- Email: [email protected]
Research libraries protest against Harcourt sale to Reed-Elsevier
POLICY AND PEOPLE
Research libraries protest against Harcourt sale to Reed-Elsevier double-digit increases”, reassures John Regazzi, who is President and Chief Executive Officer of Elsevier Science in New York and Managing
Rights were not granted to include this image in electronic media. Please refer to the printed journal. Keeping track of libraries’ costs
Director of Elsevier Science Electronic Publishing. But Case contends that even this is too much, adding that the effects of such increases are “far more dramatic” outside of the USA. “I can’t even imagine what they are in developing countries Skyrocketing subscription costs where resources are ● Since 1986, science, technology, and medical (STM) absolutely minimal.” journal prices more than tripled, and libraries cut Regazzi says the subscriptions by 6% and book purchases by 26%. company has devel● STM journal subscriptions cost over 200% more in oped consortia to help 2000 compared with 1990. smaller libraries world● Commercially published neuroscience journals are wide “band together 6·5 times more costly than not-for-profit and subscribe as a neuroscience journals group”. In China, ● By 2015, libraries will have to cancel 17% to 45% of for example, “a large their journal subscriptions to keep pace with inflating academic consortium prices. subscribes to our Source: Association of Research Libraries engineering and
Robert Harding
he Association of Research Libraries (ARL), a non-profit organisation representing some 120 of the largest academic libraries in the USA, has urged the US Department of Justice to block the proposed purchase of medical publisher Harcourt General by Reed-Elsevier. If the sale goes through, says ARL’s Mary Case, “we assume based on past patterns that the prices of the Harcourt titles, which now are only about a third of the cost of Elsevier titles, will go up, meaning we will again be forced to cut subscriptions” (see panel). When Elsevier Science, a division of ReedElsevier and also publisher of The Lancet, purchased Pergamon Press in 1991, Pergamon medical titles increased by 27%, Case notes. “We are committed to containing costs. Our prices increased 7% last year and 6% for next year—no more
T
ScienceDirect journals. And libraries that couldn’t afford the individual print subscriptions, and we couldn’t afford to deliver to them, can now get access electronically by banding together.” Electronic publishing not only brings access, but also “more use and value”, contends Regazzi. “For the same amount of money, more people can read the articles, and by paying a bit more [in the Web Editions programme], they can access articles for the past year.” But Case is not impressed: “ARL libraries could have purchased almost 225 000 additional journal titles or 1·3 million books for the US$60 million that Reed-Elsevier is spending this year on electronic publishing. It would have been better for libraries to have had those dollars to spend to support the needs of their faculties and students than for Reed-Elsevier to assume that they can ever make their journals worth the price.” Electronic access also creates a perception problem, continues Case. “What seems to faculty and researchers on campus like full-text, free online access to articles [from a respected journal] exists only because the library has paid a subscription for that journal. And although electronic access is of great benefit to the community, it has not reduced the cost of the print publication.” Marilynn Larkin
WHO sets dot-health in its sights
W
HO has taken a major step to improve the quality of health information on the internet by proposing to sponsor a new toplevel domain (TLD) called “.health”. The proposal is now being considered by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the notfor-profit organisation that manages the domain name system, as part of the first TLD review since the 1980s. If the proposal is accepted, only individuals or organisations that meet quality and ethical criteria developed through WHO’s proposed consultative process would be eligible to register a .health site. As sponsor, WHO would be able to refuse registration to sites not meeting stringent criteria. Dothealth status could also be cancelled or suspended if random
1664
checks or the proposed yearly re-registration process revealed that a site was not maintaining high standards. ICANN’s findings are expected to be published this week, and will be open for public comment (http://www.icann.org/). Several organisations, such as the Health on the Net Foundation (HON; http://www.hon.ch/), are already attempting to improve the quality and ethics of online health information. Commenting in ICANN’s initial web-based public forum that ended on Nov 5, Timothy Nater, HON executive director (Geneva, Switzerland), identified several concerns about the proposal, including the criteria for admission and how these will be drafted, as well as potential conflicts of interest and undue political influence by national governments. However, he adds: “If WHO will
deliberately call for a collaborative effort as it brings its .health TLD sponsorship, its worldwide resources, reach, recognisability and global-health mandate to the table, then it could actually accelerate the building of trust in e-health.” According to Joan Dzenowagis, chief scientist on the project, WHO is already planning an international consultation to define further the types of information providers who would be eligible and the quality standards for these categories, and to harmonise and further develop ethical standards. “What we propose in this case is to expand and enhance work already underway by industry groups, consumer groups, governments, and health and medical associations”, she explains. Kelly Morris
THE LANCET • Vol 356 • November 11, 2000
For personal use only. Not to be reproduced without permission of The Lancet.
