Do you contribute to a scientific society (as a member or
otherwise), and why? Many scientists
don't bother maintaining memberships, thinking the only benefit is getting a
journal to which their institution already subscribes. Most people don't even think about what scientific societies
do. The best answers I have heard are "manage
the journal", "organize meetings", and/ or "give out
awards." Many societies do some or
all of these three things, but I think most academics are unaware of the
backdrop, and the importance of the financial
linkage to the journals and conferences.
Scientific societies are sometimes funded largely by profits from their
journals and meetings, though some funds also come from membership dues,
donations, and grants (the relative proportions vary greatly by society-- e.g.,
some take a yearly loss on their meetings).
The revenue funds are then used for maintenance of those same activities
as well as distributing a variety of awards (most often for students but
sometimes for workshops), outreach activities, and overhead/ staff. Some societies also engage in activism,
promoting the merits of their discipline to the public or politicians, including
drafting statements about controversial topics (e.g., stem cell research,
evolution education) and arguing why scientific research is a good public
investment (see also this article, that's not by a scientist).
These societies are, and operate like, non-profit
organizations. However, the revenue
source is a little different-- rather than relying exclusively on donations, the
yearly conferences and journals provide potentially larger and more consistent
funds to maintain these activities.
Now, let's think for a minute-- what would happen if we
changed the model to one resembling most non-profit organizations? What if society journals exactly "broke-even"
to the publishers, making them cheaper in which to publish and subscribe but
eliminating the revenue to societies?
What if we then asked PI's to donate to their societies to fund the
grants, outreach, and activism efforts?
There's a fundamental problem-- "donations" cannot be billed
to grants, so we'd have to donate out-of-pocket. This problem is apparent in why people often
refuse to pay memberships to get reduced publication charges, even when the
reduction is greater than the cost of membership-- publication charges come
"from the grant" and memberships come "from checkbooks."
So, societies with an associated journal get funds from
journal publication and subscription charges (and sometimes from conference
registrations), and use those funds in a "charitable" way to meet the
goals of the group, including distributing extensive student research or
achievement awards, maintaining communication among scientists via conferences,
and providing outreach to schools and the broader public. Yes, there's some overhead too, like funding
the travel of the scientific officers to meetings, but these officers rarely
receive any compensation beyond "expense reimbursement" for what ends
up being days of work each summer.
There are typically minimal (and often overstretched) staff, too.
This should be food for thought in choice of publication
venue, personal society memberships, personal journal subscriptions, recommendations
to your university about journals in which to subscribe, and choice of
conferences. Memberships in societies (e.g., Sigma Xi) really do directly give back to your community, in addition to getting you a journal. Subscribing to and publishing
in SOCIETY journals (e.g., Evolution,
Genetics, Journal of Heredity) brings money back to your students,
colleagues, and community, whereas publishing in NON-SOCIETY journals often fails
to do so. Similarly, attending SOCIETY
meetings potentially gives flexible funds back to an organized group with similar goals,
whereas attending other meetings only does so indirectly, if at all.
Food for thought.
I'll note that I'm not unbiased, though, as I have served and currently serve
in many societies myself.
