of the body’s steering committee. Brunner has used her association with the OHP to bridge the dichotomous divide between research and library domains, which UCLA library has found to be an enormous asset.

“What future is UCLA library working to achieve?” Brunner asserted that this overarching question is the underlying motivation for the university’s work with the OHP. Furthermore, in light of the financial crisis and reduced budgets, open access issues are at a “watershed moment” where scholars and librarians will be working together to make more research freely available online. Brunner then outlined the library’s six fold vision, which ranges in order from most to least achievable:

1. UCLA seeks to be a flourishing hub of institutional repositories. While this is gaining ground many professors are still distrustful of online sources and perceive them to lack the same credibility as their print counterparts.

2. The library envisions itself as a curator of scholarly records. While this is considered a mandate for most university libraries, the “costs of migration” mean that “much content is overlooked” (Brunner).

3. UCLA hopes to disseminate an increasing amount of new digital media, which “enables semantically enhanced” (Brunner) products. The library has not been able to fulfil this goal on a large scale, but has created digital maps through the Hypercities project.

4. The library anticipates playing a greater role in providing open access content in classrooms. The UCLA library uses “a more liberal policy” (Brunner) towards content, which aligns neatly with the ideals of the OHP. One of the main benefits of this institutional leniency will be the increasing availability of cheaper text books spawned from more widely recognised open access scholarship.

5. The UCLA library hopes to be a paragon of a sustainable business model for housing and distributing open access content. Brunner used the comparison of the cost of a Toyota Corolla and the journal “Applied Polymer Science”: The periodical costs considerably more. Consequently, libraries will be facing economic crises as budgets are cut and journal costs stay high.

6. The most difficult goal to attain will be reducing to restrictive nature of academic tenure on open access scholarship. The generally perceived lack of authority of online sources continues to hinder the open access movement.

Shana Kimball at the PKP Conference (Courtesy J. Miller)

Shana Kimball began by posing a different question: “How do we scale a liquid book?” The University of Michigan Scholarly Publishing Office (SPO) seeks to provide an answer for this important query. Kimball outlined the role of the publishing branch of the library bOpen Humanities Press Panelefore explaining its core principles. The speaker then elaborated upon how these values guide the publisher’s work towards making research publications more cost effective, as well as elucidating on its partnership with the Open Humanities Press.

The University of Michigan publishing branch currently supports forty predominantly open access online journals, as well as a few print publications. The organisation also runs a “robust” reprint service for its online repositories and has published over 9000 titles on Amazon. Additionally, the SPO is working with the OHP to develop its online monograph (single subject books) endeavour as part of a pilot project whereby the university will “convert, host, provide access to, and archive” the series.

The University of Michigan Scholarly Publishing Office also operates with a set of six main beliefs to guide its aim of making scholarly publishing “more sustainable and scalable” (Kimball):

1. The SPO works at the peripheries of mainstream library services by providing copyright counsel in the copyright arena, cataloguing metadata, maintaining digital library functions and financing complicated transactions.

2. The SPO forms partnerships with other organisations to provide supplementary services, such as content sharing or publication conversions into digital forms amongst other enterprises.

3. The SPO believes strongly in protecting the rights of authors to use their own material as they see fit.

4. The SPO takes small, calculated risks that focus on perpetuating and promoting experimental texts, such as producing scholarly works within Comment Press that can be freely annotated.

5. The SPO provides a myriad of services that range from electronic publication to print on demand to content preservation.

6. The SPO is working cooperatively with the Open Humanities Press to extend its number of published series, as well as further enhance its reputation for high quality academic work. Authors will be able to choose to use a creative commons license while retaining copyright protection.

Ultimately, the SPO cannot attain the goal of supporting the OHP without creating partnerships with other bodies. Furthermore, the task of producing single monograph publications is a daunting one because the library / publisher relationship has been traditionally weak. Kimball concluded her presentation by welcoming interested parties to inquire about future collaborative endeavours and reaffirmed her organisation’s commitment to building the reputation of open access content, as well as being an agent of change in the advancement of the Open Humanities Press’ ideals.

Analysis

Both the UCLA Library and the University of Michigan Scholarly Publishing Office acknowledge to importance of the Open Humanities Press and seek to propagate its principles to the wider academic community. However, achieving change and gaining acknowledgment is proving to be difficult due to general academic distrust, high operational costs, a system of reputation based incentives that favour established scholars, as well as an overwhelming amount of content through which to sort. The goals of the OHP are laudable, but there needs to be an economic compromise between open dissemination of information at no cost to the consumer and providing profitable rewards to creators, researchers or artists in order to perpetuate the transmission of knowledge. The University of Michigan SPO appears to be negotiating this difficult dialectic by working with open access supporters, while charging for unique services and publishing traditional print journals, which is referred to as the mixed approach (Schmidt et al., 2005). The UCLA library, on the other hand, is focussing on reducing costs by embracing predominantly open access works. It will be interesting to see which institution offers the more sustainable business model and if other libraries will adopt these new paradigms. Moreover, it illustrates that the new open access ethos is having to coexist with traditional print resources until an alternative, yet effective, system of rewards can be established.

