In a post at AHA today, Kritika Agarwal (AHA) interviews William Deverell (Huntington-USC Institute on California and the West) about the publication of his new OA monograph Water and Los Angeles: A Tale of Three Rivers, 1900–1941, released in 2016 by the University of California’s Luminos OA imprint.
Q. Do you see any clear advantages or disadvantages to publishing an open-access monograph?
Access beyond traditional publishing pathways, marketing, sales, and inventories: all that is great. Is there a barrier in the shape of up-front author-carried funding? Yes. The amounts are not huge, but I do hope that the academy continues to be supportive of, for instance, junior or non-tenure-track scholars (and others) whose access to research funding that can support open-access publishing is limited in ways that it might not be for more senior faculty at institutions that can provide such support. That seems obvious, but it is a real concern.
Q. Much of the open-access content right now is in the natural and physical sciences. Why is open access a good format for historians and for historical research?
For the same reasons, I’d guess. And for the opportunity to bring first-rate humanities work to wider publics hungry for scholarly insight, analysis, and argument.
The interview provides a case study for librarians supporting open access publishing in the humanities and offers a faculty perspective on the benefits and and concerns of open access.
This post was produced through cooperation among Kelsey George, Joseph Koivisto, Stephen Lingrell, Stephen McLaughlin, Megan Martinsen, Allison Ringness, and Chella Vaidyanathan (Editors-at-large for the week), Patrick Williams (Editor for the week), and Caitlin Christian-Lamb, Caro Pinto and Roxanne Shirazi (dh+lib Review Editors).