Publishers challenge HEFCE over OA monograph plans

University press publishers have challenged the head of research policy at funder HEFCE over plans to require all monographs to be published Open Access to be eligible for the 2027 Research Excellence Framework (REF). One publisher told The Bookseller the move was "an inexplicable direct attack on a thriving industry".

Speaking at the University Press Redux conference in London yesterday (Tuesday 13th February), HEFCE's Steven Hill confirmed to delegates that to qualify for the next-but-one REF, long-form works will be required to be published OA. He said this requirement would be a "strong driver".

Without providing concrete details on plans, Hill suggested that new business models "to allow funding to channel into OA long-form publishing" could include the "new university press" on the UCL Press model, "mission-driven OA", freemium models, aggregator or distributor models like Knowledge Unlatched, or the "author pays" model involving a processing charge.

He also spoke of opportunities to innovate through what he termed "decoupling the academic book", referencing developments such as the open source software Open Review Toolkit and writing and publishing workflow Leanpub.

But speaking from the floor, University of Wales Press director Natalie Williams questioned why Hill was moving the focus away from traditional publishers "with a wealth of experience" to new entrants to the market. "Have you engaged with current publishers to understand what value they bring?" she asked.

Another speaker from the floor warned that an "unintended consequence" of the REF eligibility change would be "a massive decrease in the quality of output because it will be taking away from the editorial and peer review process." She also warned that some high-quality monographs commissioned before the policy change would be penalised.

Hill said the change in policy had been "signalled" over a year ago, and that he anticipated there would be exceptions allowed, including one for monographs contracted before the rule change. He added: "Palgrave is producing monographs on a Gold OA model, UCL Press is doing it on another model - it is not a quality issue."

He told Williams: "I am not suggesting there is not a role for traditional publishers. Our two objectives are to get content out there and accessible and to maintain quality control. This can be achieved by traditional publishers and new entrants - I am agnostic."

Bristol UP's Alison Shaw argued: "The key things publishers struggle with is the money, where is it coming from, particularly in the humanities and social sciences? We would happily publish Open Access, as long as we were confident that the revenue stream would come. In the current climate of government cuts, we need to be confident where the money is coming from, and that we can sell enough [print] copies to cover the [cost of the] work we put in."

Another publisher who preferred to speak anonymously told The Bookseller: "It seems extraordinary (not to mention wilful and naive) that one of the key government funders is seeking to introduce the requirement that for a monograph to be considered for the REF 2027 it has to be available in open access without ANY consultation with academics or publishers or consideration of the potential consequences. The direct consequence of this will be that many high quality monographs will not be eligible for consideration and that academics will be strongly dis-incentivised from publishing with their publisher of choice so that rather than the determining factor being fit with the publishers list or the quality of editorial input, it will simply be about the ability to deliver OA.

"The idea of decoupling the academic monograph from publishers is an inexplicable direct attack on a thriving industry which fulfils the essential functions of development (through peer review), curation, dissemination and promotion. Open access repositories and aggregators fulfil none of these functions, as their name suggests."

HEFCE (the Higher Education Funding Council for England) will transfer its research function to the UK Research and Innovation on 1st April, in a new council called Research England. Hill will continue his work from Research England.

The UP Redux conference, organised by UCL Press and the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) continues today (14th February).