Many UK universities are likely to walk away from journal access agreements after several publishers put forward ¡°business-as-usual proposals¡± with ¡°year-on-year price rises¡± rather than the cheaper deals demanded by national negotiators, a library chief has predicted.

Higher education institutions are currently reviewing proposals submitted by the so-called Big 5 publishers ¨C Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, Wiley and Sage ¨C with the??reportedly seeking price reductions of between 5 and 15 per cent on the ?112 million currently spent annually with these publishing houses.

This internal consultation is scheduled to close on 29 August with the sector-wide results due to be presented to Jisc¡¯s publisher negotiations expert group at its meeting on 30 September, where it will discuss next steps.?

If the sector or multiple universities choose to reject the offers, many institutions may see themselves cut off from journal access when the current five deals expire at the end of 2025.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

That scenario is looking much more likely given some of the offers made by publishers over the summer, explained David Prosser, chief executive of Research Libraries UK, who criticised the failure of some publishers to amend their offers in light of the sector¡¯s financially straitened circumstances.

¡°It does appear that one or two of the publishers have missed the financial reality in the sector and have put forward business-as-usual proposals with year-on-year price rises that may prove to be beyond a number of institutions¡¯ ability to afford,¡± said Prosser.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

The offers ¨C which have not yet been made public ¨C come amid calls to reduce substantially the amount spent by UK universities on the so-called big deals. In a blog in May, Newcastle University¡¯s library??its current spend with Big 5 publishers is ?2.5 million annually.

¡°A 5 per cent saving would represent ?128,000, 10 per cent ?257,000, and 15 per cent ?385,000,¡± it said, adding how ¡°at a time when we can expect no additional resources to invest in collection building to support new or expanding programmes, any funds released for reinvestment through securing better deals would be welcome¡±.

¡°The library is already analysing the value for money of the existing deals, and assessing the potential impact of ¡®walking away¡¯ from any of the agreements, which includes taking into account the internal administrative costs of managing selective access to individual journals,¡± it continued.

At the start of 2025, three universities ¨C Sheffield, Surrey and York ¨C announced they had not renewed their deals with Elsevier for their final year, with some instead?subscribing to a smaller selection of Elsevier journals?rather than opting for the Jisc-negotiated deal.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

Many universities are already preparing mitigations including the provision of rapid document delivery through?the inter-library loans service if publisher offers are deemed unaffordable.

In a statement to?̽»¨ÊÓƵ,?Jisc confirmed it was currently in a ¡°consultation phase¡± and?said negotiations including the ¡°acceptance or rejection of publishers¡¯ proposals by sector¡± were due to take place on?

¡°In the consultation we¡¯ve provided details of the offers together with an evaluation of each offer against the sector¡¯s requirements?and institutions are asked to accept or reject each proposal,¡± Jisc said. ?

¡°In the meantime, we¡¯re supporting the sector by running a number of webinars and Q&A sessions to provide the opportunity to ask questions, share reflections, and discuss key points with peers,¡± it added.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

In a statement, Elsevier said: "We can¡¯t go into detail about on-going contract negotiations but we¡¯re working hard to continue our strong partnerships with institutions across the UK."

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com