Croatian Open Access Declaration, the “Hamster” portal, and open access theology journals

I received an email last month from Matina Ćaran, theological librarian at the Biblijski institut/Bible Institute in Zagreb, Croatia about open access initiatives happening in her country. She told me about the Croatian Open Access Declaration that was officially released on October 24, 2012, and about Hrčak (“Hamster”) an open access scientific journals portal, which also hosts a number of journals in theology, including Kairos, a title published by the Bible Institute. I want to thank Ms. Ćaran for bringing these initiatives to my attention. I am also indebted to Dr. Ivana Hebrang Grgić, senior research associate with the Department of Information Science Faculty of Philosophy in Zagreb, whose book Open Access to Scientific Information in Croatia: Increasing Research Impact of a Scientifically Peripheral Country (2011, pre-publication version) added significantly to my understanding of the current state of open access in Croatia as I was researching for this piece. Thanks too, goes to Google Translate, which helped me immensely with the Croatian language.

Croatian Open Access Declaration

The Croatian Open Access Declaration was presented at a workshop hosted by the Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Zagreb, on October 24, 2012 during International Open Access Week. The workshop featured presentations by professors, librarians, computer information technologists, and a computer science student. The opening speech was given on behalf of the Croatian Ministry of Science, Education and Sports—the central funding body for basic research in Croatia—which has put open access to scientific literature on the national agenda. The first signatories of the Declaration were members of the organizing committee and presenters at the workshop.

To express our concern caused by lack of strategic points of reference on access, dissemination, storage and preservation of scientific information in Croatia, we are making the Croatian Open Access Declaration the purpose of which is to sensitise everyone who participates in creation, publishing, use, and preservation of scientific information in Croatia. In our declaration we are stressing the fundamental importance of scientific information, necessity of it being available to everyone, and obligation of its permanent preservation. Open Access means unrestricted, free, and undisturbed online access to digital scientific information that allows scientific information to be read, stored, distributed, searched, reached, indexed and/or used in any other legal way. Unrestricted in this context means free of any restrictions and terms imposed upon its access and use. For the purpose of having unrestricted access to the information, it is necessary to guarantee anonymity to the information users. … We are inviting the state administration, headed by the ministry responsible for science, as well as scientific and educational institutions, organisations, professional associations, and all the others involved in gathering and publishing scientific information to act decisively and in coordination in order to store all the Croatian scientific information in open access form. (from the Declaration)

As of February 2, 2013, 549 persons have added their names in support of the Croatian Open Access Declaration.

Hrčak (“Hamster”): Portal of Scientific journals of Croatia

In 2003, the Croatian Information and Documentation Society developed an idea for a central online portal for storing and accessing Croatian scientific and professional journals. The platform was developed and is maintained by the University Computing Centre, University of Zagreb, and it receives support from the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports of the Republic of Croatia as part of the government’s Science and Technology Policy [PDF]. The portal, which was launched to the public in February 2006, is called Hrčak, or “Hamster,” (apparently) named for that rodent’s remarkable ability to stuff its cheeks with food, which it then safely stores in its nest, to eat as needed at a later time. Not only is Hrčak intended as a portal for current access, it also serves as an archive for ongoing preservation, including journal titles no longer in publication. The Hrčak portal utilizes Open Journal Systems (OJS) publishing and peer-review management backend.

Thanks to Hrčak, publishers have a free, simple and fast tool for creating online versions of their journals, i.e. for small effort and no cost they can become OA publishers. Publishers are responsible for the regular uploading of full text articles and for inputting metadata at journal, issue and article level. Authors can see their articles’ download counters; their articles have better visibility and impact. Research and academic institutions get the chance for better dissemination of their research results. Readers (who can be scientists or the wider general public) can easily access the results of publicly funded research. Web robot software programs can disseminate information about the articles to the global scientific community. (Hebrang Grgić, pp. 48-49.)

According to Dr. Hebrang Grgić the majority of journal publishers in Croatia are not-for-profit, a status that makes them eligible for government support. According to the “Code of ethics for editors on the Hrčak portal” [PDF in Croatian], open access content is a pre-requisite for inclusion in Hrčak, with preference given to content that is immediately available (simultaneous with the release of a print or digital version). In special publishing circumstances, an embargo of up to 6 months is allowed, though issues will not be publicly displayed as published in the portal during this time. Finally, to enhance international visibility of Croatian research published through the portal, bibliographic information such as titles, abstracts, and keywords should be included in English and other languages. Conversely, inclusion of foreign-published Croatian research in Hrčak should include bibliographic information in Croatian. As of this writing, Hrčak has archived 323 journals, 7,013 issues, and 88,218 full-text articles.