Related Links

Open Humanities Press

UCLA Library

University of Michigan Scholarly Publishing Office

Hypercities

Comment Press

References

Albert, K. M. (2006). Open access: implications for scholarly publishing and medical libraries. J Med Libr Assoc, 94 (3), Retrieved July 9, 2009, from http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1525322&blobtype=pdf

Antelman, K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact?. College & Research Libraries, September, Retrieved July 9, 2009, from http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/publications/crljournal/2004/sep/antelman.pdf

Schmidt, K. D., Sennyey, P., & Carstens, T. V. (2005). New roles for a changing environment: Implications of open access for libraries. College & Research Libraries, September, Retrieved July 9, 2009, from http://paws.wcu.edu/kschmidt/publications/CandRL.pdf

Presenter: Mark Weiler, PhD Candidate, Simon Fraser University

Background

Freedom of information (FOI) legislation was enacted in Canada in 1983.  This legislation, in existence in various forms throughout the world, allows individuals to request access to government-held information.  In Canada, there is no formal database to allow interested parties to search for previously submitted FOI requests, or for the documents released as a result of these requests.

Session Overview – Session Abstract

Mark Weiler is interested in developing technologies that allow students and other academics to carry out historical research.  Recently, he became interested in the use of Open Journal Systems (OJS) and its capacity to make government-held knowledge more accessible to academics as well as to the general public.  This interest is in keeping with the aims and goals of the Open Access movement, namely, to make accessible information held by the government through Freedom of Information legislation.

Open Government Records (OGR), initially designed as a plug-in for OJS, helps journals to submit, track and publish FOI requests and the resulting correspondence and documentation that follows these initial requests.

The OGR website currently offers access to several FOI repositories touching on a number of areas of interest, including public servant curriculum and scholarships/grants.  What the website allows, above and beyond what a traditional print-published compilation of the FOI requests would, is the ability to offer access as the documents are obtained.

Commentary and Questions

The ensuing discussion highlighted a number of the potential uses of the OGR technology.  Notably, journalism schools were felt to be likely beneficiaries.  This type of repository could help inform work on government policy, public servant salaries, etc…  There was concern, however, that journalists may be reluctant to submit FOI requests to a database for fear of being “scooped”.

Another area of discussion concerned to potential use of this type of technology to help users submit information requests to journals in order to obtain more information about their corporate structure and partnerships.

Related links

Below are a series of links to websites and societies dedicated to civic action and freedom of information;

Open Government Records – The OGR website, with its FOI repositories.

Visible Government – A Canadian NGO website dedicated to increasing government transparency.

What Do They Know? – Database of UK FOI requests.

MySociety – UK civic action website.

References

Weiler, M. (2009). Publishing freedom of information: the open government records plugin for ojs. PKP Scholarly Publishing Conference 2009. Retrieved 2009-07-08, from http://pkp.sfu.ca/ocs/pkp/index.php/pkp2009/pkp2009/paper/view/131

Presenter: Syd Weidman, Library Systems Supervisor, University of Winnipeg – Session Abstract

Session Overview

Why was this an issue?

With the transition to open-access publishing of several journals at the University of Winnipeg, Syd Weidman and the University library have been involved in multiple aspects of this transformation.  Given that these journals have been in print for decades, one of the major obstacles that needed to be addressed was the importation of back issues into an online, open-access compatible format.

Initial attempts using the available software proved difficult.  They were met with bugs and their associated patches; overall, Syd described the process as “laborious and convoluted”.  He surmised that “in the context of importing [a large volume of] back issues, small efficiencies [may] have a large impact.”  With this notion in mind, Syd began work on the Open Journal Systems (OJS) Import Project.

Tackling the problem – Use of Django

Syd highlighted the basic design goals of any software to be used for this purpose; he stressed that the process needed to be as EASY as possible.  He sought to optimize the software’s ease of CONSTRUCTION, USE, DEPLOYMENT and MAINTENANCE.  Being most familiar and comfortable with the Python programming language, Syd opted to use the Django Web framework to build a Web-based application to carry out the task of importing back issues.

Django is an open-source framework that was initially used by the online publishing industry.  With a short digression, Syd took a moment to review the “4 freedoms” of open-source software, being the “free” use of software for any purpose, free access to its code, freedom to modify as well as an understanding that improvements will be shared with others (for more, take a look at the Free Software Foundation’s website.)  Django, in particular, has several advantages over other similar frameworks, namely:

• object relational mapping – allows use of fewer lines of programming, increasing robustness
• automatic administrator interface
• elegant URL design
• pluggable template system
• flexible and robust cache system
• i18n compatible – allows for the application to be adapted to other languages without significant engineering changes
• excellent documentation
• an active mailing list (a double-edged sword!)

