Selling science is big business

Posted on February 1st, 2012 by Robin Barbier

As a library we have a limited budget for purchasing literature. Read the reflections on purchasing and negotiating scientific information.

Text: Just de Leeuwe (Product manager licenses/Open Access TU Delft Library)

The end of the year traditionally sees a glut of information from publishers. Introduction rates, discounts, digitised archives, special offers; the unavoidable must-haves offered in all conceivable combinations follow in quick succession, putting even the local supermarket to shame. Science it would seem is a commodity to be quickly sold off!

How very different from the cold reality one encounters in attempts to obtain structural financing for our unique collection. The normal market mechanism between supplier and client seems hardly to apply in the world of scientific subscription, if at all.

While the Netherlands has seen an inflation index of a maximum of 3% in recent years, many publishers without so much as a by your leave have raised their prices as high as 30%. Moreover, they always have good reasons for these price increases as more articles have to be placed, volumes are larger, internal financing problems have arisen, the euro is devalued, the shareholders have to be kept happy and so on and so forth… Whether clients have asked for these changes and whether it is logical that clients automatically foot the bill is apparently beside the point. Sending an invoice is often the only form of communication between publisher (or an intermediary) and TU Delft Library.

Selling science is big business. Major players such as Macmillan (Nature Publishing), Elsevier Reed (Elsevier Science), John Wiley and Thomson Reuters (Web of Science) are listed companies whose highest profit margins are generated by marketing science. While there is nothing wrong with that, it nevertheless jeopardises the relationship with scientific institutions. Articles are offered by these institutions to fill all those thousands of journals but if these journals become unaffordable, the bizarre situation then arises that publications by scientists fall under the radar in their own institutions.
What complicates procurement is the fact that scientific publishers are de facto monopolist and semi-monopolist and, as a client and purchasing party, that places you in an extremely difficult situation. It is almost impossible to opt for an alternative as the journals are too specialised and, moreover, titles are very often stored in large batches making the prospect of a nominal price even more problematic. Owing to their ‘natural’ monopoly, publishers are also excluded from the European tendering rules.

TU Delft Library wishes to only buy content from publishers at affordable prices that are based on a balanced funding of our collection with a view to a long-term commitment. This means repeatedly clarifying to publishers where our financial borders lie as well as asking whether the year-end discounts could also be structurally offered in the form of moderate price increases. An assertive attitude that has proved on more than one occasion to lead to results while also creating the impression that there are numerous other and more acceptable deals to be made. However, it is clear that we have our work cut out for us!