UPDATE: I received further information about Hrčak from the portal’s development team at the University Computing Centre, University of Zagreb. The name “Hamster” is an acronym for HRvatski (Croatian) CAsopisi (journals). The portal was developed in-house and has been designed to be easy to use. “It does not support the whole publishing process like OJS, just the publication of ‘finished’ articles. Journal editors do all the manual work. They enter articles (each article as separate pdf) and respective metadata for their journal. We also have an OJS instance for interested journal editors, and have implemented a bridge between OJS and our back-end so there is no need to duplicate effort.”

Theological journals in Hrčak/Hamster

Calling this a portal for scientific journals is technically misleading from a disciplinary standpoint, because Hrčak also includes journals in the social sciences and the humanities. “Scientific” here is meant to encompass any systematic scholarly study of a topic or subject.

Of particular interest are 22 journal titles listed under Theology. A closer look shows 20 titles with content, including 3 titles that are apparently no longer published, but issues are included for archival access. About half the titles include coverage in theology as part of the inter- or multidisciplinary scope of the journal. Ms. Ćaran is not aware of any significant theological journal that is not included in Hrčak.

About a third of the journals are relatively new, having begun publication in the last 10 years. But several have been around for a long time, including Obnovljeni život/Renewed Life (ISSN 0351-3947), published by the Institute of Philosophy and Theology of Society of Jesus since 1919, and Bogoslovska smotra/Theological Review (ISSN 0352-3101), published by the Catholic Faculty of Theology, University of Zagreb since 1910 and is considered one of the oldest Croatian scientific journals. (I have created links to these titles in the Journal Directory.)

Kairos: Evangelical Journal of Theology

One of the relative new journals is Kairos: Evangelical Journal of Theology (ISSN: 1846-4580 (Croatian), 1846-4599 (English)), published by the Biblijski institut/Bible Institute, Zagreb beginning in 2007. (I have created a link to this title in the Journal Directory.) On the journal’s website, editor Stanko Jambrek lists four goals for the journal.

First, to be a canal for communicating the gospel and biblical values to intellectuals, pastors, preachers, students, believers and society. Second, to be a publishing support to Croatian evangelical theologians and scientists as well as lovers and doers of the Word of God. Third, to be a Croatian Evangelical voice to the world. Fourth, to publish articles of authors from around the world who are important to Evangelical Christianity in Croatia. The academic works of Croatian authors and authors from abroad who work in Croatia or who have been, in some way spiritually connected and influential in Croatia will be published in the articles and discussions section. Articles may be from biblical, systematic and applied theology, ethics, Church history, and sociology of religion, philosophy and church life. The journal publishes academic works that are characterized in accordance with the recommendation of the Ministry of Science, Education and Sport of the Republic of Croatia. Kairos publishes articles that are reviewed and those that are not subject to review. Articles that may be categorized as “academic” or “expert” need to have at least two positive reviews. Reviews are anonymous. The journal publishes articles without review that are of relative content for Evangelical Christianity, well thought out and well written.

I gathered Dr. Jambrek’s statement that the journal publishes academic works “in accordance with the recommendation of the Ministry of Science, Education and Sport of the Republic of Croatia” is referring to standards of academic quality, peer-review, etc. But also because the journal is open access.

As it happens, librarian Matina Ćaran is the journal’s secretary. I was able to ask her about Kairos as an open access journal.

We are proud to say that Kairos has always been open access, and will continue to be so. Kairos has so far been published by the Bible Institute, and as of this year it will continue to be published jointly with the Evangelical Theological Seminary in Osijek, Croatia. It is the first Evangelical theological journal in this region of Europe. Although it is a fairly new journal, over the last six years it has become a true Evangelical voice in these parts of the world, and we are reporting both strong and diverse readership. As a secretary of the Journal, I am happy about our growing exchange with other journals in the region, and presence in various open access databases and libraries.

Ms. Ćaran is also a signatory on the Croatian Open Access Declaration. I asked her about her philosophy of open access.

I am a librarian hoping for the time when I will no longer have say to my fellow students: “This is a article you need, but we cannot get it for you.” My personal philosophy of open access rests primarily on front-line work with students, and my personal experience throughout my previous and current studies: hitting walls of restricted access, having to become skilled in all kinds of ways to get to the requested information, article or book, and trying to work with what one has. However, even before I started working as a librarian at my school, I always believed that scientific information is something that is shared and given, not possessed and bought, and that everyone honestly seeking it for the sake of good should have an equal opportunity to access it.

Hat Tip: Clay Shirky: Open access gives preference to our academic mission not our current practices

Author, consultant, and teacher Clay Shirky was the general session speaker on Wednesday, November 7 at the 2012 EDUCAUSE Annual Conference in Denver, Colorado. The session was entitled “IT as a Core Academic Competence,” and within it Clay Shirky described how the Internet, especially as a milieu for collaboration, is dramatically impacting how people learn and changing the ways in which knowledge is created and shared. The video of the session is available on the EDUCAUSE website, and Shirky’s presentation, which starts about 20 minutes in, is well worth a view.

