[Duraspace] Fwd: [GOAL] Re: Any examples of journals charging non refundable fee for peer review?

[Hilton Gibson]

FYI.

*Hilton Gibson*
Ubuntu Linux Systems Administrator
JS Gericke Library
Room 1025C
Stellenbosch University
Private Bag X5036
Stellenbosch
7599
South Africa

Tel: +27 21 808 4100 | Cell: +27 84 646 4758

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum at gmail.com>
Date: 24 October 2014 15:34
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Any examples of journals charging non refundable fee
for peer review?
To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal at eprints.org>


Before Mandatory Green Open Access becomes universal, all Gold OA fees are
overpriced, double-paid, unsustainable Fool's Gold <http://j.mp/foolsgoldOA>
fees, whether they are for publication of for refereeing.

After Mandatory Green Open Access becomes universal, everything changes,
and No-Fault refereeing fees become Fair-Gold, affordable and sustainable:

Harnad, Stevan (2010) No-Fault Peer Review Charges: The Price of
Selectivity Need Not Be Access Denied or Delayed
<http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july10/harnad/07harnad.html>. *D-Lib Magazine*, 16
, (7/8)

Abstract Plans by universities and research funders to pay the costs of
Open Access Publishing ("Gold OA") are premature. Funds are short; 80% of
journals (including virtually all the top journals) are still
subscription-based, tying up the potential funds to pay for Gold OA; the
asking price for Gold OA is still high; and there is concern that paying to
publish may inflate acceptance rates and lower quality standards. What is
needed now is for universities and funders to mandate OA self-archiving (of
authors' final peer-reviewed drafts, immediately upon acceptance for
publication) ("Green OA"). That will provide immediate OA; and if and when
universal Green OA should go on to make subscriptions unsustainable
(because users are satisfied with just the Green OA versions) that will in
turn induce journals to cut costs (print edition, online edition,
access-provision, archiving), downsize to just providing the service of
peer review, and convert to the Gold OA cost-recovery model; meanwhile, the
subscription cancellations will have released the funds to pay these
residual service costs. *The natural way to charge for the service of peer
review then will be on a "no-fault basis," with the author's institution or
funder paying for each round of refereeing, regardless of outcome
(acceptance, revision/re-refereeing, or rejection). *This will minimize
cost while protecting against inflated acceptance rates and decline in
quality standards.


On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Frantsvåg Jan Erik <jan.e.frantsvag at uit.no>
wrote:

>  I assume what you are referring to, is what is often called submission
> fees.
>
>
>
> This is treated in this report
>
>
> http://www.knowledge-exchange.info/Files/Filer/downloads/Open%20Access/KE_Submission_fees_Short_Report_2010-11-25.pdf
>
>
>
> Both OA and TA journals use this, some OA journals are listed in a table
> in the report.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Jan Erik
>
>
>
> Jan Erik Frantsvåg
>
> Open Access adviser
>
> The University Library
>
> UiT The Arctic University of Norway
>
> phone +47 77 64 49 50
>
> e-mail jan.e.frantsvag at uit.no
>
>
> http://en.uit.no/ansatte/organisasjon/ansatte/person?p_document_id=43618&p_dimension_id=88187
>
> Publications: http://tinyurl.com/6rycjns
>
> http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3413-8799
>
> *http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3413-8799*
> <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3413-8799>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Fra:* goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] *På
> vegne av* Danny Kingsley
> *Sendt:* 24. oktober 2014 02:08
> *Til:* goal at eprints.org
> *Emne:* [GOAL] Any examples of journals charging non refundable fee for
> peer review?
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I am passing on a question from a library in Australia:
>
>
>
> "I have recently become aware that some publishers and journals are
> charging authors a non-refundable fee to have their articles peer reviewed
> that is separate from the article processing charge.  I hadn’t heard about
> this until one of our librarians mentioned it in passing.
>
>
>
> I was wondering if anyone else had come across this (or whether I’ve just
> had my head in the sand and not noticed!), and if so, whether it is
> common.  Any examples would be great J“
>
>
>
> Dr Danny Kingsley
>
> Visting Fellow
>
> Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science (CPAS)
>
> p: +61 413 101 197
>
> w: http://cpas.anu.edu.au/about-us/people/danny-kingsley
>
> t: @openaccess_oz
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL at eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
>

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL at eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lib.sun.ac.za/pipermail/duraspace/attachments/20141024/c9b5a467/attachment.html>