The Impact of Electronic Publishing on Scholarly   Communication

      	Previous	 	Contents	 	Next
	Issues in Science and Technology   Librarianship
	Fall 2000

	DOI:10.5062/F41C1TVQ



                      

     	 URLs in this  document have been updated.  Links enclosed in {curly  brackets} have been changed.  If a replacement link was located,  the new URL was added and the link is active; if a new site could not be  identified, the broken link was removed.



      

Conference Reports
    The Impact of Electronic Publishing on Scholarly Communication:  A Forum on the Future, October 26-27, 2000
  University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Libraries
      Jane Duffy
  Physics/Astronomy Librarian
  Ohio State University Libraries
duffy.88@osu.edu        "A Forum on the Future" addressed the academic community's growing concerns about  the increasing numbers, titles and prices of scholarly scientific publications,  especially as they now exceed the capacity of many libraries' current resources to  make these materials accessible. Developed and organized by Karen Schmidt and Greg  Youngen, both of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Libraries, the  "Forum on the Future" hosted 165+ registered participants. Although the timely  topic is extremely popular in professional discourse and library journal  literature, the "Forum on the Future" distinguished itself as unique; its  solution-oriented focus was on tomorrow rather than on problems with which  we are well acquainted today. The conference was planned so that voices were heard  from all stakeholders in the scientific scholarly communications chain, i.e., from  academics as authors/readers, academic librarians as consumers and intermediaries,  scholarly societies and commercial publishers as brokers of peer review, marketing  and promotion. 

    Speakers were asked to address their own experiences with the provision that they   include 3 major themes.  First, they were to discuss emerging trends, behaviors,   and changes which they see taking place within the next decade.  Secondly, they   were asked to describe changes in the systems of scholarly communication and   publishing that they find troubling.  And finally, organizers sought the speakers'   views on how change could improve the quality of scholarly communication. 

    The Thursday program was devoted to stakeholders in the creation of scientific   databases. The first speaker, Clifford Lynch, of the Coalition for Networked   Information, set an optimistic tone by addressing infrastructural changes in the   scholarly communications process, while identifying new opportunities and   challenges for information professionals. His presentation of new genres of   scholarly communications, including reconceptualized non-sequential packaging of   information, was referred to - and occasionally challenged - throughout the   remainder of the conference.  Carol Tenopir of the University of Tennessee   presented data gathered over three decades examining fundamentals of scientists'   information needs and offered four "lessons" which could serve as a heuristic   model for libraries committed to meeting those needs. 

    Other Thursday speakers included Daniel Greenstein of the Digital Library   Federation, who spoke to the issue of peer review, predicting that although peer   review will "always be in demand", there will also be a increasing parallel demand   for mainstream publication of - and improved access to - gray or "unreviewed"   materials, such as e-prints, computer-based learning content and electronic   discourse communities. Greenstein wondered if libraries could meet this challenge   and if not, whether they would be replaced - at least partially - by portal   services made available directly by publishers. Julia Blixrud of SPARC gave an   interesting overview of new models of scholarly publishing such as BioOne, Dspace,   and Project Euclid. As a guide to the improvement of the current scholarly   communications model, Blixrud made a case for the development of standards for   archiving, authentication, rights management and description, etc. To Blixrud, the   greatest challenge for the future is the ability of academic libraries to purchase   more journal content more economically.  She pointed to the SPARC "Create Change"   campaign as a means for making this happen. Pulling together the scholarly issues   raised throughout the day, University of Kansas Provost, David E. Shulenburger,   outlined a series of principles for adjusting current, unsustainable models for   copyright, fair use and costs, and he presented the ideas within the context of   statistics on academic journal price increases.

    Friday's sessions were reserved for publishers, scholarly societies, and   commercial vendors who presented issues related to review, marketing and other   value-added services. Tim Ingoldsby of the American Institute of Physics shared   his predictions that the online journal would become the "copy of record;"   Ingoldsby also made some provocative comments about what he foresees as the   "deconstruction of the journal" and the restructuring of the secondary publishing   industry. Using the "tanagram analogy" of smooth edges despite changing   configurations, Mark Doyle of the American Physical Society next offered a model   of "layering of the independent features of publishing" as a possible response to   researcher driven information demands. Steve Moss of the Institute of Physics   echoed many of Doyle's and Ingoldsby's predictions.  Moss, however, devoted a   greater proportion of his presentation to future pricing models. Other speakers,   including Justin Spence of the American Chemical Society and Michiel Kolman of   Reed Elsevier, discussed further the topics of pricing structures and the merits   of cost-benefit analyses as a means by which to guide establishment of those   structures. These latter issues spurred lively questioning from the audience.

    The "Forum on the Future" closed with presentations from senior members of the   scientific information establishment, who recapitulated and tied together many of   the philosophical concerns that had been raised throughout the conference. Issues   such as the continued "certifying function" of the book and the journal, growing   collaborations among university presses, and striving for the right balance   between "bricks and clicks," were the major themes that closed the conference.   While many differing visions and perspectives on scientific publishing had been   presented throughout the exciting two-day program, participants left with the   feeling that scholarly communications will stay vital through such dialogue.   Optimism runs high that it will continue with vigor. 

    Notes from the "Forum for the Future" as well as copies of the overheads may be   found at:   {http://gateway.library.uiuc.edu/phx/Forum.html} 

        


         

  

  	Previous	 	Contents	 	Next