The first question in the Q&A following Shirky’s presentation (at 59:40) was about open access journals. His response:

The real tension around open access journals is that institutions occasionally get to this moment—the moment I think our community is in—where you’re given a choice between conserving your mission and conserving your practices. Institutions tend to want to preserve the problem to which they are the solution. And so we have a world where trying to keep the current structure of journals intact has become obviously a goal of, say, Reed Elsevier, but also it’s just the easy slot to fall into for tenure committees, if you know how to rank them. At the same time, we have open access journals, which are plainly more in line with our academic self-conception, mission, and goals. Not just for the generic spreading of information, but for the internal professional needs for wide self-criticism and conversation.

So the first thing I think you have to say about open access journals is: We have to support them. Interestingly, as the number of submissions to a journal goes up the quality of the submissions they can choose also goes up. … The other thing we can do, as some institutions have already done, is to announce that our institutional preference is for our mission and not our current practices, and that we expect faculty to expose their work widely for feedback and for conversation. That de facto means preferring the open access journals. Not as a way of intervening in the fight with Reed Elsevier, or what have you, but simply as a way of living up to our own stated goals. (emphasis added)

Hat Tip: “How to Succeed in Publishing Without Really Trying”

This hat tip goes to Bryn Geffert, Librarian of the College at Amherst College, Massachusetts for his creative retelling of C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters on today’s Inside Higher Ed site, entitled “How to Succeed in Publishing Without Really Trying.”

Lewis’ 1942 satirical novel reads as a series of letters written by a senior demon named Screwtape, who is mentoring his inexperienced nephew Wormwood in the finer points of how to secure the soul of an unsuspecting British chap—”the Patient”—into hell.

In Geffert’s retelling, Uncle Screwtape is mentoring Wormwood as an aspiring academic publishing magnate.

My Dear Wormwood,

So you aspire to become an academic publishing magnate. You noble devil.

Supporting the life of the mind. Disseminating research conducted in the public interest. Sharing the output of the academy with those beyond our ivy-encrusted walls. Making information universally accessible. Enlightening the world. Concerned only for the common good, with no thought of profit. Such care for the scholarship, the academy, the developed world, the developing world.

Such altruism. Such nobility of soul.

Your mother raised you right, young man. I am prouder than I can say.

Your Admiring Uncle,

Screwtape

But in true demonic fashion, it turns out Screwtape’s tongue was deeply lodged in his cheek. His second letter begins:

My Dear Wormwood,

For Hades’ sake, you dolt! You wouldn’t recognize sarcasm if it bit you in the nose.

Of course I was joking….

Uncle Screwtape reserves special distain for open access. He encourages his nephew Wormwood to play-off the fears of his scholarly captives, who might deeply suspect their work will not be taken seriously if they publish in an open access venue. Picking up mid-way into this letter, Screwtape writes:

[W]ill any scholar sully her name by allowing a press—no matter how reputable, how long a track record, how committed to quality editing and peer review—to distribute her work for free? Of course not.

Granted, she will receive no compensation for publishing her article with you. But the impressive price tag you put on her book provides an imprimatur of importance, solidity, and worth. A free publication? Your gut and my gut know that gratuitous goods have no value. Free = worthless. Ask any marketing specialist.

Fourth, nobody need remind the professoriate just how many open-access publications are, shall we say, rather sketchy. Consult the Directory of Open Access Journals to peruse a stunning variety of semi-reputable and dodgy titles sprinkled among the worthies that demand rigorous peer review and scrupulous editing.

If we play this right, we can easily tarnish the very notion of open-access by pointing to some embarrassing examples. You know the argument: Toyota once produced a lemon, ergo all Japanese cars are lemons.

Fifth, faculty don’t care whether anybody reads their work. Research indicating that articles in open-access journals enjoy many more readers than articles behind paywalls: couldn’t be more irrelevant. Of absolutely no consequence to academic authors.

And sixth, fear works to our advantage. Gently cultivate the gut-wrenching anxiety of young faculty facing tenure and promotion. Nobody is more uncertain and skittish than an assistant professor planning for D-Day. Milk this for all it’s worth. Remind young faculty how deeply you care about them: your sole concern is their welfare and success, and thus you would be heartbroken if they elected to publish in any journal or with any monograph press that exudes even the faintest odor of novelty. Too great a risk. Anything the least bit unfamiliar is uncertain, and uncertainty is to be avoided like the plague.

Thanks for this great read, Bryn! It nicely captures the spirit of C.S.

Hat Tip: “Would [open access] be prestigious just because we say it is? I say, why not?”

This hat tip goes to Jessica P. Hekman for her May 10, 2012 post on Scientific American’s Guest Blog, “Moving the Prestige to Open-Access Publishing.” Hekman is preparing to graduate from veterinary school. Before this, she had a twelve year career in online publishing, and got her undergraduate degree in medieval studies from Harvard University.

Hekman is reflecting on the April 17, 2012 memorandum sent by the Harvard Library Faculty Advisory Council (covered by me here), which among other things, encouraged faculty to submit their research articles to open access journals in order to “move prestige to open access.”

