3 Conversations I Can’t Wait to Have at ER&L

As I am preparing for my trip to Austin for the ER&L conference, I am thinking a lot about the conversations I have had with librarians over the past year, especially at Charleston in November. The consistent theme of each conversation was uncertainty—often budgetary, but also regulatory and administrative. Everywhere, libraries are under pressure to do more with less, leaving many to ask: how to manage library budget cuts while transitioning to open access? It’s clear that librarians are no longer just managing collections;  they’re navigating a total systemic shift.

Because they are resilient problem-solvers, librarians are experimenting with solutions to those challenges. Some are short term solutions to fill urgent gaps and others are more complex, structural changes.

When I return home from Austin, I want to have a better understanding of how the trend towards consolidation in academic publishing and changing open access mandates are playing out on campus, and how you, librarians, are adapting to meet the needs of your research community.

Here are three conversations I am eager to have with you to learn more about your daily reality:

1. Are you feeling the "Indie Squeeze"?

We know that Transformative Agreements (TAs) have become the primary engine driving the transition to Open Access. However, I am concerned about the "Indie Squeeze"—the risk that these deals are concentrating power among commercial giants and pushing independent, mission-driven publishers out of the ecosystem.

I want to learn from you:

• Does your library feel pressure to prioritize large commercial portfolios for administrative simplicity?

• Are you finding it difficult to measure the diversity and impact of your research output? Some institutions have told us they are unaware of impact on policy (society) and prestige occurring outside of their large TA deals. Is this your experience?

• How are you looking to provide access to smaller, independent publishers when budgets are being cut?

2. How do you help ensure equity and protect academic freedom for underfunded researchers?

We often discuss equity, but I want to understand the mechanics of it at your institution. While TAs promise efficiency, they can inadvertently limit publishing choice under the guise of expanding it by funneling researchers toward the "free" options in large commercial packages.

I want to learn from you:

• What happens to your early-career researchers who lack substantial grant funding?

• Are you looking for more ways to remove financial barriers for these authors to choose the most suitable journal for their research?

• Would a model that rolls APC management into a predictable annual agreement help you support these researchers on equal footing with their better-funded colleagues?

3. How is the burden of administering publishing agreements changing your role?

The transition from traditional subscriptions to Read & Publish agreements has introduced a new set of administrative tasks for librarians: monitoring usage of OA waivers; approving eligible articles; educating authors on the specifics of each agreement, etc.

I want to learn from you:

• How much of your time is now dedicated to monitoring the activity within each agreement and educating authors?

• What has been the response from researchers towards these agreements?

• What would you suggest to improve publisher agreements?

Let’s Connect

We see librarians as valuable collaborators in creating an open science future, but I need to understand your specific constraints and goals to be a better partner.

I invite you to sit down with me at the conference. Help me understand how you are navigating publisher agreements and open access mandates amid budget uncertainty.  Maybe I can show you how a JMIR Institutional Partnership will help ease your administrative burden, increase equity, and protect diversity in scholarly communication.