Research libraries protest against Harcourt sale to Reed-Elsevier double-digit increases”, reassures John Regazzi, who is President and Chief Executive Officer of Elsevier Science in New York and Managing
Rights were not granted to include this image in electronic media. Please refer to the printed journal. Keeping track of libraries’ costs
Director of Elsevier Science Electronic Publishing. But Case contends that even this is too much, adding that the effects of such increases are “far more dramatic” outside of the USA. “I can’t even imagine what they are in developing countries Skyrocketing subscription costs where resources are ● Since 1986, science, technology, and medical (STM) absolutely minimal.” journal prices more than tripled, and libraries cut Regazzi says the subscriptions by 6% and book purchases by 26%. company has devel● STM journal subscriptions cost over 200% more in oped consortia to help 2000 compared with 1990. smaller libraries world● Commercially published neuroscience journals are wide “band together 6·5 times more costly than not-for-profit and subscribe as a neuroscience journals group”. In China, ● By 2015, libraries will have to cancel 17% to 45% of for example, “a large their journal subscriptions to keep pace with inflating academic consortium prices. subscribes to our Source: Association of Research Libraries engineering and
Robert Harding
he Association of Research Libraries (ARL), a non-profit organisation representing some 120 of the largest academic libraries in the USA, has urged the US Department of Justice to block the proposed purchase of medical publisher Harcourt General by Reed-Elsevier. If the sale goes through, says ARL’s Mary Case, “we assume based on past patterns that the prices of the Harcourt titles, which now are only about a third of the cost of Elsevier titles, will go up, meaning we will again be forced to cut subscriptions” (see panel). When Elsevier Science, a division of ReedElsevier and also publisher of The Lancet, purchased Pergamon Press in 1991, Pergamon medical titles increased by 27%, Case notes. “We are committed to containing costs. Our prices increased 7% last year and 6% for next year—no more
T
ScienceDirect journals. And libraries that couldn’t afford the individual print subscriptions, and we couldn’t afford to deliver to them, can now get access electronically by banding together.” Electronic publishing not only brings access, but also “more use and value”, contends Regazzi. “For the same amount of money, more people can read the articles, and by paying a bit more [in the Web Editions programme], they can access articles for the past year.” But Case is not impressed: “ARL libraries could have purchased almost 225 000 additional journal titles or 1·3 million books for the US$60 million that Reed-Elsevier is spending this year on electronic publishing. It would have been better for libraries to have had those dollars to spend to support the needs of their faculties and students than for Reed-Elsevier to assume that they can ever make their journals worth the price.” Electronic access also creates a perception problem, continues Case. “What seems to faculty and researchers on campus like full-text, free online access to articles [from a respected journal] exists only because the library has paid a subscription for that journal. And although electronic access is of great benefit to the community, it has not reduced the cost of the print publication.” Marilynn Larkin
WHO sets dot-health in its sights
W
HO has taken a major step to improve the quality of health information on the internet by proposing to sponsor a new toplevel domain (TLD) called “.health”. The proposal is now being considered by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the notfor-profit organisation that manages the domain name system, as part of the first TLD review since the 1980s. If the proposal is accepted, only individuals or organisations that meet quality and ethical criteria developed through WHO’s proposed consultative process would be eligible to register a .health site. As sponsor, WHO would be able to refuse registration to sites not meeting stringent criteria. Dothealth status could also be cancelled or suspended if random
1664
checks or the proposed yearly re-registration process revealed that a site was not maintaining high standards. ICANN’s findings are expected to be published this week, and will be open for public comment (http://www.icann.org/). Several organisations, such as the Health on the Net Foundation (HON; http://www.hon.ch/), are already attempting to improve the quality and ethics of online health information. Commenting in ICANN’s initial web-based public forum that ended on Nov 5, Timothy Nater, HON executive director (Geneva, Switzerland), identified several concerns about the proposal, including the criteria for admission and how these will be drafted, as well as potential conflicts of interest and undue political influence by national governments. However, he adds: “If WHO will
deliberately call for a collaborative effort as it brings its .health TLD sponsorship, its worldwide resources, reach, recognisability and global-health mandate to the table, then it could actually accelerate the building of trust in e-health.” According to Joan Dzenowagis, chief scientist on the project, WHO is already planning an international consultation to define further the types of information providers who would be eligible and the quality standards for these categories, and to harmonise and further develop ethical standards. “What we propose in this case is to expand and enhance work already underway by industry groups, consumer groups, governments, and health and medical associations”, she explains. Kelly Morris
THE LANCET • Vol 356 • November 11, 2000
For personal use only. Not to be reproduced without permission of The Lancet.