Implicit in the memo’s encouragement is the truth that if an academic journal has acquired prestige it is only because it originated with the scholars themselves. Recovering this truth disrupts the status quo and creates an opening for brainstorming alternatives.

In the post Hekman is brainstorming. She puts forward an interesting idea that amounts to the creation of post-publication peer review lists of open access articles, vetted by scholars in prestigious academic departments at prestigious academic institutions. Would this work? Hekman herself points out some of the challenges. But what I loved most was her simple disarming directness when she says:

Would inclusion [of open access articles in this review list] be prestigious just because we say it is? I say, why not? The big name journals are prestigious just because we say they are, and because we make hiring and promotion decisions based on publication in them.

Hey, that’s right! Hey, that’s empowering! Thanks Jessica.

Could Harvard Library’s “untenable situation” regarding journal costs help move scholars toward open access?

We write to communicate an untenable situation facing the Harvard Library. Many large journal publishers have made the scholarly communication environment fiscally unsustainable and academically restrictive. This situation is exacerbated by efforts of certain publishers (called “providers”) to acquire, bundle, and increase the pricing on journals.

Thus begins the memorandum dated April 17, 2012 from the Harvard Library Faculty Advisory Council. The memorandum, addressed to Faculty Members in all Schools, Faculties, and Units, is subtitled “Major Periodicals Subscriptions Cannot Be Sustained.”

The memo notes, with an unapologetic jab at commercial profit-taking, that Harvard’s annual cost for journals from these “certain publishers” now approaches $3.75 million.

Even though scholarly output continues to grow and publishing can be expensive, profit margins of 35% and more suggest that the prices we must pay do not solely result from an increasing supply of new articles.

This, insists the Faculty Advisory Council, is unsustainable, and “financially untenable.” The memo makes particular reference to bundling practices that put “major, high-use journals…in with journals consulted far less frequently.”

The memo solicits ideas from faculty, while also offering several options that faculty and the Library might take to address the situation. In addition to seeking other sustainable subscription pricing options, several options relate directly to open access:

• Follow-through on depositing of research into the University’s institutional repository, consistent with faculty-initiated open access policies.
• Consider submission of articles to open access journals; “move prestige to open access.”
• Leverage participation on journal editorial boards to push for open access publishing options, or consider resigning in protest.
• Encourage professional associations “to take control of scholarly literature in their field or shift the management of their e-journals to library-friendly organizations.”

The recommendation that faculty participate in “moving prestige to open access” is especially powerful. Scholars are naturally and understandably drawn to publish their research in high quality, high reputation journals. It is reasonable to suppose that a journal’s prestige will enhance their own. But these are also often the very journals that publishers have priced out of affordability. This recommendation recognizes and affirms that a journal’s prestige actually originates with the scholars themselves. If scholars withheld their articles from these high-priced journals it would not take long for them to lose their prestige. Conversely, if scholars helped to legitimize open access journals with their articles it would not take too long for open access to gain a similar level of prestige.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. Clearly, Harvard University, with historically deep pockets, wields tremendous influence and leverage. Where Harvard leads others may follow. Assuming this is not just a cynical ploy to negotiate a better deal with publishers, which I cannot believe hearing the passion of Professor Robert Darnton, this may very well become a catalyst for fundamental change in scholarly communication. It may serve to empower more scholars to move toward open access.

Open access as a public good: “He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.”

This “hat tip” goes to the Spring 2012 issue of JISC Inform for covering the January 17, 2012 JISC/SCONUL Lecture in London presented by Professor Robert Darnton, Director of the Harvard University Library. Professor Darnton’s lecture was entitled, “The Digital Public Library of America: Current Plans and Future Prospects.”

Darnton spoke on the Digital Public Library of America, an ambitious project that will seek to create a national digital library, bringing together the world’s cultural and scientific record and making it freely accessible to all. In the lecture, Darnton speaks passionately about open access, and coming to view knowledge as a public good.

To set the stage, Darnton references a well-known letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to an Isaac McPherson on August 13, 1813. “Jefferson developed a metaphor,” says Darnton, “which is a description of the way intellectual communication takes place—it’s a process of spreading light from one taper, or candle, to another.” He quotes the following excerpt:

If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.

“Well,” continues Darnton, “Jefferson wasn’t exactly thinking of the Internet. But I think that is the message, and I would add to it open access—free access for humanity to the collective good of humanity.”

A bit later, Darnton again comes back to Jefferson’s metaphor to speak about how the Internet facilitates information access—exactly what I thought of as I was listening to him reading Jefferson’s words. “To get back to the idea of Jefferson’s candle-light power, enlightenment, it may seem archaic today of course, but I believe it can acquire a twenty-first century luster if you associate it with the Internet. The Internet which multiplies messages at virtually no cost.”

I have embedded Darnton’s lecture (just over an hour in length) here. It is well worth a viewing.

