1 / 21

From the Licencing Battlefield

From the Licencing Battlefield. Consortia as middlemen between publishers, agents and libraries. A view from the Continent. Consortia everywhere. ICOLC Europe National and Regional Consortia Institutional Consortia

rolf
Télécharger la présentation

From the Licencing Battlefield

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. From the Licencing Battlefield Consortia as middlemen between publishers, agents and libraries. A view from the Continent

  2. Consortia everywhere • ICOLC Europe • National and Regional Consortia • Institutional Consortia • Growing interconsortial cooperation (KE, http://www.knowledge-exchange.info/ and SELL, http://heal-l.physics.auth.gr/SELL/ ) • Variety of external and internal organisation • Variety in governance and decision making • Variety in size and coherence

  3. The Role of Government • If Large: larger scale, broader coverage, more decision making power • If Small: smaller scale, more focus, more internal dynamics • Examples: JISC, FinElib, Bibsam, DEFF versus UKB (Dutch universities), SHB (Dutch Polytechnics), VOWB (Belgium),

  4. Different needs • Universities: Much/Everything, broad, international, high level • Polytechnics: Mothertongue material, applied science, selective, focussed • Research Institutes: High level, international, but selective, focussed, often not in consortia

  5. Sources of Conflicts • Cost division • Differences in size and nature • Lack of Transparency and Flexibility • Adherence to historic spends • Inability to break away from printed based concepts

  6. Disappearing titles • When a journal changes publishers • When a publisher discontinues titles • When a society chooses to change its policy • Sticking to habits and solutions of the past • An opportunity for Agents once again?

  7. The Subscription Agent in Big Deal times • The difficulty of simplifying complexity • Purchase and licence without intermediary • Purchase and licence on consortial level • What’s new? Negotiations! • The issue at stake: the price of content

  8. Big deals and their Drawbacks • Much better value for money, but: • Big deals are inflexible • Big deals are in the long run expensive • Big Deals squeeze out small publishers • Big Deal pricing is intransparent and incomparable • Big Deal Pricing is mainly based on irrelevant figures from the past

  9. The JISC Survey • Survey 2005 by Rightscom Ltd among librarians and publishers (http://www.nesli2.ac.uk) • Priorities of librarians: widest access; financial predictability; reduced costs • Priorities of publishers: continuity; predictability; simplicity NB. Simplicity is not a librarians priority?

  10. The Publisher’s Perspective • PPV is endlessly flexible • PPV is ultimately transparant • PPV is a perfect alternative for outdated models • PPV is a perfect instrument for cost division • Above all: usage is always going up!!

  11. PPV models • Usage Based Pricing/PPV • PPV models tend to be complicated • JISC: PPV converting into subscription; Core collection + PPV for peripheral content • PPV is hidden Price Increase Driver • Does PPV really increase flexibility and/or reduce costs??

  12. Presuppositions for UBP • Usage has a calculable value • User must decide to use or not to use • User has to pay for usage • Usage can be controlled: attributed to (groups of) customers, eventually restricted

  13. What we don’t know about usage • Who is using what? And Why? • Does usage somehow reflect relevance? • Does usage somehow reflect value? • Why is usage increasing year after year? • How do users deal with information? To what effect? • Is information becoming a volatile, omnipresent commodity?

  14. Why UBP is not compatible with the nature of the library • We don’t want to restrict access but to encourage usage • We don’t want to measure and monitor usage • The usage of library materials is not sufficiently uniform and relevant to connect with pricing • UBP does not improve transparency nor, probably, reduce costs

  15. A model for the ranking of relevance Pricing should reflect: • the nature of the product • the relevance of the product for a specific customer • The relative buying power of that customer • The total spends of a customer

  16. Question 1: Who are you? Are you a (very) big/medium/(very) small: • Research University • Research Institute • Teaching University/Polytechnic • Other kind of Institute

  17. Question 2: What do you want? Do you want: • Access to a single title: list price • Access to a (subject) bundle: addition of reduced list prices • Access to a full portfolio: addition of further reduced list prices NB. But what will be the list price? And why?

  18. Question 3: Where do you live? • Buying power: mainly a matter of location • Starting Point: GDP (or similar) per country • Taking into account: division of wealth within the country

  19. An Example • Suppose: Title x = $ 1000 average in the US Nature/Size big medium small Research U/I 2000 1000 500 Teaching U 500 250 125 Polytechnic 200 100 50 • Price to be corrected for location

  20. Questions to be answered • Are such models realistic from an administrative perspective? • Are publishers prepared to develop this kind of models? • Can librarians may be of help? • Can Agents play a role here?

  21. Why don’t publishers develop pay per view for individual customers for a price that is equivalent with the Document Delivery rates that libraries are charging?Thank you

More Related