International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications
PO Box 516, Oxford OX1 1WG, UK
Tel: +44 1865 249909 Fax: +44 1865 251060
E-mail: [email protected]

E-journals: Developing Country Access Survey

Abstract

The survey initiated by INASP identified considerable interest in initiatives to promote and deliver information into the developing world. It highlighted a number of small publisher-specific programmes already in place, mostly associated with learned societies and society membership. It also highlighted the complexity of the publishing environment, where involvement in any initiatives to promote readership are dependent on other partnerships – with other publishers, with other societies, and with membership requirements.

Introduction and background

Over the past two years concern over the information gap between developed and less developed countries has resulted in a number of initiatives from publishers and/or learned and professional societies designed to supply journals into the developing world. These initiatives have largely focussed on the provision of online information, as this can be provided at little cost to the information provider. Connectivity within the developing countries is, of course, a limiting factor, but online supply is currently perceived as the most efficient and sustainable methodology by the information providers.

Whilst all information initiatives are to be welcomed, there is no comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge of the different approaches, and so not only is there a possibility of duplication of effort, but developing and transitional countries are finding it hard to identify suitable opportunities.

In response to this, the National Academy of Sciences (US) and the Committee for the Dissemination of Scientific Information (CDSI) encouraged INASP to conduct a survey of scholarly and academic publishers to obtain a full picture of what programmes and initiatives are taking place.

Methodology

A short questionnaire (see Appendix 1) was created, and sent to several ListServs, including ALPSP (Association of Learned Professional and Society Publishers) members, the AAAS member, and national societies from around the world. In addition, Highwire posted the questionnaire on their internal Publishers Forum bulletin board, and several other associations also used their personal contacts and email groups to distribute the survey widely. It is estimated that the survey was sent to approximately 800 people.

Subsequent to the survey returns, several follow-up contacts were made to discuss issues raised in the responses.

Results

In total only 46 survey questionnaires were received, mostly from the non-commercial sector. Although the number of responses were low, they represented almost 2000 scholarly and learned journals, plus a range of database and book publishing activities.

Organization type

The type of organization responding was as follows:

The response from the commercial publishers was disappointing. This may have been due to a number of factors. Among those highlighted when publishers were subsequently contacted were:

• Difficulty of answering due to the complexities associated with publishing a range of products in association with different societies and organizations
• Pressure of time, and low priority given to the survey
• Not knowing who was the best person to supply the answers

Geographical spread

The geographical spread of responses was as follows:

Europe and the USA represent the majority of publishing activity worldwide, so it was not surprising that the majority of responses came from these regions, although it might have been hoped for better representation from the Australasian region.

Subject areas

The responses covered all subject areas within scholarly publishing, and there were no noticeable differences between the different groups in their opinions or activities in relation to providing information at reduced- or no-cost to the LDCs.

Free online access to all people

Free access to all people is here defined as freely available to all - not only to subscribers or to readers from specific geographical or economic regions (e.g. through one of the initiatives).

Free online access (as defined above) to the online journals was offered by 26% of the publishers. The majority make their content available after one or two years: only one publisher reported making the content immediately available on publication. There was no correlation between those offering free online access and those making their material available within the LDCs at reduced cost or free.

Reduced-rate or free access to Less Developed Countries (LDCs)

The survey did not define “Less Developed Countries”. The publishers responding cited the World Bank categorization of the “poorest countries”; however, the criteria may differ between publishers, with some countries being included or excluded (for example, Highwire uses the World Bank definition, but also includes Djubouti).

36% of the respondents did not offer their publications to LDCs at any preferential rate, or free.

Of the publishers who did offer their publications at a reduced rate or free, some ran their own initiative, and some participated in a pan-publisher initiative such as HINARI, TEEAL, eIFL and INASP (see Appendix 2 for details of these initiatives).

*Percentage of total commercial or non-commercial respondents respectively.

Number of respondents associated with pan-publisher initiative

*percentage of those involved with any pan-publisher initiative

In addition to these initiatives, there was 1 publisher participating in Sattelife, and 1 publisher participating in eJDS.