Open access journal profile: Theological Librarianship

The program schedule for the American Theological Library Association’s 2007 Annual Conference in Philadelphia, PA listed a roundtable discussion: “Theological Librarianship: A New Online Journal.” It looked interesting, so I decided to attend.

The roundtable was convened by Andrew Keck, then chair of the ATLA Publications Committee (Duke Divinity School, Durham, NC), and Ronald W. Crown (Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO) and David R. Stewart (Luther Seminary, St. Paul, MN), who would serve as co-editors of the new journal.

Specifics of the conversation now somewhat elude me, though I do remember the roundtable was well attended, and the atmosphere was lively and engaged. The prospect that ATLA would have its own peer reviewed publication for professional and scholarly communication was exciting. Thankfully, re-reading the report on the roundtable in the Summary of Proceedings (Volume 61, 2007, pp. 231-232) brings back to mind many of the discussion topics, such as the journal’s planned composition, the peer review process, the prospect of organizing issues around themes, the importance and function of the advisory board, and opportunities for members to write and otherwise contribute. The report concludes:

Judging from how many of the attendees expressed an interest in contributing to the journal in some way, and from the caliber and variety of good ideas brought forward, it is evident that there is a great deal of enthusiasm surrounding this new project. The editors look forward to following up over the coming months. (p. 232)

The inaugural issue of Theological Librarianship: An Online Journal of the American Theological Library Association (ISSN: 1937-8904) was launched in June 2008. The focus and scope of the journal is outlined in the front matter of the first issue:

Theological Librarianship publishes essays, columns, critical reviews, bibliographic essays, and peer-reviewed articles on all aspects of professional librarianship in the setting of a religious/theological library collection (whether or not that collection comprises the entire library collection). The primary intended audience includes professional librarians in colleges, universities, and theological seminaries and others with an interest in theological librarianship in those settings.

The purpose of the journal is to support the professional development of theological librarians; contribute to and enrich the profession of theological librarianship; contribute to and enrich theological and religious studies; and to serve as the official publication of record for the American Theological Library Association.

Policies and Submissions

Theological Librarianship is published twice a year (July and December) by the American Theological Library Association utilizing the Open Journal Systems platform. The journal has a well-established Editorial Team, which works in consultation with ATLA’s Publications Committee, and is served by an Advisory Board. The journal site provides clear Submission Guidelines to assist authors in preparing and submitting manuscripts. Journal contents are published utilizing a Creative Commons “Attribution, Non-Commercial, No Derivative Works” license. Articles and bibliographic essays are reviewed using double-blind peer review. Other submissions (essays, columns, reviews, etc.) are subject to review by the editorial board.

Funding and Sustainability

ATLA provides a basic budget for the journal, including modest stipends for the Editorial Board, infrastructure support (server space and software maintenance), and a layout editor. This financial and infrastructure support from the Association is essential to the success and sustainability of the journal.

Open Access: “We sense that we are part of something bigger”

The Open Journal Systems platform provides wording for a generic “Open Access Policy,” which is also included on the Theological Librarianship site. But looking back on the roundtable in 2007 and the editorials in the first couple of issues of Theological Librarianship, it is interesting (from the perspective of this blog) to note that the term open access as such was never used. Concerns at the start seemed to be more practical and less “ideological” (if that is the right word). The journal was going to be published online using an open source platform as a cost consideration. Co-editor David Stewart indicated a concern that making the journal subscription-based would have driven down interest. “ATLA wanted to have a more direct channel to potential readers.” The fact that the journal would be easily distributed to and accessed by the ATLA membership, and freely read by other interested persons, was seen as a consequential benefit of this approach. Stewart essentially confirmed my assessment:

The point you make about open access being a more pragmatic concern for ATLA and Theological Librarianship early on is well taken. I would surmise that what is true for our journal at this point is true for many others as well: there’s been a certain amount of collective “consciousness-raising,” and the lines have been drawn more clearly between traditional publishing models and OA. In other words, 2007-08 turned out to be a propitious time to be launching an open access journal, in ways we didn’t appreciate fully at the time.

Indeed. As I scanned the editorial and article content in the journal archive, it wasn’t until the third issue (Vol 2, No 1, 2009) that an article by Kevin Smith entitled, “Open Access and Authors’ Rights Management: A Possibility for Theology?” (PDF, pp. 45-56) actually raised and then delved into the concept of open access as a topic for serious reflection and purposeful action. It was Smith’s article that introduced me to the idea that theological librarians, associations, and institutions might embrace a “task of building an ‘open access culture’”—a phrase that continues to served as an inspiration for this blog.

David Stewart provided me with some additional background leading to ATLA’s decision to start the journal. Jack Ammerman, head librarian at Boston University’s School of Theology at the time, had earlier developed a plan to start a “Journal of Theological Bibliography.” He had also explored online publishing platforms, including OJS. It was his idea and prior groundwork that “morphed into something broader,” becoming Theological Librarianship.

