SUP collective funding for library-led open access publishing
Gillian Daly, SUP Press Manager, discusses some of the opportunities and challenges SUP has faced while developing a collective funding model for library-led open access publishing at Scottish HEIs.
Scottish Universities Press (SUP) was conceived as a collaborative, institution-led approach to exploring the benefits of open access publishing, with a particular focus on the shift towards open access mandates from funders of research.
SUP is owned and managed by the 18 participating libraries through SCURL and operates on a not-for-profit basis, investing any surpluses generated back into the Press. The objective was to develop a Scotland-wide solution, providing researchers across institutions with a clear and cost-effective route to publishing open access. We were also keen to better understand the costs associated with publishing, and to scope the potential for savings associated with open access and realising economies of scale through collaboration. Through SCURL’s work in coordinating the Scottish Higher Education Digital Library (SHEDL), we had a strong basis for collaborative working and confidence in the benefits of shared services.
The first collective challenge we faced was in raising the funds to get SUP off the ground. We explored external funding possibilities but found that approach was not an obvious fit with most existing funding streams available to us in libraries.
SCURL member libraries, therefore, agreed to fund the start-up through a subscription paid from existing library budgets. We were also fortunate to secure a small Innovation and Development grant from the Scottish Library and Information Council.
Keeping costs low was a priority as our member libraries emerged from the pandemic into a precarious funding climate. Library budgets alone are not sufficient to meet the entire cost of providing a high-quality open access publishing service.
SUP therefore opted for a hybrid model involving authors (or their funders/institution) paying a per-book production charge in addition to the annual subscriptions. The latter covers core costs such as staffing and platform hosting, which is provided by the Edinburgh Diamond service from the University of Edinburgh. The subscription income does not cover any of the costs associated with book production (e.g., copyediting, typesetting, design, distribution, marketing) so the production charge fills that gap.
The SUP collective funding model has enabled us to:
Bring down the unit cost of publishing monographs when compared to charges from commercial publishers. SUP charges range from £3.5K - £5.5K including VAT.
Create a sustainable community-led publishing infrastructure, working with our participating library services and commissioning external providers as appropriate.
Provide equitable access to publishing across institutions with vastly differing research profiles.
Whilst we believe that SUP offers a move towards a fairer, more equitable model for open access books, there remain significant challenges in the funding landscape. Authors who do not have external funding will struggle to publish their work open access without additional support measures. There is currently a variation in approach across institutions in how to tackle this issue. SUP recently surveyed member institutions on the funding available to cover open access costs for books. Some Libraries have central funds to use towards open access books, and several of the production charges for our proposals will be covered from the library budget. Other institutions currently do not have additional funding or are scoping out the support they can offer.
A response to this issue will be a high priority for institutions if, as is anticipated, open access is mandated as part of the next Research Excellence Framework.
SCURL member institutions spend around £30 million each year on providing access to electronic resources for learning and research. The open access infrastructure created through SUP has the potential to deliver long-term savings for participating institutions, but further investment will be required in the short term to realise these benefits.
Library budgets alone will not be enough to support the transition to open access. Librarians face the challenge of maintaining access to paywalled content through costly subscriptions, while trying to identify funds to support new models. The Book Processing Charges from traditional publishers introduce a high upfront cost which does not align with current library funding models.
The shift to open access represents a massive change in academic publishing. Funding models (both internal and external) and publisher pricing models need to respond to the scale of this change, focusing on exploring the possibilities of open access rather than replicating processes associated with traditional publishing models.
SUP is committed to exploring alternative funding models and will be scoping approaches that work alongside our existing hybrid model as we continue efforts to make open access publishing more equitable for authors and more cost-effective for institutions.
Please do contact us with any comments or questions.