Taylor & Francis

Agreement ID tf2021czelib
Has the agreement been disclosed and published? Yes
Agreement period 01/01/2021 – 12/31/2022
Consortia / Institution CzechELib
Country Czech Republic

Approximate range of annual corresponding author publications

Comments on size/article output From bibliometric analysis we anticipate something around 150, this was also in a approximate agreement with numbers estimated by the publisher. Transition (increasing share of Publish part) – number of eligible tokens: 75 tokens for 2021, 150 tokens for 2022.

How do the costs of the agreement relate to previous subscription-only agreements with the publisher?

Agreement costs within the range of the previous spending level

Transformative 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?

Subscriptions partly converted to OA publishing fees

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?

Small possible roll-over agreed (up to 8 articles for 2021-2022, 15 articles for 2022-2023). OA publishing above the Publication Cap is not mandatory, but 10% discount on APC for eventual articles above Publication Cap.

Are all journals relevant to your affiliated authors (in which you expect them to publish) eligible for OA publishing under the agreement?

Are fully open access journals covered by the agreement? No
OA LICENSE CC-BY mandatory
Original research articles
Review articles
Report; Short Communication; Case Report; Note; Guest Editorial

What is the approximate share of access related costs of the overall agreement?

Comments on access costs There is a transition: in 2021 the share of Publish is less then 50%, in 2022 it is more than 50%.

Are all read relevant journals covered by the agreement?

PERPETUAL ACCESS RIGHTS Partly (e.g. to core journals only)
WORKFLOW ASSESSMENT Too early to assess
Comments on workflows We are using the TF dashboard. There are some initial glitches and bugs, however the overall impression is that after fine tuning this will be a quite comfortable and usable system.

As this is the first year we didn’t know what to expect and e.g. reallocation of tokens among institutions seems to be impossible (at this moment) so it is necessary to take this into account when planning tokens for the next calendar year. However, it seems the system is in active development and the issues have the chance to be solved.

OVERALL ASSESSMENT AND COMMENTS For us, a big step forward. We had to sacrifice a certain part of perpetual access rights, but we’ve found some reasonable compromise with the publisher for this.
What is quite problematic is the following: our agreement covers only OpenSelect type journals (= journals with standard APC rate). It does not cover pure OA journals (that’s acceptable and easy to understand for authors), but it also does not cover so called Premium APC journals (cca. 150 journals with higher APC rate). This is something that is difficult to communicate to authors as he/she cannot determine if the article will be eligible for token until someone will check the title lists in agreement or list of Premium APC journals.The Dashboard shows this, that’s OK, but sending a simple message to academics, e.g. “all your research in Taylor Francis non-OA journals could be turned to OA (of course as long as we have spare tokens)”, is impossible. Also for your internal estimates this is quite complicated issue.
Request contact to the licensee contact [at] esac-initiative [dot] org