Many of the non-commercial, and two of the commercial publishers operated their own initiative to make their material available to LDCs for a reduced rate, or free.

The “Own initiatives” included a range of methods including:

• formally published special rates for LDCs
• reduced-cost membership rates (which included journal subscription)
• working with partner societies and organizations, offering reduced subscriptions
• Exchange programmes with libraries and societies.

There was little evidence of any promotion of individual-publisher initiatives, except where they were allied to society membership, and the majority of own initiatives were perceived as costly and of restricted effectiveness.

Discussion

The majority of recipients were very positive about the supply of information at a reduced cost, or no cost, to Less Developed Countries. (However, it may be assumed that those not interested in such an issue would generally not have returned the questionnaire). Of all the recipients, only one was adamant that supplying information free was contrary to the best interests of their organization. The learned society publishers described dissemination to LDCs as part of their mission, but commercial publishers appear to consider it just as important in their global strategy.

“Our Publishing Board saw [pan-publisher initiative] as a piece of welcomed outreach that fitted well with our wider mission, but that we were not resourced to do alone.” Non-commercial society

“We support the principles involved in facilitating greater access to research information by the developing world.” Commercial publisher

“the benefits . . . increased readership, PR benefit, fit with desires of societies, as well as seeding the market for future revenues as developing countries develop.” Commercial publisher

Most respondents thought that the sustainability of larger initiatives is good, with the acknowledgement that cost and time to the publisher is an important consideration. In general, pan-publisher initiatives were considered to be more appealing:

“thinking through initiatives and their implementation can be time-consuming ... projects such as [pan-publisher initiative] which can offer a “one-stop-shop” ... are more likely to be the way forward.”

All of the commercial publishers had some programme to enable cheaper or free access to LDCs, whereas only 59% of the non-commercial publishers were currently making their material available for any reduced rate. From the responses, it appears that this has not been due to a lack of will, but due to a lack of awareness about the initiatives, and a lack of resources to take an independent initiative forward. Several of the non-commercial publishers were unaware of the pan-publisher initiatives.

“We would like to, but lack information.”

“This is essentially the first time I have heard about these various programs. It would be useful to learn where we can find out about developments.”

Lack of involvement and awareness in the non-commercial (and usually smaller publisher) sector appears to be partly due to a lack of information – however in an economic climate where the financial security and content quality are vital to survival, it is perhaps not surprising that dissemination to LDCs is not at the top of their priorities.

Although on the questionnaire there was no indication of a confusion about the different pan-publisher initiatives, subsequent follow-up questions revealed that there is some confusion between the different initiatives, and a wish for clarification.

There was some indication that those publishers currently running their own initiatives were looking for the pan-publisher initiatives to supersede these, but many appeared to consider them complimentary. This may be because they frequently reach different types of subscriber in the LDCs, and serve to promote a more direct-action approach to reaching the developing world by the individual journals.

“We hope to join another online initiative because they are much more cost effective and efficient for the Society.”

“This is a project initiated several years ago . . . and will be a [society] project for the next few years . . . I see no conflict.”

Few society publishers reported linking reduced journal subscription with membership for individuals in developing countries (only 22% of all non-commercial publishers who ran their own initiative). The survey expected to find more programmes such as this already in place. This may be because fewer societies are incorporating a journal subscription with membership, or it may have been a omission in the responses to the survey.

A few non-commercial publishers published via a commercial publisher (20% of all non-commercial publishers), and the decision of whether they made their journal available to one of the pan-publisher initiatives was determined by their commercial partner.

“This is a decision for [our publisher], but we have no objection ourselves”

Equally, most of the commercial publishers worked in close collaboration with learned societies, and although they may have a company policy (which is what was reported on in the questionnaire and the results) they reported some exceptions due to the needs and wishes of their non-commercial partners:

“ There is no criteria for setting these reduced rates – they are selected and agreed by the society for whom we publish.”

“a small number of societies have raised a concern.”

There was no report of any promotion of these initiatives being undertaken by the publishers and there appeared to be a reliance on the other partner (either the pan-publisher programme, or the recipient library) to promote the service to potential users. (However, one publisher has subsequently said that they offer staff time to one of the initiatives to assist promotion.) Presumably it is seen as too time-consuming and costly when there is little or no financial return. It is surprising that the journals are not promoting their involvement to existing authors and readers via the journals themselves.

