Following the publication of our recent article in Insights [https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.435/] we wish to bring the following corrigendum to your attention.
The wording cited as reference 57 has mistakenly been attributed to Peter Suber rather than Richard Poynder.
On page 6, the text of paragraph 2, line 5 to the end of the paragraph, should read:
… What if the corporate publishers were to succeed in controlling the monographs OA market too? Shifting to a gold OA model might see a repeat scenario, Poynder fears, whereby ‘gold OA increases rather than reduces the cost of scholarly communication, and so confounds BOAI’s [Budapest Open Access Initiative] expectation that open access will be more cost-effective’. And, unlike journals, the fear is that books will simply not be funded to the level required (if at all – see above) through existing mechanisms and will not be published. This too will widen and not narrow ‘the North/South knowledge divide’.57
On page 11, reference 57 should read:
57. Poynder R, Preface: Open Divide? In: Herb U and Schöpfel J, Open Divide Critical Studies on Open Access, 2018, Litwin Books, Sacramento, CA: https://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/preface-open-divide.html (accessed 9 August 2018).
The author has declared no competing interests.
Lockett, A. Monographs on the move?: a view on ‘decoupling’ and other prospects. Insights, 2018, 31, 37; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.435