As an interesting footnote, Stewart shared that the publisher of the Journal of Religious & Theological Information had earlier approached ATLA about taking on this title as its official publication. ATLA turned down this option because the association wanted to retain more editorial control and ownership than was envisioned by the publisher. Stewart reflected how going with a publisher using a traditional subscription-based model would have sent ATLA in a different direction—away from open access.

I asked Stewart what he and the other members of the editorial team have learned along the way, now that Theological Librarianship is in its fifth year of publication.

Opportunism is at least as important as expertise. Good infrastructure matters. The value of a proofreader. We now know first hand that in many ways it is not that complicated or expensive (at least on Open Journal Systems) to launch a journal. We have also learned something about our community—how many of them want to write for the journal!

It is fair to say that the “ideological” benefits of open access have become more clear as the journal has gotten up and running. The recent event in Durham [see my "Into the Open: Transitions in Journal Publishing" (moderated discussion at Duke University)] was something of an eye-opener. There is a growing disenchantment with traditional publishing. We are part of a much bigger shift in publishing, and (somewhat to our surprise) some who are considering the open access option view us as a “model” of what the process looks like—and are asking for our advice. We sense that we are part of something bigger.

Springer interested in developing open access journals in Religious Studies

In early February I received an email from the Senior Publishing Editor of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Springer Science+Business Media. In the email, Sasha Goldstein-Sabbah indicated that Springer had recently decided to try to develop open access journals in Religious Studies and Philosophy. I replied to introduce myself and request more information.

Springer is a large international commercial publisher based in The Netherlands. It is perhaps known more for publishing in the sciences and medicine than in the humanities, much less religious studies. I was curious about both Springer’s entry into publishing in this discipline generally, and about the open access initiative in particular. Although it continues to publish a majority of its journals using a traditional subscription-based model, Springer has distinguished itself as a commercial publisher willing to be innovative in exploring alternatives to the traditional business model, including open access.

I spent some time browsing on Springer’s website and found 7 journal titles listed under “Religious Studies.” There are also 28 book titles currently listed, all published since 2009, with several additional titles forthcoming. Currently, there are no religious studies titles on the SpringerOpen open access journal platform.

This last observation suggested that the open access initiative must be very new. I didn’t realize how new until Ms. Goldstein-Sabbah emailed me back to say she had just been hired at the beginning of January (after seven and a half years at Brill) primarily to develop the field of religious studies at Springer. Ms. Goldstein-Sabbah confirmed that Springer’s involvement in religious studies publishing generally is fairly recent (within the last 10 years or so).

Springer started developing in religious studies as both an outgrowth of their very strong philosophy program (namely from philosophy of religion) and the acquisition of several small publishing houses which had various series and/or journals in religious studies. The journals were primarily acquired over the past ten years, although a few have been with Springer longer. Of course we are still interested in acquiring existing subscription model journals but we realize the market is changing and we want to provide what the market is asking for, namely open access, especially for new start up journals. As for the push to acquire books this is more recent, in the past five years more or less, however we now have several book series in religious studies and are publishing about 15-20 religious studies volumes a year with the hope of more to come in the future.

It appears that rather than converting their existing journals to open access, Springer’s open access initiative in religious studies is to get new journals started with this publishing model. I found Ms. Goldstein-Sabbah’s comment about the changing market interesting. My experience is that scholars in religion and theology have been fairly slow to embrace new mediums of scholarly communication. Although we may be finally moving past the print vs. electronic format debate, one reason I started this blog because knowledge of open access and its viability is not yet common among my scholar and library colleagues in religion and theology. Indeed, this effort has afforded me the opportunity to learn more about open access.

Ms. Goldstein-Sabbah is taking her reading from the broader world of scholarly communication, where the shift is definitely in evidence. Although developments are less clear in religious studies, it might help drive change in our discipline if more publishers like Springer took the initiative toward open access. To get things going, Ms. Goldstein-Sabbah’s approach is to concentrate on organizations rather than individual scholar authors.

Currently Springer does not have any OA journals in Religious Studies and Philosophy. However, given the success Springer has had with OA journals in the traditional STM [science, technology and medicine] market we are very keen to adopt similar initiatives. For the time being my model is to focus on agreements with societies, associations, and institutions which have funding and wish to develop an OA journal with a professional publisher. I am currently working with one society but we are at the preliminary discussion stage so I cannot give any details.

Coupled with the ease of online distribution, one of the primary benefits of open access journal publishing is that it eliminates the costs of publication (and burden for the profits) from the reader side.* Removing the cost barrier to access enhances exposure of a scholar’s research, which is the intent of scholarly communication. But those costs of publication (and profits that must accrue for a commercial enterprise) have to be recouped/generated somewhere. Some of this is accomplished through the efficiencies inherent in online distribution. Beyond this, Springer’s approach is to shift costs to the producer side.

