Is There Life After Budget Cuts?
Establishing a Fee-Based Publishing System

Judy Winn Associate Professor and Extension Communications Specialist Department of Agricultural Communications Texas A&M University, College Station

The Department of Ag. Communications at Texas A&M has long been the publisher of both Extension Service and Experiment Station publications. Historically, both agencies have supported the department with personnel and operating funds. In the last year, however, the Experiment Station has stopped funding a number of functions that had been centralized. In the last round of budget cuts, last summer, it was decided that the Experiment Station would no longer fund the printing of research publications. Instead, publishing costs would shift to individual authors and their departments.

This paper will explain how the elimination of funding for Experiment Station publishing has affected the Department of Ag. Communications, and how we have responded by establishing a fee-based publishing service for researchers and scientists.

Shared Resources with Joint Funding

In the past, Experiment Station authors produced publications in a variety of numbered series, including Progress Reports, Consolidated Progress Reports, Department Technical Reports, Bulletins, Miscellaneous Publications, etc. These originated with individual researchers, with department heads, or with directors of the 18 research centers across the state. In recent years Ag. Communications has produced 20 to 30 Experiment Station publications each year. In addition, we produce 300 to 400 Extension publications annually.

Printing of Experiment Station publications was paid for with a central fund within Ag. Communications, so authors never saw a bill. In addition, Experiment Station contributed 30 percent of the basic operating expenses within the publications section, with Extension contributing 70 percent. Operating funds are, of course, used for everything from computers to paper clips.

In the personnel area, Experiment Station funded one editor, a half-time artist, one typesetter and half the position for a second typesetter. Extension funds four editors, two artists, and half the position of the second typesetter.

The synergy that existed within Ag. Communications made the most effective use of funding from both agencies. For example, personnel funded by Extension might at times work on Experiment Station publications. A computer purchased with Experiment Station funds might also be used for Extension work. Shared resources gave us the flexibility to manage people and work to the benefit of both agencies.

Effects of Lost Funding

How did the end of centrally funded research publishing affect the personnel and operating budgets within the publications section?

The editorial position was lost. The half-time artist was reassigned (on paper at least) to support news and marketing rather than publications. The full-time typesetter has been moved to a secretarial position, although she is available to help with typesetting as needed. The second typesetter has lost funding for half her salary.

And of course the publications section lost 30 percent of its operating funds.

It might seem that with the loss of so many resources we should have simply abandoned the idea of continuing to produce research publications. But as strange as it may seem, we really didn’t have that option because of the personnel situation in our pre-press area (artists and typesetters). While the Experiment Station contributed about 40 percent of pre-press salaries, those people spend roughly 90 percent of their time on Extension publications. It would have been nice if Extension had stepped in to make up the difference in those salary dollars lost, but Extension’s budget has tightened also, so that didn’t happen. Because we are dependent on those pre-press personnel to handle Extension publications, we had to find a means of paying their salaries. Offering a fee-based service for Experiment Station publishing seemed the only way to do that. And, if successful, such a system might also recover some of our lost operating funds.

A second reason for continuing a service for Experiment Station authors was our belief that agricultural research should be published. Our department is familiar to authors; we felt they would continue to welcome our help in getting their materials produced professionally, and that a properly structured and well-managed fee-based system could succeed.

The Mechanics of Fee-Based Publishing

The first decision we faced was how to set up such a system. We knew it had to bring in enough money to make up for lost salary dollars, that it had to mesh smoothly with our ongoing Extension publishing, and that it had to be attractive enough to research authors to overcome the shock of having to pay.

This is the system we established. As leader of the publishing team, an author will contact me when he wants to produce a publication. I will hire a free-lance editor to work on the manuscript. After editing, the job will go to our artists and typesetters for pre-press work. I will get a printing estimate from either the Extension print shop or the university printing center, depending on the specifications of the job. I’ll supervise the printing and see that the finished publications are delivered to the author. Experiment Station publications will no longer be stocked in and distributed from the publication warehouse. Instead, the author will be responsible for distribution.

The author will pay Ag. Communications for the editor’s fee and our pre-press production fee. We will in turn pay the editor. The printer will bill the author directly.

Once we knew how the system should be structured, it was a matter of putting all the pieces together.

I began by researching current commercial costs for typesetting, graphic design and page layout. In our area, those services from commercial printers average $20 to $22 per printed 8 1/2 x 11 page. We settled on a fee of $15 per page to be competitive.

Without an Experiment Station editor on staff, we knew it would be necessary to rely on contract editors. Luckily, there are several available in the community. I spoke with three who are interested in being called as needed. Another agency at Texas A&M uses free-lance editors extensively; knowing how they pay editors, I was able to set a comparable rate of $3.50 per manuscript page. For this fee the editor will be expected to correct the original manuscript, confer with the author as necessary to reach agreement on the final version, and proofread typeset pages until camera-ready copy is completed.

I also worked with Experiment Station fiscal officers to be sure our system would fit with their purchasing procedures, and to get a new account set up to handle monies paid to and from Ag. Communications. Finally, I wrote contracts to use with free-lance editors and with authors. These contracts spell out everyone’s responsibilities, as well as the fees to be paid.

Besides just the printing of publications, we felt Ag. Communications had another very important service to offer- the electronic dissemination of research information via the Internet. Steve Hill in our department is setting up links to libraries and other information networks that we hope will appeal to researchers as a way of sharing their information with the world. Some authors may decide to forego printing and simply publish electronically. We’ll charge a fee for that service as well, though it hasn’t been determined yet.

Overcoming the Psychological Obstacles

Developing the mechanics of the fee-based system has been just part of the task. The other part is dealing with authors, and trying to be both diplomat and salesman at the same time.

Early on, when the word got out that publishing costs would now be borne by academic departments and research centers, several faculty members called me. Some were irate that the administration would no longer pay to publish their research; some were more philosophical about it; but all felt that an unwarranted burden had been forced on them. They’d never had to bear publishing costs, and weren’t used to budgeting for them.

But the most difficult obstacle was psychological. Any time someone else pays for a service you receive, and you never have to concern yourself with the cost, it’s easy to start thinking you have a “right” to that service. That’s the attitude of many researchers. So I’ve had many a conversation in which I’ve tried to soothe ruffled feathers, sympathize, reassure that we will help them find the most economical way possible, and at the same time get them used to the idea of paying for it.

I’ve gotten printing estimates for a number of authors already, and most are shocked at the cost. One author has spent years photographing toxic plant tissue through a microscope. His manuscript contains 541 halftones, and the printing estimate is about $12,000 or $12 per copy. Every one of those halftones is dear to his heart, and can’t be eliminated, but now he’s got to find $12,000 to print them.

And of course it’s the cost of printing that is the stumbling block. On the job I just mentioned the editorial fee is only $511 and our pre-press production charge is $2,650--small in comparison to the cost of printing.

Will Our System Succeed?

It’s too early to tell how much business we’ll have. Some authors likely will be discouraged from having publications printed and will simply submit some of their work to journals. Some will decide they don’t need the help of professional editors, typesetters and artists and will do their own page formatting and find a cheap printer or copy shop. However, I believe that many will begin to include publishing costs in their research budgets and grant proposals, and that they’ll come to us because they appreciate the value we can add and the professional products we can produce.

The “catch-22” for us is that we need enough work to pay pre-press salaries, but too much work would make it impossible to meet our Extension publishing commitments. I expect we’ll learn a lot in this transitional year. Certainly we’ll learn how willing authors and their departments are to shoulder publishing costs and whether they will continue to look to Ag. Communications as their partner in publishing agricultural research.