(Abstract freely available. Harvard affiliates follow this link for full text.)A study published in PNAS last week examines insitutional site license subsscriptions to online journals and whether users benefit from such arrangements. They report: “If a journal is priced to maximize the publisher’s profits, scholars on average are likely to be worse off when universities purchase site licenses than they would be if access were by individual subscriptions only.” In contrast, university press and society journal site licenses benefit the scientific community because the subscription prices are closer to the costs of producing the journal. It’s also noted that some societies fund their activities with subscription monies and the scientific community also gains from these. In the latter instance, the university libraries play a key role negotiating and providing online access for users at their institutions. So for reasonably-priced journals, institutional access is a good per-capita value.
Harvard’s recent mass cancellation of Elsevier titles reflects problems with such pricing. At one point in the article, the authors point out that for a lot of journals the price reflects what users are (have been) willing to pay, rather than actual production costs.
The article does not address questions of open access.