Instead of charging users a fee to read the content, an article-processing charge (APC) is levied at the beginning of the process. This flat charge, which varies from journal to journal, covers the entire cost of the publication process. This includes peer-reviewing, editing, publishing, maintaining and archiving, and allows immediate access to the full text versions of the research articles. (from the SpringerOpen website)

This seems to working well in disciplines where funding for article publication can be built into research grants, especially where the potential economic spin-offs of research make such funding easier to justify. But what about an academic discipline like religious studies that does not typically enjoy this kind of funding? Can Springer’s approach scale downward? Ms. Goldstein-Sabbah is optimistic.

As we both know there is much less funding in Philosophy and Religious Studies. However, costs for developing an OA journal are much less than most people think, although it does vary based on the project size and scope. Most institutions wishing to develop OA journals will find it is actually less expensive to develop a proper OA journal in partnership with a publisher than on their own. In the long-term I believe that funding will swap from a subscription model to an OA model where institutions provide funding for OA fees, however this is many years off. In the meantime Springer wishes to be at the forefront of OA development and we are very keen to partner with institutions who have similar thinking. For the time being we see more growth and interest in the partnership model for OA. However, I do believe that in the future we could move towards the author pay model.

The SpringerOpen FAQ gives an idea of what an author or supporting organization would pay in article processing charges and what those charges pay for. The range is from $665 and $1,996 per published article, depending on the journal (there is a waiver for “low-income countries”).

As you probably guessed I can’t give you an exact figure for the APC range but I would suspect religious studies journals would be at on the low end of the spectrum. If the journal is done in conjunction with an organization’s then the APC would be discussed with the organization. Of course what would be interesting is if Springer sat down with organizations such as ATLA or AAR to discuss APC fees and how that would work in research or library budgets.

Without more information and a specific situation to draw upon it is hard to determine whether this is a manageable and sustainable figure. Ms. Goldstein-Sabbah’s last statement suggests that part of the move to open access involves a change in the way organizations conceptualize funding for the publication of their journal. For example, instead of association membership dues including the purchase of a journal subscription, access to the journal for both members and anyone else in the world who might be interested would be free, and dues would go to help build an article publication fund. Instead of libraries sustaining institutional subscriptions from their budgets, monies already in the system would be shifted to help their faculty get their articles published. And so on.

I get the sense from Ms. Goldstein-Sabbah’s responses that it may be too early to know how this commercial open access model will work for religious studies. Still, Springer should be commended for its innovative thinking and leadership. I will be interested to see how this develops.
__________
* Another primary benefit of open access journal publishing, especially when the journal is self-published, is that authors retain greater control over their copyrights. As a commercial publisher, Springer is demonstrating leadership by allowing authors to retain their copyright though use of a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 2.0) License.

Into the Open: Transitions in Journal Publishing (moderated discussion at Duke University)

On February 24, 2012, coincident with meetings of the editorial board of the open access journal Theological Librarianship, a moderated discussion on open access journal publishing was held at Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. The discussion focused on core questions about open access and journal publishing: Who is doing open access? What does it take to start a new open access journal? When is open access appropriate for an existing journal? Where can a journal find infrastructural support? Why open access?

The discussion was moderated by Andrew J. Keck, Associate Library Director at the Duke Divinity School Library, and Columns Editor at Theological Librarianship. Joining in the discussion were editors from the Duke University Press, Duke Law Journals, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies, PLoS Genetics, Faith & Leadership, and others, indicating a vibrant and growing open access presence at Duke.

I was unable to join the live stream of the discussion due to technical difficulties. My report is drawn from a recording that was made available following (start playback at around the 7:20 mark). The discussion sought to address both the philosophical (why?) and “nuts and bolts” (how?) of open access journal publishing. I have summarized/collated the responses under question headings.

What is an open access journal?

An open access journal is one with all access barriers (e.g., subscription fees) removed so there is no cost to the reader, anywhere in world. But more, open access means that restrictions to reuse and adaptation (often complicated through application of copyright in traditionally published journals) are removed through, for example, the use of Creative Commons licensing, where attribution is given to the original author but the content can be re-used in various ways.

One person commented that a commitment to open access also implies assurance of sustained access through appropriate archival measures.

How do you see open access in relation to your own discipline?

Different academic disciplines have different traditions, missions and mechanisms of scholarly communication. For example, in theology, open access supports in the most consistent way a mission of “getting the word out” without barriers—economic or otherwise.

This can work in two directions, of course. As the editor of a new open access journal in Eighteenth Century Russian Studies mentioned, a lot of research is being done by scholars in other parts of the world who frequently don’t have the opportunity to publish. So, it’s not only about making research produced in the United States or Europe available to scholars in less developed countries, it’s also about providing a medium for locally produced research to get larger world-wide exposure.

