Re: EJP

From
Date
Norm MacLeod wrote:

>I have yet to hear a single criticism of
>electronic publishing and distribution of technical paleontological
>information that can't be easily surmounted by a little open mindedness and
>creativity and I've heard a lot about the advantages and EPJ would bring to
>the field. All the really bad problems (such as those brought up by Henry)
>cut across the process of publishing in any medium, or at least that's how
>it looks to me.

The more this discussion goes on, the more matters I find that Norm and I
agree on, though I've often used his comments as starting points for my own
rants. Yes, most of the problems with electronic journals that have been
brought up (how to cite, how to access, even how to archive) can and will
be solved. Most of them aren't really problems at all; they will in fact be
easier to deal with electronically than with a system solely based on paper
print. We just have to find the best solutions and go for them.

So where don't we agree? Basically, I think, in the questions of how much
work will be needed between author and output, from where the resources for
this work should be taken, and how we should organize it to ensure quality
(and I'm not talking only of scientific quality of the contributions,
however important that in itself is) and stability.

I'll skip past the details of what kind of work is done in editorial
offices. Jere and Henry, in particular, have been more elaborate about
that. Estimates of the value of such work obviously vary from a least a
hundred thousand dollars per year (thank you, Henry!) to zilch (thank you,
Whitey!). Just let me reiterate one of my points: The digital revolution
has so far brought a tremendous extra work load into at least this
editorial office (as we now also do what used to be the printing house's
job). Going online will not make it easier, it will make everything a
couple of steps more demanding. It's the Red Queen's rule: You have to run
to remain in place.

To me, the idea to such work should be done by people who are really paid
to do something else, or who donate their spare time, is fundamentally
wrong. Why this urge to hide the costs? If we agree that the work is
important (and most of us seem to do so), why not try to create the
resources to make it possible for the future webitors to do a professional
job without having to apologize to their employers and jeopardize their
careers because they aren't teaching the courses or publishing the papers
they were paid to do? Otherwise they won't be long at their posts, and we
shall all suffer by the decrease in publishing standards.

I really feel like an echo of my old friend and mentor Anders Martinsson,
the founder of Lethaia and Fossils and Strata. Anders didn't live to see
more than the beginning of the digital revolution, but he fought many
battles on the Scandinavian and international arenas with the outspoken
ambition to create a career niche for the scientific editor. In spite of
all his efforts, not much of this has been implemented anywhere, but the
urgency to carry on with it is ever increasing with the expanding role of
the editor.

Notwithstanding this personal note, I should also add that I'm not arguing
for my own sake here - my employer lets me spend part of my work time on
this, I have as secure a work position as I can wish for, and I have
adequate financial resources to do the job. But I am truly worried about
the general situation: how an effective scientific publishing will be
organized in the face of the prevalent(?) expectations that it need not
cost anything and the global funding problems for science, which certainly
doesn't seem to leave much place for new positions.

So we should give our active support to people who want to take on the
challenge of becoming the new kind of editors that will be needed and make
sure that their efforts are seen as equal to those of teaching, research,
and even administration. This means not only formalizing editorial duties
as part of job descriptions, but also to make sure these people get the
right resources for the job. Are universities, museums, etc. willing and
able to do this? Probably only if we can all put pressure on them and if
some money rains from heaven - or from subscription fees. What role the
publishing houses will play in this is partly up to them, but if they can
produce the right services at the right cost there is certainly a major
role for them as well.

Stefan Bengtson                      _/        _/ _/_/_/    _/        _/
Department of Palaeozoology         _/_/      _/ _/    _/  _/_/    _/_/
Swedish Museum of Natural History  _/  _/    _/ _/    _/  _/  _/ _/ _/
Box 50007                         _/    _/  _/ _/_/_/    _/    _/  _/
S-104 05 Stockholm               _/      _/_/ _/   _/   _/        _/
Sweden                          _/        _/ _/     _/ _/        _/

tel. +46-8 666 42 20
     +46-18 54 99 06 (home)
fax  +46-8 666 41 84
e-mail Stefan.Bengtson@nrm.se