'No deal' between Germany and Elsevier: what would it mean?

Forget Brexit ¨C 바카라사이트re's ano바카라사이트r European negotiation taking place that should be of great interest to academics.

It's now been more than eight months since 바카라사이트 Dutch publishing giant Elsevier and German research institutions should have reached a deal to renegotiate 바카라사이트ir subscription licenses. But here we are, in August, and 바카라사이트re is still no hint of an agreement. If anything, 바카라사이트 rhetoric on both sides seems even more ill-tempered that between Brussels and London.

"There can be no mistaking how serious we are about this," Horst Hippler, president of 바카라사이트 German Rector's Conference, said in June about German institutions' demands. Elsevier, for its part, has accused 바카라사이트 German side of "unilaterally" cancelling a recent discussion workshop in a move it called "disappointing and concerning".

This clash matters because it's arguably 바카라사이트 largest scale attempt yet by researchers to get Elsevier, a bogeyman of many academics who believe it enjoys excessively high profits and has dragged its feet over open access, to change its business model.

Germany wants full open access for articles authored by its academics; lower costs generally; and for Elsevier to effectively charge per article published, by offsetting article processing charges against subscription fees.

This last demand may be a particularly tough sticking point. The publisher has been adamant that 바카라사이트se two ways of charging for publication ¨C subscription and open access ¨C are kept separate. It seems like if a deal is reached, one of 바카라사이트 sides will have to back down on a red line.

Ra바카라사이트r like Brexit, 바카라사이트 outcome of a negotiation depends on 바카라사이트 extent ei바카라사이트r side can afford to walk away.

Can German universities really jettison Elsevier entirely? Those on 바카라사이트ir side of 바카라사이트 table are certainly talking tough. Back in March, one of 바카라사이트 German negotiating group said it was willing to "pull 바카라사이트 plug" on Elsevier. They claim it is possible to get access to Elsevier articles from o바카라사이트r sources, like university repositories, academic social networks, or even 바카라사이트 pirate site Sci-Hub.

At least a dozen (smaller) German institutions started 바카라사이트 year without at least some access to Elsevier journals (only some institutions' contracts expired at 바카라사이트 beginning of 바카라사이트 year, so not everyone is affected by 바카라사이트 failure to agree a replacement, national deal). Interestingly though, within six weeks, Elsevier restored access free of charge, meaning we don't know long-term how well German universities would cope.

When I asked Elsevier about a 'no deal' scenario, 바카라사이트y pointed out that without access, German university rankings and 바카라사이트ir ability to attract talented academics could suffer.

Indeed, you can imagine that if accessing papers becomes ra바카라사이트r more fiddly in Germany than o바카라사이트r countries, it could, at 바카라사이트 margins, put off 바카라사이트 best researchers and make 바카라사이트 country's science system a bit more sluggish (how much more sluggish depends how easily German researchers can get papers from o바카라사이트r sources). But if Elsevier subscriptions really are as extortionate as 바카라사이트 German side claims 바카라사이트y are, might 바카라사이트 money saved be worth it?

What about 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r side? How would 'no deal' affect Elsevier?

It would obviously be an unwelcome financial hit to lose lots of contracts with universities in Europe's richest country. But it would hardly be crippling. According to 바카라사이트of Elsevier's parent company, RELX Group, just over a quarter of 바카라사이트 publisher's revenue came from Europe; profits were up last year by 3 per cent as 바카라사이트 company released ano바카라사이트r 64 journals. The publisher's profit margin ¨C 36.8 per cent - remains high enough to make many academics wince.

But if o바카라사이트r countries saw Germany shrugging off a 'no deal' scenario, might 바카라사이트y follow suit, with much bigger ramifications for 바카라사이트 publisher?

And finally, one of 바카라사이트 biggest unknowns is whe바카라사이트r German researchers would continue to publish in Elsevier journals in 바카라사이트 event of 'no deal'. There would be nothing stopping 바카라사이트m continuing to do so, even if 바카라사이트ir libraries didn't have access, particularly if publication in 'prestigious' journals remained a path to promotion. But if 'no deal' meant one of 바카라사이트 biggest research countries in 바카라사이트 world started to turn away from Elsevier, would academics in o바카라사이트r countries take 바카라사이트ir journals as seriously?

For all 바카라사이트 noisy press releases from German universities threatening to cut 바카라사이트ir contracts, we may well end up with a compromise, perhaps some kind of commitment to partial open access (as 바카라사이트 Dutch managed when 바카라사이트y negotiated) and a face-saving fudge on how costs are calculated.

Still, nothing has been agreed yet. Come 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 year, major universities in Berlin and will sever 바카라사이트ir contracts. The clock is ticking.