Elsevier and Carnegie Mellon Reach Transformative Open-Access Agreement as Research Universities Seek Major Change

Carnegie Mellon gave much credit to the UC system. “Negotiations were slow, frankly, until the point at which the University of California breakdown was announced at the end of February,” said Keith Webster, dean of libraries at the private research university. “That gave us some momentum.”

The UC system sought a similar deal with Elsevier, but said it had stopped negotiations with the company because Elsevier’s pricing was too high. Webster said Carnegie Mellon had achieved a “fair value” contract but declined to disclose publicly the financial details of the agreement. He said the university had negotiated with Elsevier for about a year.

Elsevier has characterized itself as a supporter of open access, and Webster surmised that the company wanted to make something work with Carnegie Mellon after UC canceled its subscription. “Elsevier probably couldn’t afford many more hits of licenses being canceled.”

Webster thought it had helped that Elsevier is not the largest publisher of Carnegie Mellon research, which made the campus an attractive place to make a first-of-its-kind deal. “We’re almost like a boutique operation for them.”

A spokeswoman for Elsevier did not respond to specific questions from The Chronicle or make representatives available for comment.

The spokeswoman, Lauren O’Leary, instead provided a statement that said the company does not have a one-size-fits-all approach for customers.

The company’s pilot agreements show that Elsevier is “ready to listen, test, and learn from the community,” the statement read. Findings from the deals will shape longer-term, larger-scale future contracts.

“During this year the agreements where we have found a way forward far outweigh the instances where we haven’t yet,” the statement said. “Even so, we should not underestimate the work, time, and commitments of all parties required to build these agreements.”

Gino Ussi, Elsevier’s executive vice president, said in a separate statement that the deal with CMU reflects the university’s needs and represents a “mutually beneficial agreement.”

A New Landscape

Including open-access publishing in a contract between an American library and a behemoth publisher shows significant change in the publishing landscape.

For decades, libraries signed so-called “big deals” with publishers like Elsevier, paying one sum to subscribe to all of a company’s journals. But supporters of the open-access movement want academic research to be freely available, even to readers without expensive journal subscriptions.

Advocacy on that front has grown more mainstream in Europe and, increasingly, in the United States. Elsevier, which is based in Amsterdam, signed a deal that includes reading and open-access publishing with Norwegian institutions earlier this year.

That’s one major factor driving change. Another is that the costs of some “big deal” packages have increased as many library budgets have remained stagnant, making it hard for campuses to stomach the price of those bulk subscriptions. Publishers argue that costs increase because there is more content each year.

Carnegie Mellon’s deal, effective January 1, will provide access to all of Elsevier’s journals for four years in addition to the payment of article-processing fees, often required for open-access publication. University scholars who publish in Elsevier journals as the corresponding author will automatically have the option of opening their work up to a universal readership.

The deal comes as research libraries are sharing tactics used to negotiate with Elsevier and other publishers.

One of UC’s lead negotiators laid out their processes as a “blueprint” at an April conference. In October the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s libraries published a framework to guide negotiations with scholarly publishers that was endorsed by universities from New Hampshire to Arizona. Libraries are telling their faculty members that change might be on the horizon.

Webster said on Thursday that he had “benefited greatly” from UC’s advice and negotiating materials, and would be “happy to discuss our approach with anyone.”

For their part, UC’s negotiators congratulated Carnegie Mellon, expressing hope that Elsevier would sign similar agreements with other universities. “We look forward to the opportunity to re-engage in conversations with Elsevier to achieve a cost-effective agreement on similar terms,” they wrote.

Lindsay Ellis is a staff reporter. Follow her on Twitter @lindsayaellis, or email her at lindsay.ellis@chronicle.com.