2014 Taylor & Francis and Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers Society Survey: Challenges Facing Learned Societies

This article examines key results from the 2014 Taylor & Francis and Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP) Survey of Learned Societies. The current reality of societies’ membership demographic, financial security and Open Access is discussed, along with the issues learned societies face in these areas and the strategies they are evolving to meet those challenges. The survey respondents showed a good degree of awareness about the challenges their societies face and are keen to embrace change that will allow them to thrive into the future.

Introduction

The 2014 Survey of Learned Societies was carried out by the Research & Business Intelligence Department at Taylor & Francis in collaboration with the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP).

It was distributed in March 2014 to Taylor & Francis’ society contacts in Australia, Canada, the UK and the USA, and ALPSP members worldwide. The survey attracted 139 responses, mainly from Publication Directors, Publication Managers and Chief Executives.

Whilst a survey with a sample that better reflected the worldwide population of learned societies would give a more comprehensive overview, these results nonetheless give an interesting indication.

Age demographic of society membership

At present, the majority of societies report either a stable or a positive situation regarding their membership numbers; the largest group of respondents (42%) said membership numbers are “staying roughly the same” and the second most popular answer (37%) came from those reporting a slight rise. Only 16% said numbers are falling (Figure 1).

Figure 1. How would you describe the membership numbers for your society?

However, looking towards the future, over a third (35%) of society respondents report the average age of their membership is “getting older” or “significantly older” every year (Figure 2).

Figure 2. How would you describe the demographic profile of your society?

The two factors that attracted the highest level of concern among societies when asked to think about the future were that “academics do not have the same funding support as previously” (65%) and that they no longer have “time to dedicate to active membership” (49%) – both of which hint towards reasons why younger researchers are no longer becoming members in sufficient numbers to prevent the average age rising year-on-year in many learned societies.

Further to this, some respondents suggested that opportunities for young researchers to find a position in academia have not returned in the same way as before, after the recent economic cycle: “declining employment in the field” is another reason why there are fewer young researchers in many academic societies.

The long-term implications of an ageing demographic have not gone unnoticed, as a large majority of respondents (87%) agree they would like their society to “do more to help students and young researchers”, second only the number who agree they would like their “society's journals to have higher impact in the community” (89%). Indeed, “membership attrition and an ageing demographic” is something nearly half (46%) of respondents are concerned about.

This interest in the next generation did not extend beyond the research world. Asked to suggest one aspect of their society they would change overnight if they could, only four of the 90 respondents who chose to give an answer, expressed sentiments such as: “increase the membership of young professionals”. Instead, members are concerned with more immediate issues, with a wish to change the governance, structure or organization of their society the most commonly expressed desire.

Geographic distribution of society membership

The second most popular aspect respondents would change about their society tomorrow if they could – a general increase in membership – was closely followed by those concerned with the geographic composition of their membership (Figure 3a). One in nine respondents wanted to increase the number of international members in their society.

Figure 3a. How well are each of the following regions represented in the geographic profile of your society's membership – compared to the size of the field's academic community in that region?

Figure 3b. Growth areas for membership (selected regions).

When it comes to geographic representation compared to the size of the field in the region, there is no region for which the majority of societies feel their membership accurately reflects the size of the academic community.

Unsurprisingly, given the composition of the survey population, Europe and North America are the only regions where some societies report significant over-representation – but this is balanced by other societies reporting under-representation.

The majority of survey respondents – nearly all of whom are from societies based in the English-speaking world – said Africa (78%), Asia (67%), Latin America (76%) and the Middle East (73%) were under-represented in their society membership compared to the size of the field in those regions.

The future prospects look positive in Latin America, as 4 in 10 (40%) respondents said Central America and Mexico are growth areas for membership and the proportion is slightly higher again in South America (45%).

This situation is likely to improve faster in Asia as around half of the societies said Central Asia and the Far East (53%) along with sub-continental Asia (47%) were growth areas for the future (Figure 3b).

Figure 4. The financial return our society generates from journal publishing.

Representation of African members in the societies surveyed is unlikely to change radically in the near future because Northern and Southern Africa are the smallest growth areas for membership anywhere in the world (9% and 15%).

Financial security

Half of societies (51%) report the financial return from journal publishing is stable, whilst a further third (34%) say it is rising slightly (Figure 4).

Figure 5. The proportion of total revenue generated by our society from publishing.

However, the degree to which this leads to a stable financial situation overall obviously depends on the proportion of a society's revenue that is generated by publishing.

In this respect, the survey sample exhibits a wide diversity: nearly a fifth (19%) of societies receive less than 5% of their revenue from publishing, whilst at the other end of the scale nearly 1 in 10 (9%) make nearly all of their income from publishing alone (Figure 5).

Figure 6. Do you have, or are you planning, any of the following revenue generating activities?

In fact, a slim majority (53%) of societies report that income from all activities is broadly stable.

The proportion of respondents who agreed they were optimistic about their society's “long-term financial security” is exactly 50%, although only 9% of those “strongly agreed”.

Although the most frequent answer when asked “What concerns you most about the future of your society?” related to “financial stability”, only one of those respondents said revenue was falling sharply. The rest were mainly concerned with managing growth and diversification of their revenue.

