Bibliocycle

Librarians have known for some time that this day was coming, but still, the announcement last week by the American Chemical Society that it is ceasing the distribution of the print editions of  all but three of its academic journals, and will offer the journals only online, was sobering.  It is hard to argue with the rationale for this decision, that “printing and distribution costs now exceed revenues from print journals.”  But are we really ready to give up, cold turkey, access to print-based publications?

Several years ago, we conducted an “overlap analysis” of our periodical collection at the OWHL.  We had been systematically acquiring electronic access to databases of journals, and, as good stewards of Academy resources, it seemed inappropriate to purchase the materials in redundant formats.  Our decision in each case was based on expected use.  Titles that were routinely browsed in the Freeman Room (like Scientific American and The Economist)  were kept in print even if we had full text leectronic access through one of the databases.  On the other hand, if the titles were predominantly used for research, we dropped the print subscription.  Frankly, electronic access is far superior for research, and in limiting our print holdings we were able to free up valuable space.  Obviously we were not alone.

In a perfect world of unlimited resources, all libraries would acquire multiple formats in order to serve the needs of diverse users.  But this is an imperfect world, where subscription prices are rising and budgets are shrinking.  From the perspective of the publisher, the economics of an all-virtual publication are simple.  The “fixed costs” are the costs attendant to producing one issue.  The “variable costs” are essentially zero.  The question then becomes, will this model be a boon to scholarship?  Will publishers drop journal prices to acknowledge the economic reality of the new model?  Or will they cling to an outmoded model of pricing that no longer reflects the costs of production?  Additionally, what impact on the outcome of this revolution will the Open Access movement have?  Most of the authors of scholarly journal articles are educators and scientists who are not being directly compensated for their work.  The NIH model has demonstrated the benefits of providing open access to work produced by scientists receiving federal support.  The only thing that is certain, is that the model will change.  It is a very interesting time to be in this profession.