Success!

With the development of the new importation software, the U of W was able to scan backissues into .pdf format, to ultimately be uploaded into their respective online journals.  This required the entering of appropriate metadata in order to allow for accurate archiving and searching.

Challenges and future directions

One of the difficulties in developing a script for another piece of software is to ensure that they remain in sync when new versions appear.  In a subsequent OJS release following the development of the OJS importing application, incompatibilities/bugs appeared, and needed patching.

Commentary/Questions

Just prior to the question period, Syd mentioned the recent development of another application, “Quick Submit”, which may now be able to perform similar functions to his program.

Related Links

References

Weidman, S. (2009). Importing backissues into ojs: development of an ojs import script with django. PKP Scholarly Publishing Conference 2009. Retrieved 2009-07-08, from http://pkp.sfu.ca/ocs/pkp/index.php/pkp2009/pkp2009/paper/view/190

Presenter: Heather Morrison, Project Co-ordinator, BC Electronic Library Network – Session abstract

Heather’s presentation was recorded.  It’s available here.

Session Overview

In this session, Heather Morrison presented an overview of the economic environment in which scholarly publication currently exists, focusing her attention on potential effects of the growth of the Open Access (OA) movement on this environment.

The Macroeconomics of Scholarly Publishing

Heather began by framing her discussion with the modern definition of economics, that is, the study of our behavior and the means by which we achieve certain ends given limited resources.  This was used to raise the following question: “Where is the money to help with the transition to fully OA publishing?”

The current economic situation was then explored with a description of the estimated costs of per-article publishing in the domains of science and technology.  These estimates range widely from one publisher to the next;

• BMC – 1500$/article
• PLoS One – 1300$/article
• Springer Open Choice – 3000$/article
• Hindawi – 800$/article

These costs, among not-for-profit publishers, are broken down in the following way:

In the realm of highly profitable for-profit publishing, the per-article cost is broken down in the following manner (as per Heather Morrison’s research).  Alarmingly, in this economic model, nearly 50% of the per-article revenue goes to profits and taxes.  Perhaps most interestingly, she pointed to a number of examples where for-profit publishers charged from 6 to 7 times more for publications that were actually less cited than similar journals put out by not-for-profit publishers.

Alternative to the current model

Looking at these numbers allows an examination of costs that may be reduced through a transition to fully OA publishing and the introduction of a number of efficiencies.  OA technology such as Open Journal Systems could offer the following benefits;

• reduction in the costs of coordinating the refereeing process
• elimination of typesetting and printing costs
• reduced systems and staffing costs
• elimination of authentication, hosting and troubleshooting costs
• dropping the need for copyright policing

Other less direct efficiencies introduced by the adoption of fully open-access publishing include a rethinking of the rejection process, with a reduction in the need to resubmit rejected articles to additional journals.

With these new efficiencies and cost savings, Heather suggests, libraries would have additional resources to allocate to building collections, rather than buying collections; to funding institutional repositories rather than spending on inter-library loans and to digitizing and preserving electronic collections rather than shelving print journals.

What if the subscription-based scholarly publishing industry were to collapse?

The concern has been raised by a number of publishers that the introduction of fully open access publication may threaten the viability of the current subscription-based model.  Heather contends that although they are unlikely to fail any time soon, if the major publishers collapsed, there is sufficient open-access support available to help journals carry on with their publishing activities.  She argues that this collapse (again, however unlikely) would provide an opportunity to rethink, renew and rebuild our publishing system.

Commentary

Not surprisingly, this presentation gave rise to a healthy amount of discussion.  Questions were directed both to Heather Morrison and Frederick Friend who gave a talk on the future of scholarly publishing.  The following questions were raised;

How would fully open-access publishing be cheaper than the subscription-based system? The savings are thought to come from the wresting of control of costs from the publishers into the hands of academics.  In order for the savings to materialize, however, academics will need to focus on transforming several aspects of the economics of publishing.

If libraries are already struggling to cope with the rising costs of subscriptions, how can they set aside money for open-access initiatives? This will likely require a multi-faceted approach.  Librarians will need to set priorities along with researchers in order to make decisions about which subscriptions are most needed.  If needed, they may also need to consider canceling “one big deal” in order to leave room for OA funding.

Related links

References

Morrison, H. (2009). Open access and the economics of scholarly communication. PKP Scholarly Publishing Conference 2009. Retrieved 2009-07-08, from http://pkp.sfu.ca/ocs/pkp/index.php/pkp2009/pkp2009/paper/view/136