Reasons not to pay APCs at hybrid journals.

peter.suber's bookmarks 2018-11-05


"I applaud the Wellcome Trust and Gates Foundation for deciding to stop paying APCs at hybrid journals. This would be a good move even if Plan S were not on the horizon.

For example, Harvard decided about a decade ago, long before Plan S, not to use its APC fund to pay fees at hybrid journals.

One reason to adopt this rule is to make limited APC funds go further. The more important reason is to create good incentives for journals receiving the money. Paying fees at hybrid journals essentially pays them to stay hybrid. If we pay them at all, then we should want our payments to work as incentives to convert to full or non-hybrid OA.

No single institution can do much to make this incentive strong. But the more institutions that adopt this rule, the stronger the incentive becomes.

Another cluster of reasons for this rule arises from the case for full OA journals over hybrid journals. For example, hybrid journals charge subscriptions, limiting the ability of libraries to use their funds to support OA. Hybrid journals charge higher average APCs than full OA journals. And hybrid journals can double-dip (charge twice for the same article, once from the subscription and once from the APC), and usually do, while full-OA journals cannot double-dip. ..."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) ยป peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags: oa.hybrid oa.double_dipping oa.economics_of oa.plan_s oa.budgets oa.redirection oa.harvard.u hu.oa oa.incentives oa.fees oa.funders oa.universities oa.funds oa.policies oa.hei oa.journals

Date tagged:

11/05/2018, 14:43

Date published:

11/05/2018, 09:43