There was an interesting comment offered by Duke’s Scholarly Communications Officer, Kevin Smith regarding the way the media reports on new scientific discoveries or advancements: “If the [research] article is available to them they tend to get it right. They tend to report it better than if they can’t get to the article. There is a lot of ‘junk science’ out there on the Web. It’s really unfortunate when the ‘good science’ is locked up behind toll barriers.” In other words, open access provides the opportunity for the general public to be better informed through thoughtful and credible research.

Following-up, an editor of one of the PLoS journals made the point that publicly (tax) supported scientific research should be accessible to everyone. The people who have already paid for this research through their taxes should be able to access it to be an informed citizenry and improve their decision-making abilities.

A representative from the Duke Law School noted that law journals are frequently produced by students. The law school has been a long-time publisher of open access journals, but the library is also a signatory of the 2008 Durham Statement, committing to the suspension of publishing in print and moving to open electronic formats.

A representative for Project Euclid a collaborative publishing portal for mathematics research (not all open access) noted that mathematicians typically post to archives, and feel their research should be available immediately. Of course, she also lamented difficulties often faced by younger scholars who need to get published in order to kickstart their academic careers. So whereas the use of pre-print archives accelerates scholarly communication, the current peer-review process still creates obstacles in other ways.

Kevin Smith responded that this pre-print approach would be less successful in the humanities where scholarly vetting is an ingrained tradition. He reasoned, however, that post-print archiving or Gold (journal) open access should certainly be viable alternatives to traditional subscription-based journals.

For those considering starting a new open access journal, or moving from print to open access electronic format: How do you know when it’s time to start? What about a sustainable business model?

One editor who works with a commercially published journal is considering moving to open access but noted the hurdles are huge. Publishing houses stand to lose a lot of money. In the example given, the title currently brings in $2 million primarily through bundle subscriptions sold to libraries. To move this title online and then just charge for print would bring in an estimated revenue of only $160,000. Of course, that accustomed subscription revenue is drying-up as libraries are finding increasingly difficult to maintain “Big Deal” bundles. It might make more sense to start a new journal from scratch as open access.

A number of possible business models were suggested. The most common is charging article fees. Also mentioned were print on demand (hybrid); seeking association subsidies; university and college departments providing comp-time for faculty involved in journal work; cost-sharing among library consortia; libraries supporting open access by redirecting subscription budgets; and donations/sponsorships along the lines of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy model.

One person mentioned that multiple revenue streams could be created by differentiating between a product (the content itself) that can be free, and a service that adds value in ways that someone might be willing to pay (e.g., searchable content, licensing for commercial re-use, etc.).

Those who are actively editing an open access journal, what are the pros and challenges?

David Stewart, co-editor of Theological Librarianship mentioned coming to better understand his journal’s community, including discovering how many folks appreciated having an opportunity to write.

There is a learning curve at the start to understand the platform software, and grapple through editorial questions. Editors affirmed the importance of getting a good editorial management system to streamline the process, and developing consistent policies for peer-review. Initially, there will be more back and forth with an author to get their manuscript into peer review form. But this gets easier with time and experience. Indeed, one author noted that his experience with peer review was efficient and very pleasant. He continued by saying [contrary to the claim often raised by traditional commercial publishers], “Really good peer review, which I got from the reviewer, is not incompatible with publishing in an open access journal at all.”

Initially, you may be spending time just trying to get content and then get that content discovered. In a way, you’re dealing with a “supply-side” model and you’re trying to create demand for your product. The recommendation here was get indexed as soon as possible, and in as many places as possible. Indexing puts your content on equal footing with established and prestigious journals, enabling you to attract readers and gain reputation.

How do you promote your journal, manage feedback, assess impact?

Several persons mentioned use of analytics tools, and shifting assessment of impact from the journal level to the author/article level.

The use of social media is big, with journals promoting themselves through Facebook, Twitter, blogs and newsletters, and encouraging readers to push content into their own social networks. ”It’s not just a citation and a paper anymore.” Commenting and conversation around articles is a growing and vibrant trend. As one participant put it:

One of the things about open access that I think is really significant is the way in which it restores and even increases the use of journals as means of communication. It’s not just about people wanting to publish so they can have another line on their resume. When journals started out [in the late 17th century]—like The Royal Society’s Philosophical Transactions, or the French Journal des sçavans—most of the content was correspondence between scientists and scholars. They were actually communicating with one another, instead of just producing an article and then moving on. In an ironic sort of way we are using this [online] technology to restore the original purpose of journals.

Budapest Open Access Initiative: Happy 10th Anniversary!

On February 14, 2002, the Budapest Open Access Initiative was publicly released online with 16 original signatories, formally giving birth to the Open Access movement.

An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good. The old tradition is the willingness of scientists and scholars to publish the fruits of their research in scholarly journals without payment, for the sake of inquiry and knowledge. The new technology is the internet. The public good they make possible is the world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature and completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds. Removing access barriers to this literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.

For various reasons, this kind of free and unrestricted online availability, which we will call open access…

Read the rest of the Initiative here. Happy 10th Anniversary BOAI!