Re: Online Self-Archiving: Distinguishing the Optimal from the Optional

From: Albert Henderson <chessNIC_at_COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:10:35 -0500

on Tue, Barry Mahon <> wrote:

> >Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 07:50:26 -0500
> >From: "Thomas J. Walker" <tjw_at_UFL.EDU>
> >Subject: Market outlook for STM publishers
> >
> >In case you want to know what Morgan Stanley market analysts think of
> >investing in STM publishing, read this:
> >
> >
> >
> >Of course, they were probably pushing Enron and WorldCom not too long ago.
> One interesting item in there is the prediction that electronic delivery will free up
> resources to buy more content (i.e. good prospects for STM publishers). At the
> Online Conference in London last week a session on scholarly publishing seemed
> to show that this was not the case. The problem seems to be that we are
> increasingly recycling the same money, to buy journals, pay people like BioMed
> Central and/or set up archives, there is no new money. One consequence, no
> money (and maybe no incentive) to look at permanent availability, preservation of
> the record.

        This is the "productivity paradox" first observed by
        Baumol and termed "cost disease." The expectation that
        cheaper technology will save money is met by the
        reality that it invites more activity, much of it
        labor-intensive. It is such an enormous business
        phenomenon that it has been studied by the National
        Academy of Sciences with little effect. In research you
        may take, as an example, self-"archiving" and the huge
        cost burden placed on readers drowning in unreviewed

        Best wishes,

Albert Henderson
Received on Tue Dec 10 2002 - 18:10:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:46:46 GMT