Once again, there are signs that societies recognize the challenges before them and are diversifying their revenue streams. Half (49%) have already increased their conference activity and a third (35%) are planning to increase their conference activity further. Separately, around half (48%) also plan on offering more continuing professional development in the future (Figure 6).

Figure 7. When thinking about Open Access with respect to our society, I consider it to be a …

Most societies (53%) are no longer considering launching more traditional subscription titles, and whilst fewer than a fifth (17%) have already embraced Open Access journals, almost half (47%) of societies surveyed are now considering this option for the future.

Nevertheless, “surviving financially after Open Access” was another key concern respondents had about the next five years.

Open Access

Two-thirds (68%) of societies agree that “in an ideal world all research published by our society would be freely accessible for everyone to read”, but understandably fewer than one in five (18%) societies would be willing to “earn less money in an Open Access world”.

Currently, those who consider Open Access in general to be a minor threat to their society (25%) plus those who consider it a major threat (16%) outweigh the combined total of those who see it as a minor (20%) or major (10%) opportunity (Figure 7). However, the biggest single group of respondents (29%) comprises those who are currently unsure either way.

Figure 8. Concern about Green and Gold Open Access mandates

The picture is more balanced when it comes to the level of concern about a specific aspect of Open Access, namely “compliance with Green and Gold Open Access mandates” (Figure 8). In this regard, the survey respondents were equally split three ways between those who were concerned (32%), those who were unconcerned (35%) and those who were neither (33%).

Figure 9. Rate how important you consider these functions of a journal publisher from your society's perspective from 10 (highly important) to 1 (not at all important; N = No opinion).

Once again, the largest single group comprised those unable to say either way whether Open Access was a threat or an opportunity.

There is clearly an important role for publishers to play in supporting learned societies here, since “providing solutions to emerging challenges such as Open Access” is something that three-quarters (76%) of respondents felt was an important (7, 8, 9 or 10 out 10) function of a journal publisher from the society perspective.

Valued publisher services

The single most important service a publisher provides is “high-quality online publishing” – nearly half (46%) of respondents awarded this the highest level of importance – more than any other service. In fact, not a single respondent selected a response lower than 6 out of 10, except those for whom this did not apply (Figure 9).

In terms of the proportion of respondents choosing “highly important”, having a partner to collaborate with was the second most valued service, 10 percentage points ahead of the most valued financial benefit: “a predictable financial return”. A “predictable financial return” was itself 10 percentage points ahead of the importance of a “growing financial return”.

Summary

Although membership numbers are staying roughly the same or even rising slightly in many societies, over a third of societies report that the average age of their members is getting older every year. Societies are very keen to do more to help students and young researchers, especially in the light of the falling number of research positions and less funding support being made available, contributing to the declining number of young academics joining learned societies.

The majority of the societies surveyed said Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East are under-represented in their society membership. Given that increasing the international diversity of their membership was high on the list of aspects respondents wanted to change about their society, it is promising that Latin America and Asia are indeed both fairly strong growth areas, although much more progress is necessary with regard to representation of scholars from Africa.

Overall financial return across all society activities is broadly stable in over half of societies. Nonetheless, the most common concern for the next five years is financial stability, motivated by the transition towards an Open Access world and a declining or ageing membership. Societies are mitigating this by expanding their conference activity and Continuing Professional Development as well as embracing Open Access publications in order to diversify their income streams.

Open Access itself is currently a source of ambiguity as many respondents are unsure whether it is a threat or an opportunity – although societies are firm that this is a challenge where continued support and partnership with publishers will be very important.

Further Research

Areas that could be explored in future surveys of learned societies include:

• How to attract younger researchers into academic societies;

• How to expand the geographic distribution of the membership;

• How to meet challenges arising from Open Access and turn threats into opportunities.

Methodology

The survey was sent via SurveyMonkey's email distribution interface on 13 March 2014 to the Taylor & Francis contacts.

The following methods were employed to maximize the response rates:

• The survey invites were sent in batches by region timed to hit close to optimal time for survey responses;

• A follow-up email was sent to non-respondents as a reminder on 8 April 2014.

Table 1 gives a breakdown of the responses by region for Taylor & Francis’ contacts.

Table 1 Responses from Taylor & Francis contacts.

Taylor & Francis contacts	Survey responses
Australia	21
Canada	24
Europe	3
UK	25
USA	37
Others	2
Sub-total	112

ALPSP also circulated the survey to their members in March 2014 (Table 2).

Table 2 Responses from ALPSP contacts and Grand Total

ALPSP contacts	Survey responses
Society members	27
Grand Total T&F and ALPSP	139

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Will Frass

Will Frass is a Senior Research Executive at Taylor & Francis. He joined the Research & Business Intelligence Department in 2010 and specializes in Primary Research, conducting and analysing both our longitudinal Author Survey and individual surveys of our authors, editors, societies and librarians. In 2013, Will Frass conducted the industry's largest ever survey about Open Access, exploring the views, attitudes and preferences of Taylor & Francis authors worldwide towards Open Access publishing. The 2014 survey followed up on the key results from the previous year and investigated authors’ responses to publishing mandates from funding bodies. Prior to joining Taylor & Francis Will Frass read Physics at the University of Oxford.