Clarivate, the company behind Proquest, abandoned the bombshell in the academic publishing world last month, when it would be “phasing out as a permanent purchase of digital collections, printed and digital books in libraries.” Instead, institutions will turn to a subscription-based access model. Clarivate demonstrates this shift in earthquake by pointing out the need for regular content updates, especially with the reshaping of AI-enhanced research tools.
While the permanent access options for e-books won’t go away completely, they will be available through Clarivate’s rialto platform, such as Clarivate’s Rialto Platform, which will greatly reduce traditional buying options. More disturbingly, it marks a wider industry trend towards an acceleration of subscription-only model, raising profound questions about the future of academic scholarships and highlights the critical role of libraries in ensuring equitable, continuous access to academic resources.
Key Differences Between Books and Journals
In recent years, some major commercial publishers such as Hachette and Penguin Random House have shifted from permanent access to subscription-based access models for e-books, a shift that has so far primarily impacted public libraries.
The subscription drive reflects established practices in academic journals but presents unique challenges to academic e-books. Unlike journals that primarily offer new discoveries, academic books represent lasting investment in knowledge. Decades later, the monographs received today remain essential for scholarships, especially in the history, literature, philosophy and sociology of humanities, etc., where basic texts have been passed down from generation to generation.
Financial and academic risks
Given the unique value of academic books, subscription-only access can undermine teaching and research continuity. Teachers who design courses around a particular text may suddenly discover basic works that are not available due to licensing changes. Researchers working on long-term projects have the potential to lose access to critical resources if the subscription fails. While the subscription model initially provides lower upfront costs and greater flexibility, cumulative expenses can increase significantly over time, introducing budget uncertainty.
However, the subscription model also provides clear advantages for some institutions. Programs with rapidly evolving content, especially in the STEM area that requires frequent updates, may benefit from subscription flexibility. Smaller colleges and institutions experience enrollment fluctuations or course shifts, and a subscription that is economically viable may be economically viable due to the low immediate costs. Subscriptions can help organizations avoid large upfront spending, manage predictable annual budgets more effectively, and ensure constant access to current academic content.
Understanding these potential financial implications becomes crucial, especially as other industries transition to subscription-based models, which face similar challenges.
Lessons from other industries
Higher education can extract valuable insights from similar transitions in the field of software and media streaming. Traditionally, software represents a one-time transaction that grants permanent access, allowing customers to use it indefinitely after the initial investment. The software transition as a service (SaaS) fundamentally changes this paradigm, thus providing continuous access through recurring subscriptions. The SaaS model initially attracted organizations due to lower upfront costs and had greater scaling service flexibility as needed. However, this transition introduces budget uncertainty, as continuous subscription fees are unpredictable over time.
The media industry’s experience in the subscription model provides another cautionary tale. Platforms like Netflix and Spotify initially attracted consumers to easily access a huge library of content. However, as time goes by, many competitive services have entered the market and the content is distributed. Consumers find themselves juggling multiple subscriptions to maintain full access, resulting in “subscription fatigue” and significantly increasing the total cost. This split not only affects the family budget, but also creates complexity in managing multiple services, ultimately reducing the convenience originally promised by these platforms.
Similar to higher education, subscription-only models may similarly disperse access to academic resources, forcing institutions to maintain multiple subscriptions for a full collection. Over time, this split may increase administrative complexity and total cost, thus complicating resource management. Therefore, institutions must be cautious and deliberate to deal with subscription-only models.
Open access as a strategic solution
One proactive strategy to address subscription challenges is to embrace open access (OA), a model that provides free, unrestricted online access to academic research. Unlike traditional business models that rely on paywalls, OA enables anyone to read, download and distribute content without cost barriers. This greatly increases the visibility of research and makes knowledge democratic by making knowledge, regardless of institutional affiliation or financial competence.
Institutions can strategically support OA by investing in university media, institutional repositories and collaborative publishing platforms. Examples of success include open access to the catalogue of books, open book publishers and open humanities libraries that demonstrate a sustainable, rigorous approach to academic publishing. Redirecting some subscription budgets to these initiatives can create a permanent collection while fostering transformative academic communication practices.
However, OA models face their own challenges. Financial sustainability is concerned because the cost of publication often falls on the author or institution, which can detriment the researchers without the need for institutional support. In addition, a strong infrastructure, consistent funding and an effective policy framework are essential to maintaining the quality and lifespan of OA content.
Move forward: Mobile phone
When academic scholarships drive these transformative currents, institutional leaders must proactively interact with their libraries, publishers, and suppliers. Delaying actions risks diversified access, costs increase and undermine academic integrity.
Leaders should prioritize collaborative actions:
- Work with publishers and suppliers to develop balanced subscription and permanent access models.
- Make strategic investments in open plans while acknowledging and responding to their implementation challenges.
- Strengthen alliances and partnerships to enhance negotiation capabilities, reduce decentralization and simplify resource management.
- Develop structural communication between teachers, libraries, publishers and suppliers to align acquisitions with academic priorities.
The positive decisions we make today will shape academic scholarships over the next few decades to ensure that important resources remain accessible, sustainable and equitable.
