Watch the companion News & Views online discussion forum here.
Predicting the Impact of Current Events
Scholarly publishers are wondering how the COVID-19 pandemic and the unfolding economic downturn will impact the scholarly journals market. Of course, this is an impossible question to answer definitively, but are there events in the past that we can use for guidance?
This month we look at the impact of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, bringing some longstanding historical analysis linking GDP and publishing revenues up to date. Our aim is to see what factors may act as a barometer of the economic impacts we might expect during this challenging time.
Historical View
The STM Association industry reports have done a great job of assembling figures, albeit from different sources which use different methodologies. The reports only go back to the mid-2000’s. Together, they suggest that:
Despite the variability of historic data, we think it is fair to say that the Journals market has shown low to mid-single-digit growth, regardless of the economic cycle. In particular, the market weathered the 2007-2008 downturn well.
Historically, the volume of output has been driven by the continued real-terms growth in research and development expenditure and the rising number of researchers:
Updating the historical baseline
The industry reports demonstrate a close relationship between numbers of journals, articles, and numbers of researchers. This seems intuitive. It is based on work dating from 20031 and includes data from 1990 to 1995.
To determine a baseline for comparison, we updated the 2003 view to see if the same factors held now, and if we could form a view that spanned the 2007-2008 downturn. We looked at data for:
We examined various combinations between the variables above to identify the strongest relationships. Subscribers to our Data and Analytics Tool can review the detailed data; below we present the headlines.
In the following results, all data are indexed relative to the year 2000, and CAGR spans 2000-2017. All sources have lead times, with some more recent data falling off-trend as a result.
Factors Related to Growth in Volume of Articles
Sources: SCImago (Scopus), Dimensions, OECD, World Bank, Delta Think analysis. See footnotes for full citations.
© 2020, Delta Think Inc. All rights reserved.
The figure above examines the factors influencing growth in volume of articles.
Projecting results to the future
Activity remained pretty consistent across the 2007-2008 downturn, with downturns in GDP having little (if any) short-term effect on article volume. The 2003 analysis looking at researcher numbers largely holds true, albeit with the nuance of looking at all workers in R&D in countries with the largest economies.
Subscription revenues have historically weathered downturns well, as mild falls in activity do not lead to a collapse in subscriptions and subscription price is not directly tied to article volume. Price pressures are not new in the subscription market but may increase if institutional budgets are impacted by a weakening economy.
While the majority of scholarly publishing revenue is still derived from subscription models, Article Processing Charge-based (APC) Open Access now has roughly five times the market share it had in 2007-2008. Fully OA journals employing APC-based business models rely on article throughput. Their revenue could be more quickly impacted by article volume changes, putting some proportion of the 6.75% of total journal revenue that is associated with APCs at risk.
Additionally, with COVID-19 threatening to have a profound effect on the global workforce for an unknown period of time, the effective numbers of R&D workers across disciplines may fall at some point in the future. Currently, our anecdotal evidence points to an initial increase in submissions for many journals. We suspect this might be the result of researchers focusing on writing up results from completed research when they are unable to get into their labs.
However, this boost in activity may be short-lived. If significant numbers of researchers cannot continue their work, and we see a reduction in the number of personnel overall, then the data suggest we could see a reduction in article volume and in journal market value.
Conclusion
When we started this analysis, our working hypothesis was that the scholarly journals market could pull off its old trick of weathering choppy waters well.
However, the data suggest that this time things may be different. The key factors related to journal market value look set to fall significantly, and the balance of business models across the marketplace has changed. It seems likely that a fall in the numbers of researchers and global economic activity will lead to a decline in the overall market size for journals publishing.
As is always the case, averages are not distributed equally throughout the market. Fully APC-based Open Access publishers are more at risk, because of their dependency on article volume and the close connection of their cash-flow to throughput. This reality may drive a shift towards non-APC based OA, such as subscription and membership models applied to OA.
Publishers with significant subscription-based income – especially the large ones – are (arguably) in the better position. However, they may see increased pricing pressure from a library market responding to deeper cuts in funding than we saw in 2007-2008. And, of course, any publishers relying on events will have seen these and similar in-person revenues disappear abruptly.
In fact, some mixed-model publishers may look to increased OA activities to help make up lost ground elsewhere. The same headwinds that challenge OA also make it more responsive.
We wish all our readers and their extended families, friends, and colleagues well through these challenging times.
Notes
Please note: since this piece was published, some minor edits were made to remove reference to GDP, and clarify the wording about journal market value.
Sources