Monitoring the transition to OA in the UK

(with some Global comparisons)

Michael JubbResearch Information Network

STM Conference, Frankfurt13 October 2015

Context

Finch Group Reports 2012 and 2013 Universities UK Open Access Co-ordination

Group need for ‘authoritative indicators’ of progress

OA options: publishing models and policies Accessibility: how much is actually accessible free of

charge Usage: does OA lead to more usage? Financial sustainability: impact on finances of key

players------------------------------------------------------ Quality of service: for authors and readers

1. OA Options for Authors

OA Publishing Models

OA Publishing Models Available to Authors: Journal Types

Global Total (SCOPUS)Journals in which UK Authors

Publish

2012 2014 2012 2014

Gold APC 7.8% 8.2% Gold APC 7.2% 7.3%

Gold no APC 8.7% 8.6% Gold no APC 6.2% 5.6%

Hybrid 45.5% 49.0% Hybrid 59.9% 63.8%

‘Delayed OA’ 2.3% 2.4% ‘Delayed OA’ 3.5% 3.8%Subscription-only 35.6% 31.7%

Subscription-only 23.1% 19.5%

Total no. journals 21,741 22,486 13,411 13,585

Posting Policies and Embargoes

Deposit and embargo periods, AAMs Generally permissive for pre-prints, less so for ‘accepted manuscripts’ (AAMs), much less so for published Versions of Record (VoRs)

Similarly most permissive for postings on author websites, less so for institutional repositories, subject repositories, and least permissive for commercial sites

Some policies difficult to find, and sometimes difficult to interpret

2. Accessibility: Take-up of OA

Take-up of OA Publishing Options

Take-up of Publishing Models: Articles Published

Global Total of Articles (SCOPUS)   Articles Published by UK Authors

2012 2014 FWCI 2012 2014 FWCI

Gold APC 7.9% 9.6% 0.90 Gold APC 7.4% 9.3% 1.58

Gold no APC 4.9% 4.6% 0.56 Gold no APC 2.4% 2.1% 0.96

Hybrid Gold 0.8% 2.4% 1.32 Hybrid Gold 2.7% 6.5% 1.65

‘Delayed OA' 5.3% 5.4% 1.89 ‘Delayed OA' 11.0% 11.2% 2.37

Subscription-only incl hybrid non-Gold 81.1% 78.0% 1.03

Subscription-only incl hybrid non-Gold 76.4% 70.7% 1.57

Total no.articles 2,351,119 2,519,824 148,466 157,240

Postings of Articles

Versions of Articles Posted: Global Sample

Version Immediate OA (incl hybrid)

Delayed OA

Subscription

Total (all articles)

Total (all articles excl illicit)

Preprint 2.7% 2.5% 4.2% 3.9% 3.9%

AAM 1.8% 8.0% 3.2% 3.1% 2.5%

VoR 52.5% 39.7% 11.1% 17.8% 9.6%Total (de-duplicated for multiple versions) 56.0% 47.2% 17.6% 24.0% 15.1%Total (excl illicit postings) 56.0% 22.3% 7.9%

Postings of UK ArticlesVersions of Articles Posted: UK Sample

Version Immediate OA (incl hybrid)

Delayed OA

Subscription

Total (all articles)

Total (all articles excl illicit)

Preprint 3.7% 2.2% 6.1% 5.5% 5.5%

AAM 2.2% 5.9% 3.4% 3.3% 2.6%

VoR 58.0% 39.8% 12.8% 22.4% 12.4%Total (de-duplicated for multiple versions) 61.6% 46.6% 21.2% 29.8% 19.0%Total (excl illicit postings) 61.6% 17.0% 9.2%

Where are articles posted?

Overall Proportion of OA Content 2014

3. Usage

Are OA articles used more than non-OA?

Views and downloads occur on an increasing range of sites…….

Publisher data suggests more downloads for OA articles, but with huge variations between journals

Confirmed by data from Jisc’s Usage Statistics Portal

Downloads from UK IRs highly skewed and dwarfed by those from publishers and from PMC

No data from sharing sites No definitive answer to the question until article-

level download data made more openly available No-one has data on the demographics of usage

All publications Open Access Non Open Access

Ratio of downloads of OA/non-OAJournals

Total number of articles)

HTML/PDF downloads

No. articles

Av. downloads per article No. articles

Av. downloads per article

1 678 285,922 58 1,463 620 324 452%

2 815 887,130 204 1,957 611 799 245%

3 443 376,065 40 3,579 403 578 619%

4 1,208 1,709,396 223 2,758 985 1,111 248%

5 452 587,593 65 2,001 387 1,182 169%

6 654 1,340,695 151 4,874 503 1,202 405%

7 136 78,014 24 1,383 112 400 346%

8 141 23,538 8 557 133 143 390%

9 136 622,370 136 4,576 0 n/a n/a

10 52 63,606 52 1,223 0 n/a n/a

Total 4,715 5,974,329 961 2,947 3,754 837 352%

 YearTotal No. Articles

AvailableHTML Full Text

RetrievalArticle PDF

RetrievalAv retrieval per article

2012 2,790,219 251,363,758 104,153,931 127

2013 3,119,643 389,623,123 106,260,140 159

2014 3,506,234 513,545,220 145,227,684 188

4. Financial Sustainability

Costs for UK Universities and Funders: APCs

Huge variations between universities

Huge variations in prices paid Discounts, special deals, offsetting….

Relationship between mean APC paid and citation impact of journal

Total Cost for UK Universities: APCs and Subscriptions

APCs now a significant part of some universities’ total expenditure on journals range from 1% to 39% across 24

universities average 14% (12% excl. UCL)

Offsetting clearly an important issue in a context of financial constraints for universities and funders

Financial Sustainability: Learned Societies

c280 UK Learned Societies publish journals 63% publish a single journal 22% publish three or more

24%publish on their own account; 76% use publishing partners

dependence on publishing revenues for other charitable activities varies from nil to >100% for more than half of societies, publishing

surpluses represent over 50% of their charitable expenditure

too early to see significant change since 2012

Conclusions?

A baseline picture of OA in the UK with some international comparisons

A collaborative exercise across different stakeholders

Building on this exercise for the future

Reference and thanks Jubb, M et al (2015) Monitoring the Transition to

Open Access: A report for the Universities UK Open Access Co-ordination Group. London, Universities UK

http://www.researchinfonet.org/oamonitoring/

Thanks to Stephane Goldstein (RIN); Mayur Amin, Andrew Plume, Stephanie Oeben, M’Hamed Aisati (Elsevier); Stephen Pinfield, Peter Bath, Jennifer Salter (University of Sheffield); Rob Johnson, Mattia Fosci (Research Consulting)