Library Partnership Subsidies (LPS)

Click here to download a copy of our LPS flyer for libraries and librarians interested in participating.

Libraries as Stakeholders, Decision Makers and Supporters: Join Us

In his book, The Access Principle, John Willinsky notes that “JSTOR has already demonstrated the level of cooperation that can be achieved among libraries, publishers and scholarly associations” (Willinsky 2006, 85). Indeed, as Don Waters also notes, JSTOR is a “community-based organization” (Waters 2004). Willinsky goes further, though. Implicit in his assessment is a new potential for a future JSTOR-like organization for the humanities; one that, in this age, would be open access (like PLOS) and funded through cooperation, not through competition (like arXiv). 

The current system of scholarly economics is irrational. University staff produce material that is then given to publishers so that it can be sold back to university libraries. Theories of market agency are flawed in this context because they assume that all information is available to all purchasers and that these purchasers can go elsewhere if better competition is available. But what competition is available when a researcher needs a journal article to which a publisher has exclusive rights? None. Competition is a flawed concept within these micro-monopolies, as Peter Suber terms them (Suber 2012, 39).

Library Partnership Subsidies (LPS)

Our proposed alternative is a system of Library Partnership Subsidy (LPS). arXiv, the repository for electronic preprints in maths, physics, computer science and astronomy held at Cornell University, has shown that it is possible for libraries to support an infrastructure instead of simply purchasing journals. The economies of scale that are achieved here can be staggering. To fund an operation publishing 250 articles and 12 books in partnership with reputable presses per year, we need a banded average of just $700 from 500 libraries. If 1000 libraries participated, this cost is lowered to $350. On the $700 rate that's a cost to each library of $2.80 per article. And you get 12 books per year (as part of our monograph pilot study). This becomes cheaper with every library that joins. In this way there will be no Article Processing Charges for authorsThis is the way to end the serials crisis, not by transitioning to a straight supply-side rate at the cost levied by many commercial publishers.

Now, of course, you're not technically “buying” an article, because it's open access. So, inevitably, some people will get the material without contributing their fair share. However, if you, as a librarian, don't persuade your institution to contribute these modest amounts, we can't do it at all. More importantly, we want to give control back to libraries. Hence, when an organisation participates, they will be entitled to representation on our OLH Library Board, which will consult with the OLH Academic Board in the future admission of overlay journals and other governance decisions.

Click here to download a copy of our LPS flyer for libraries and librarians interested in participating.

Image by ccmbc under a CC BY license.

Tags: , , ,


  1. Twitter Open Access Report – 8 Apr 2014 | - April 8, 2014

    […] to a straight supply-side rate at the cost levied by many commercial publishers.” More here. […]

  2. Open Library of Humanities zaprasza do publikowania - Historia i Media - December 15, 2014

    […] OLH różni się od PLOS przede wszystkim rezygnacją z pobierania opłat za publikację ze strony autora (APC – Article Processing Charges często pokrywane są z budżetów projektów badawczych). W zamian proponują bibliotekom kolektywne finansowanie przedsięwzięcia. […]

  3. Scholarly communication’s only going to get better. Here’s how. | - August 4, 2015

    […] Research’s length-based article processing charge fees and Open Library of the Humanities’ “collaboration, not competition” funding model, moving academia away from the idea of “one size fits all” OA publishing; […]

  4. Scholarly communication’s only going to get better [Altmetric blog] | The Publication Plan for everyone interested in medical writing, the development of medical publications, and publication planning - August 10, 2015

    […] Research’s length-based article processing charge fees and Open Library of the Humanities’ “collaboration, not competition” funding model, moving academia away from the idea of “one size fits all” OA publishing; […]

  5. What’s the cost of an open access book? | Language Science Press Blog - September 29, 2015

    […] pay? Readers, as in the traditional model? Authors, via book processing charges? Libraries, as with OpenLibHums? The state? The crowd? Whatever the repartition among those sources: it will have to be about […]

  6. OLH: Building a Grassroots Academic Movement | CREATe - November 12, 2015

    […] presses and born-digital publishing initiatives alike. The OLH’s innovative business model is the Library Partnership Subsidy – an international library consortium whose members fund the cost of the OLH’s journal […]

  7. What Open Access means | Thomas Ash - December 1, 2015

    […] Library of Humanities, 2014. Library Partnership Subsidies.  Available at: Accessed [Accessed 1 12 […]

  8. Cooperation between Language Science Press and Knowledge Unlatched | Language Science Press Blog - October 13, 2016

    […] our cooperation with Knowledge Unlatched. Together with Knowledge Unlatched, we will implement a library partnership model. A library partnership model is similar to crowdfunding: a number of interested parties (in our […]

  9. An ‘Open Access in action’ experience – DiXiT - November 29, 2016

    […] models and funding strategies for enabling affordable fully open access publishing such as the Library Partnership Subsidies currently employed by the Open Library of Humanities, in order to facilitate open access publishing […]

Leave a Reply