Nordic Life Science 1
content and more. Other sources of revenue for pu
blishers include charging for reprints and e-prints that a company might want to distribute. Publishing companies are increasingly expanding into services beyond journals such as information analytics and mining services. The journals have a strong hand in negotiations, Andreasen explains, because of a lack of competition. “There’s only one Lancet,” she says. “We don’t want to tell our researchers we no longer subscribe to an important, high-prestige journal.” Michael Christensen, Global Information & Analysis (GLIA) Principal Information Resource Scientist, Novo Nordisk But libraries, information units, and scientific publishers generally have good professional relationships. “We’re not the enemy of publishing companies,” Andreasen says. “We need each other. We just want a balance between what they provide and what they ask of us.” his impact on innovation is one reason that Vinnova, backed by Director General Darja Isaksson, joined cOAlition S. This consortium of research funders including the Academy of Finland, Research Council of Norway, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Wellcome Foundation works to implement Plan S, an internationally supported activity to ensure that studies funded by public grants are published under open access standards. Vinnova and cOAlition S are also helping Swedish academic libraries negotiate with journal publishers. ”It’s a new market with new rules,” Eriksson says, ”but I’m quite positive. Established publishers are interested in finding solutions to this challenge.” R&D scientists at large companies may not think that conflicts over journal costs affect them. That means people like Rikke 102 NORDICLIFESCIENCE.ORG Andreasen, Novo Nordisk director of Global Information & Analysis (GLIA) and Michael H. Christensen, GLIA principal information resource scientist are doing their job, which Christensen says is “making access invisible and seamless for users.” But corporate information units have operations – and budgets – just like academic libraries. They’ve seen rates for journal subscriptions rise faster than inflation. Even though free downloading of open access articles is 20% and growing at Novo Nordisk, Christensen says, this doesn’t save money because the company still needs to buy subscriptions to major journals. Researchers argue that they provide the raw material for the publishing industry’s product: scientific papers. Research is funded by grants or R&D budgets so charging for journal access means that companies, foundations, and taxpayers are buying content they’ve already paid for. Publishers assert they need compensation for adding value such as managing submissions and reviews, doing layout and graphics, promoting and archiving Publishers and their clients are now wrestling over costs but the trends are toward openness. A unique life science industry contribution that also supports research integrity, reliability, and reproducibility is clinical trial transparency. This includes pre-registration, data sharing, and posting all results. The Good Pharma Scorecard, a rating system published in BMJ as, naturally, an open access article, shows companies that lead in this area, including Novo Nordisk, Roche, and other Nordic concerns. Fully open-access publishers such as the PLOS journals exist but are still seeking a sustainable model. Traditional publishers are acquiring open access journals or launching their own, such as JAMA Network Open, while keeping others behind paywalls. Scientists increasingly put their own articles on open access repositories. To read articles, they may turn to pirate sites that post materials regardless of ownership. How all these factors mix into open science models remains to be seen. Still, the open access idea is here to stay. ”It needs some new ways of thinking and new business models,” Eriksson says, ”but this the way of the future.” NLS