reed elsevier n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Reed Elsevier PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Reed Elsevier

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 22

Reed Elsevier - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 125 Views
  • Uploaded on

Reed Elsevier. Science Technical & Medical (STM) Publishing in Europe Piotr Golkiewicz Account Manager Elsevier B.V. STM publishing – a highly efficient and innovative sector. STM industry employs 90,000 globally 36,000 in the EU 2,000 publishers publish 1.4 million articles p.a.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Reed Elsevier' - kera


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
reed elsevier

Reed Elsevier

Science Technical & Medical (STM) Publishing in Europe

Piotr Golkiewicz

Account Manager

Elsevier B.V

stm publishing a highly efficient and innovative sector
STM publishing – a highly efficient and innovative sector
  • STM industry employs 90,000 globally
  • 36,000 in the EU
  • 2,000 publishers publish 1.4 million articles p.a.
  • Researcher numbers increase 3% p.a. globally
  • Major investment in digitalization – 90% of articles now online
  • Average cost of publishing €3,750 per article
  • Cost of access per article falling to less than 1 Euro
company structure
Company Structure

Elsevier, Reed Elsevier’s global Science & Medical division, is the leading provider of high quality scientific, technical and medical information to the academic, research and healthcare communities.

Reed Elsevier’s Legal division, LexisNexis, is a global provider of authoritative legal, news, public records and business information, including tax and regulatory publications in print or online.

Harcourt, Reed Elsevier's global Education division, is a leading publisher serving the Kindergarten to Grade 12 and assessment markets in the US and primary and secondary markets internationally.

Reed Business, Reed Elsevier's global Business division, is a provider of magazines, exhibitions, directories, online media and marketing services across five continents. Its prestige brands serve professionals across a diverse range of industries.

All four of Reed Elsevier's divisions are global, and each of one of them focuses on a specific market for professional information:

about elsevier
About Elsevier
  • Elsevier publishes 2000 journals and over 3000 new books each year
  • Through ScienceDirect 10 million scientists and researchers have desktop access to a service offering 8 million articles and 55 major reference works
  • In 2004, Elsevier launched its new abstract & indexing database, Scopus, which links users to over 265 million scientific web pages

To do this we:

  • Maintain sales in 180+ countries
  • Employ over 7,000 people in 70 offices in 26 countries of whom 1,142 are based in The Netherlands 
elsevier customer groups and products
Elsevier customer groups and products

Print

Electronic

  • Key Customer Groups
  • Research scientists
  • Medical professionals
  • Information professionals
  • Library researchers
  • Industrial and academic
  • users
sciencedirect content 2006

Handbooks

eBooks (2007)

~80 series

4000titles

Reference Works

~60 titles

Book Series

~160 titles

~4 million articles

1995 - present

Backfiles pre 1995

2200 journals

~4 million articles

ScienceDirect content 2006
sciencedirect more effective scientific communication
ScienceDirect: More effective scientific communication

Read articles before

they appear in print

Alert me when a new

issue is published

Submit a paper online

Send the

article to a

colleague

Save the

article to my

desktop

eMail the

author

Crossref: linking to other scientific publishers

overall sciencedirect usage of articles year
Overall ScienceDirect Usage of Articles/Year

Estimation for 2007=365 million

e investments since 1999 elsevier example

Organise editorial boards

  • Launch new specialist journals

Solicit and manage submissions

Manage peer review

Archive and promote

Publish and disseminate

Edit and prepare

Production

E-investments since 1999: Elsevier example

In total, €300 million+ invested in E-publishing technology and distribution since 1999

  • Author and Editorial Systems, €10M+
    • 500,000 submissions
    • 200,000 referees
    • 1M referee reports
    • 40-90% articles rejected
  • ScienceDirect, Scopus, Scirus, €250M+
    • 7M articles
    • 10M researchers
    • 4,500 institutions
    • 180+ countries
    • 310+ million downloads/year
    • 2.5M print pages
  • eBack-files, eReference Works, €30M+
    • 7,000 editors
    • 70,000 ed board members
    • 6.5M author-publisher comms
  • E-Warehouse and Production, €20M
    • 250,000 new articles/year
    • 180 years of back issues scanned

These investments and functions make the difference between raw outputs of research, and published research

meeting researcher needs

1. Access

2. Quality

3. Preservation

4. Efficiency

5. Cost effectiveness

Meeting Researcher Needs

What matters to researchers?

Where are we in 2007?

