Open Access publishing and discovery platforms, repositories, and infrastructures in general are constantly being upgraded with additional features making it possible to automate processes, ensure metadata enrichment, coordinate dissemination, but how much of it is actually used? Are the users aware of the possibilities they are offered and the value of the infrastructure and services?
There seems to be a gap between infrastructures and users: not infrequently, infrastructures are ahead of user needs. Contrary to what is generally assumed, infrastructures offer some features that are not widely adopted even when they are easy to use, training and guidelines are provided, time savings are significant, and no additional costs are involved. For example, publishing platforms usually support online journal management from submission to publication and offer whole sets of additional tools facilitating e-publishing, but still some journals handle the whole process manually, via e-mail, using procedures inherited from print publishing.
The poor uptake of e-publishing and innovation may not necessarily undermine the sustainability of publishing platforms but it certainly discourages innovative initiatives and development.
This problem is quite apparent in Serbia (where scholar-led Diamond OA relying on public funding is dominant) and it may also be observed in other similar environments. It would be interesting to see whether this gap is generally present, or it is related to the prevalence of a particular business model, funding sources, professionalization level in publishing, and perhaps limited to particular disciplines.
Do you encounter this problem in your communities?