Re: Journal expenses and publication costs

From: Lee Miller <lnm2_at_CORNELL.EDU>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 13:09:19 -0500

At 11:31 AM 1/17/2003 Friday -0500, Albert Henderson wrote:

> The open access model promises the end of libraries
> and librarians as reductions in library spending
> reach a final conclusion. Such an end to library
> spending will very likely mean an end to journals,
> the economic power of faculty, including learned
> associations, editors, and political leadership.

The open access model will fail if it does not guarantee the continued
support of journals that provide high quality peer review. But there is no
reason why the model cannot accommodate such support.

> More downloads are not necessarily better, since
> the main cost of information is the cost of
> readers' reading and associated activities. Tenopir
> and King point out the cost of readings far exceeds
> the cost of journals and its potential for saving.
> This is where publishers' delivery of select
> material to a select audience outstrips the various
> open plans which force the reader to consider
> unrefereed and quack articles.

Scientists are capable of recognizing reliable sources of information.
Peer-reviewed journals have always served as those sources, and they will
continue to do so in the open access world. Scientists may read unrefereed
preprints from known, reliable colleagues, but they generally do not waste
their time reading unrefereed articles (unless the article was sent to them
for review by the editor of a journal they respect.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lee N. Miller phone: (607) 255-3221
Editor Emeritus
Ecological Society of America
118 Prospect Street, Suite 212
Ithaca, NY 14850 USA email: lnm2_at_cornell.edu
Received on Fri Jan 17 2003 - 18:09:19 GMT