  • Dramatic increases in access levels since 1999
    • EU libraries: 3x-10x more journals via ScienceDirect
    • 40%+ annual growth in ScienceDirect downloads (’01-’06: from 14M to 81M)
    • Researchers list access to journals as 12th among their concerns
  • Extremely high standards of quality control and integrity
    • 96% of researchers regard Peer Review as important
    • Elsevier: 500k submissions, 200k reviewers, 70k editorial board members
  • Definitively published research is preserved in perpetuity
    • KB, Portico
    • 7 million articles on SD, The Lancet to 1826
  • Significant increases in researcher productivity since 1999
    • Science: only info sector less time spent researching vs. gathering ‘01-’05
    • Researchers read 25%+ articles from 2x more journals than in print era
  • Continuing improvements in value for money
    • Moderating price increases: Elsevier 5.5% for last few years (lowest quartile) absorbing inflation (3%), growth in articles published (3-4%), usage (20%/yr)
    • E-licensing terms: many journals at substantially less than print list price
      • UK example (LISU): 20% decrease in average price paid per journal, ’99-’03
      • Effective price paid per Elsevier article downloaded: from €12 to €2 and still falling (45% annual decrease)
  • STM on a very positive trajectory since E-revolution began in 1999
  • Question: how to progress even further without undermining current high standards for researchers
innovative experimental dissemination models
Innovative experimental dissemination models
  • author pays – Public Library of Science, Biomednet, financial sustainability not proven
  • sponsored distribution – eg Elsevier/Wellcome Trust
  • delayed access hybrid journals – content made freely available after embargo period, dependent on readership pattern
  • open archiving
what are we learning access

Author paysjournals

<1%

  • ~10,000 articles: mostly BioMed Central, PLoS, Hindawi
  • 70% of authors believe they should not pay; others may pay for them, e.g. funding bodies

<1%

  • 15-20% of journals now offer option (15+ publishers)
  • Estimated 2,000 articles sponsored in total

Sponsored articles

  • 1% at <6 months; 5% at 12 months; 1% at 18 months+
  • Primarily life and health sciences

7%

Delayed access

  • Most journals allow pre-print and/or manuscript posting
  • Elsevier
    • 5% posted as pre-prints; 1% as manuscripts
    • 2% of total posted in institutional repositories
  • NIH: less than 5% of authors voluntarily post
  • 38% of researchers unwilling to post

Open archiving

5-6%

What are we learning: access

% of STM articles, 2007

Comments

Very low levels of interest and uptake by researchers after several years

what are we learning cost effectiveness

Effective price paid per article downloaded

15

10

5

0

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

‘05

€ per download

What are we learning: cost-effectiveness

Current trajectory: value for money

Likely cost impact of recent approaches

Author pays journals

Effective price paid per journal accessed

  • Author-pays journal publishers raising fees
  • Model has no net costs savings, transfer only
    • Prolific institutions pay more
    • Those contributing fewer articles pay less

0%

-10%

Sponsored articles

-20%

-25%

Delayed access

  • No net savings

-30%

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Source: LISU, 2004

Index 1999 = 1

  • Repositories duplicate system costs
  • UK estimates:
    • Costs to build IR system: £17 million
    • Costs to preserve IR system: unknown
    • UK articles per year: 60,000
    • Cost per UK article deposited in UK IR: £283
    • Cost per article downloaded via SD: ~£2
  • Key question: what is the incremental cost per article for how much - if any - incremental access?

Open archiving

New approaches will either not affect or will increase total system costs

preserving the electronic record
Preserving the electronic record
  • Elsevier has been a leader in establishing an official trusted third party archive at the National Library of the Netherlands for the electronic version of our journals.
slide15
Backfiles Project – 2001- Initiative to digitize all Elsevier owned journals from 1994 to volume 1 number 1

Millions of pages

$40 million for scanning

Four Sea Containers and Two Air Cargo Containers

13 mainframe computers
13 Mainframe computers

Storage in Petabytes!

the martini principle any time any place anywhere
The Martini Principle – any time, any place, anywhere

Authorised Users

Current members of the staff of the Licensee (whether on a permanent, temporary, contract or visiting basis) and individuals who are currently studying at the Licensee’s institution, who are permitted to access the Secure Network from within the premisesof the Licensee and from such other places where Authorised Users work or study, including without limitation halls of residence and lodgings and homes of Authorised Users, and who have been issued by the Licensee with a password or other authentication.

Walk-in Users

Persons who are not Authorised Users but who are registered as permitted users of the Licensee’s library or information service and who are permitted to access the Secure Network from computer terminals within the Library Premises. The payment of a fee in order to be registered as a Walk-in User is deemed not to constitute Commercial Use.

threat of unwarranted regulatory intervention
Threat of unwarranted regulatory intervention
  • Concern that out of date perceptions may lead to inappropriate and damaging interventions, such as:
    • mandating content deposit in open repositories, or
    • mandating author pays business model
  • STM publishing is a highly innovative efficient sector
    • Many ongoing experiments taking place with differing dissemination models
    • Multiple market driven reforms under way
  • Regulatory intervention unwarranted and unhelpful to the competitiveness agenda
conclusions
Conclusions
  • The current system is delivering significant benefits in areas that researchers value most:
    • Access
    • Quality
    • Preservation
    • Efficiency
    • Cost-effectiveness
  • These benefits are resulting from significant investment in E-technologies that publishers have made since 1999
  • Any proposed policy should rigorously quantify its impact on all of these dimensions before being implemented
  • Publishers are continually working with the research community (policy-makers, researchers, librarians, funding bodies) to test new approaches that can deliver sustainable measurable benefits without compromising current high standards
  • We strongly advocate a fact-based, test-and-learn approach to ensure that net benefits for researchers are positive
    • One-size-fits all approaches will not work: journals dynamics vary dramatically, e.g. subject area, business model
    • We must have up-to-date facts to measure the impact of new approaches, e.g. on access, quality and cost
    • We must implement based on fact-based results, not theory, to ensure no unintended negative consequences