Photo credit: www.publishersweekly.com

Clarivate’s Subscription Shift Sparks Concerns in Academic Publishing

Global information services company Clarivate, known for its data and analytics tools, including the ProQuest platform, announced on February 18 its intention to implement a subscription-based access model for academic institutions. This strategy will phase out traditional one-time purchases of digital resources, including books and collections, by 2025, necessitating that libraries rent content rather than permanently acquire it. This change has caused unrest in the academic library sector at a time when funding for higher education is under pressure.

Bar Veinstein, Clarivate’s president of academia and government, emphasized the transformative nature of this new access method, stating that institutions and users will have to adapt to a model where renewal of access becomes the norm. Alongside this shift, the company is making substantial investments in AI to enhance the research experience through digital resources.

EBSCO Information Services, a competitor in the library technology space, expressed its commitment to maintaining its current policies of offering perpetual access. In a statement, EBSCO highlighted its diverse acquisition strategies, including Evidence-Based Acquisition (EBA) and Demand-Driven Acquisition (DDA), which cater to various library needs.

Jon Elwell, EBSCO’s Senior Vice President for books, cautioned that a leasing model may lead to less diverse collections, which he views as detrimental to innovative research. He stressed the necessity for libraries to preserve academic integrity by owning their resources. Elwell also mentioned that EBSCO is heavily investing in its new ordering system, Mosaic, pointing out disruptions caused by Clarivate’s new strategy.

A Mixed Response to Leasing Models

The leasing model, although not new, has traditionally coexisted with perpetual access. Leo Lo, president of the Association of College and Research Libraries, argued that both models should be retained to offer flexibility to libraries. He pointed out that while leasing can facilitate budgeting for some institutions, Clarivate’s decision to eliminate ownership could compromise the stability of collections and the preservation of scholarly works.

Lo anticipates that as libraries navigate these leasing arrangements, their focus may shift toward high-demand resources, potentially neglecting works in niche or interdisciplinary fields. He also predicted that this shift could complicate the relationship between librarians and publishers and encourage libraries to seek more favorable licensing arrangements.

Doug Way, dean of libraries at the University of Kentucky, voiced a similar concern, noting that many libraries prefer one-time purchases to annual subscriptions. This perspective underscores the widespread belief that Clarivate might be overestimating libraries’ appetite for subscription services, as institutions often find capital for significant purchases more feasible than continuous payments.

Andrew Pace, executive director of the Association of Research Libraries, reinforced this view, emphasizing that libraries depend on a variety of competitive options to curate their collections effectively. The viability of perpetual access is crucial for maintaining the academic record, as stated in previous ARL publications.

Pace also raised alarms about the potential consequences for not-for-profit university presses, already grappling with tight budgets. He noted that libraries must critically evaluate whether the new subscription model aligns with their stewardship responsibilities and stated that the ARL will closely monitor the impact of these changes on scholarly publishing.

Implications for Academic Publishing

From the perspective of academic publishing, Wendy Queen of the Association of University Presses stressed the importance of permanence in book collections. Reflecting on past initiatives like the Mellon Foundation’s support for e-book licensing exploration, she pointed out that the community had previously established key principles for e-books centered on unlimited user access and perpetual rights. The recent announcement from Clarivate, however, has raised concerns over its implications for nonprofit publishers who rely heavily on stable revenue streams for their operations.

Queen remarked that while the subscription model might provide Clarivate with a reliable income base, it raises pressing questions about the sustainability of nonprofit publishing amid fluctuating revenues. The gravity of the situation escalates quickly as the academic community grapples with these potential changes.

Source
www.publishersweekly.com