“Editors and editorial boards are, I think, told in a rather ad-hoc fashion. But there are moves afoot to increase visibility.”

There were few publishers reporting sale of reproduction rights to developing countries (the only clear indication of such an initiative was from CAB International who sell reproduction rights to China, and also to India). Again, this was surprising, but may have also been due to the investment required for little financial return. Equally, it may have been omitted from the information provided (as these agreements may be handled by different individuals within the organizations).

Few societies listed formalised relationships with other bodies in LDCs (libraries, other societies, etc.), through which they worked to promote membership, share facilities or distribute material. However, the questionnaire only asked about “formal” arrangements, and there were indications of other, more informal, arrangements with libraries, societies and individuals throughout the Less Developed World.

It was generally thought that sustainability of online access programmes to reach the LDCs was good, so long as the costs of the publishers were not too high. Although online provision avoids direct postal and printing costs, there are still administrative, and other “hidden” (particularly staff time) costs that were of some concern, although it was thought that the pan-publisher initiatives would remove some of this burden from the publishers. There was no concern about lost revenue through compromising potential sales.

There was no concern about security in the responses and few of the publishers mentioned any reporting requirements to monitor abuse. There were comments about the difficulty of dealing with the changing economies of certain countries which would change their eligibility status, and two publishers mentioned that they were considering the initiatives as a trial, and would evaluate their continued involvement at the end of 2004. There was no mention of politics influencing country selection.

“I do think that this service is sustainable but that we have to evaluate carefully which countries qualify.”

“We need to watch out for deeply discounts extending to the next band of countries, or to poorer areas of otherwise reasonably well-off countries.”

There were mentions of earlier initiatives (mostly paper-based), which have now ceased, or been migrated to the online initiatives: for example the OSI sponsorship of some journals to reach the NIS which has now been replaced by the eIFL programme. There appeared to be no belief that paper-based distribution was feasible, and online delivery was thought to be the only sustainable methodology. The publishers asked did not know how successful these previous schemes had been.

Summary

There is a willingness and a desire by publishers (both commercial and non-commercial) to make their content more visible and more available in the developing world. However there are also some concerns about the costs to societies and publishers. Pan-publisher initiatives are perceived as an opportunity to improve the reach into less developed countries, whilst reducing the burden on publishers.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank all those who returned the survey questionnaire and responded to subsequent enquiries. I would also like to thank the Committee for the Dissemination of Scientific Information (CDSI) for their financial support of this survey.

For further information about this survey please contact Ms Pippa Smart, Head of Publishing Initiatives, INASP: [email protected]

Appendices

Appendix 1: INASP survey questionnaire

Appendix 2

Pan-publisher initiatives to enable access to information by LDCs

The following information was extracted from the websites of each initiative on December 12, 2002.

Association of Commonwealth Universities: Protecting the African Library

http://www.acu.ac.uk/yearbook/feb2002/19-25.pdf 

Publishers offer their journals to ACU member universities in selected countries at either the individual subscription rate, or another rate equivalent to 10-20%of the normal institutional subscription, plus distribution charges at cost. ACU undertakes (at no charge) the publicity or the scheme to the universities concerned, to take orders, collect and pass on payments.

• Participating Publishers: Blackwell Publishing, Cambridge University Press, Haworth Press, ITDG Publishing, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Palgrave, Portland Press, Sage Publications, Taylor & Francis, Ltd., University of Calgary Press, University of Chicago Press
• Reach: 17 African countries. See Appendix 3
• All disciplines (including science, technical, medical, humanities).

EJDS

http://www.ictp.trieste.it/ejournals/ 

EJDS: The Programme is geared to facilitate the access to current scientific literature. It is meant for scientists in institutions in The Third World Countries which have low bandwidth internet facilities that do not allow them to download material in a timely manner and/or they cannot afford them.

