| Publisher |
Karger |
| Agreement ID | kay2020czelib |
| Agreement labeling | Standard license agreement |
| Has the agreement been disclosed and published? | Yes |
| URL | https://www.czechelib.cz/default/files/download/id/258/albertina-x-sla-karger-20191204.pdf |
| Agreement period | 01/01/2020 – 12/31/2022 |
| Consortia / Institution | CzechELib |
| Country | Czech Republic |
| SIZE
Approximate range of annual corresponding author publications |
14 |
| Comments on size/article output | 14 – 28 free open access publications for authors from Charles University and Masaryk University. 14 is the common publishing output in Karger for those institutions – and from our bibliometric analysis, this represents almost the whole publication output at Karger from the Czech Rep. |
| COSTS
How do the costs of the agreement relate to previous subscription-only agreements with the publisher? |
Cost decrease |
| Comments on cost development | Not easy to assess, there was intermittent two-year period during which the larger old consortium (pre-2018) ceased to exist and institutions were using limited access at decreased payments (no state co-funding). The agreement almost failed to continue from 2020 onwards (only two institutions), but the publisher has offered reasonable prices including a full OA clause and this has persuaded us to continue. |
| FINANCIAL SHIFT
Transfomative agreements vary by their transformative mechanisms, meaning the way in which financing is shifted from the subscription side to open access publishing. What are the characteristics of this agreement to this regard?
|
Still presented as subscription with free OA APCs |
| RISK SHARING
How do entitlements for open access publishing correlate to the anticipated article output? Which mechanisms for risk sharing have been agreed in cases of exceeding or not reaching the number of OA publishing entitlements? |
We have no price increase for the years, we can exceed twice the number of articles each year and only after that we have 5 % yearly increase.
If the APCs exceed “subscription” (i.e. the whole subscription is fully converted to OA APCs and more), then we should discuss with publisher possible solution. Citing the clause from agreement: “Annual price increase is calculated at 0%. However, in a case of a more than 100% growth in the number of published articles compared to the preceding year, an annual price increase of 5% per year will be added to the price of the coming year for the Participating Institution in question. Such price increase shall be applied only if the total number of Open Access articles published in the then preceding year exceeds twice ReferenceNumber of Open Access articles set above. If in any specific year the totalvalue of the Open Access articles (= APC or Author’s Choice Fee) of all participating institutions reaches the level of the total collection price, the Distributor reserves his right to reconsider the conditions of the contract, discussing solutions in good faith with the consortium.” |
| OA COVERAGE
Are all journals relevant to your affiliated authors (in which you expect them to publish) eligible for OA publishing under the agreement? |
Yes |
| Are fully open access journals covered by the agreement? | Yes |
| OA LICENSE | CC-BY preference, exceptions allowed |
| ARTICLE TYPES |
Original research articles |
| ACCESS COSTS
What is the approximate share of access related costs of the overall agreement? |
More than 50% |
| Comments | This applies if the typical publication output is maintained, but it could theoretically be much lower (in case of higher publication output) |
| ACCESS COVERAGE
Are all read relevant journals covered by the agreement? |
Yes |
| PERPETUAL ACCESS RIGHTS | Yes |
| WORKFLOW ASSESSMENT | Too early to assess |
| Comments on workflows | We need to ask for periodic reports (via e-mail and Karger agent) |
| OVERALL ASSESSMENT AND COMMENTS | This was our first fully transitional agreement, in terms of publication output which could be converted. Still the subscription costs are higher than the expected APCs spent, but this was very good starting point. Discussion with Karger (including license terms) was quite constructive. Let’s see the workflow. |
| Request contact to the licensee | contact [at] esac-initiative [dot] org |