• Currently includes 197 journals from Academic Press, the American Physical Society and World Scientific
• Reach: For “scientists in Developing Countries”, but each publisher stipulates which countries can access their material on the service – full information on the website. See Appendix 3 for countries that are entitled to receive some of their content
• All disciplines (including science, technical, medical, humanities).

eIFL

http://www.eifl.net/ 

eIFL-Electronic Information for Libraries. Aims to facilitate affordable access to electronic scholarly resources by libraries in countries in transition. Participating countries pay highly discounted subscription fees for country-wide access. The initial prices have been guaranteed for three years.

• Content currently includes the EBSCO databases, American Physical Society, ProQuest, Blackwell Publishing, Cambridge University Press, HighWire Press, and Institute of Physics Publishing
• Reach: Their website lists 27 Newly Independent countries, and 9 African countries: See Appendix 3
• All disciplines (including science, technical, medical, humanities).

Highwire

http://www.highwire.org/lists/devecon.dtl 

HighWire offers an option for journals to provide free access to the World Bank's list of "low income economies", plus Djibouti, starting in December 2002

Free Access to a number of journals that publish through Highwire to World Bank's list of "low income economies,"

• Currently 41 journals from: the BMA, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, American Physiological Society, The Royal College of Psychiatrists, American Society of Hematology, the Journal of Joint and Bone Surgery, Rockefeller University Press, the American Society for Clinical Investigation, Massachusetts Medical Society (New England Journal of Medicine), and the National Academy of Sciences.
• Reach: the World Bank's list of "low income economies". See Appendix 3
• All medicine and biomedical sciences

HINARI

http://www.healthinternetwork.org/index.php 

The Health InterNetwork was created to bridge the "digital divide" in health, ensuring that relevant information - and the technologies to deliver it - is widely available and effectively used by health personnel: professionals, researchers and scientists, and policy makers.

• Currently 2082 journals from American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Annals of Internal Medicine, Arnold, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, BioMed Central, Blackwell Publishing, BMJ Publishing Group, CABI International, Canadian Medical Association Journal, The Cochrane Collaboration, The Company of Biologists, Elsevier Science, IRNEM - Institut Fédératif de Recherche, Necker Enfants Malades, JAMA & Archives Journals, The National Academy of Sciences, Nature Publishing Group, The New England Journal of Medicine, Oxford University Press, Portland Press Limited, the Biochemical Society, The Royal Society of Medicine Press, Sage, Springer Verlag, Taylor & Francis, Thieme Verlag, University of Chicago Press, John Wiley & Sons, Wolters Kluwer International Health & Science, Yale University Library
• Reach: Country lists are based on GNP per capita (World Bank figures, 1998). See Appendix 3.
• All medical and biomedical sciences.

PERI

http://www.inasp.info/peri/index.html 

Programme for the Enhancement of Research Information (PERI). A programme of support to information production, access and dissemination for research partners in developing and transitional countries utilising new Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs).

• Currently c.7500 journals from CAB International; EBSCO, SilverPlatter, Academic Press, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford University Press, Institute of Physics, Gale, The Cochrane Library, Mary Ann Liebert
• Reach: based on GDP and/or HDI ranking: See Appendix 3.
• All disciplines (including science, technical, medical, humanities).

TEEAL

http://teeal.cornell.edu/ 

TEEAL includes the scanned and digitized contents of over 140 of the world's most important scientific journals in the field of agriculture presented on CD-ROMs.

• Currently 140 journals from a 75 publishers (most providing a small number of journals or other publications to the service), plus a series of FAO papers and monographs
• Reach: 110 of the lowest-income food deficit countries, as listed in the World Bank's 1998-9 World Development Report: See Appendix 3.
• All agricultural.

SATELLIFE

http://www.healthnet.org/infoservices.php 

SATELLIFE has specially designed a suite of electronic information service tools to help connect health workers with each other and with relevant, useful, and reliable sources of knowledge.

• It publishes its own digests including material from over 40 peer-reviewed medical journals from a range of publishers
• Reach: developing countries – there is not a specific list
• All medical and biomedical sciences.

Appendix 3: Countries eligible to join pan-publisher initiatives, January 2003

(NB eligibility to join is as quoted on website: access may be free or reduced-price, as determined by initiative organisation, and there may be other selection criteria within country)