Allen, B. M. (2008). All hype or real change: Has the digital revolution changed scholarly communication? Journal of Library Administration, 48(1), 59-68.
Covers current (2008) trends in acquisitions and new publishing models, and strategies to create an open environment of sharing research results.
Alonso, C. J., Davidson, C.N., Unsworth, J.M., Wilthey, L. (2003). Crises and opportunities: The futures of scholarly publishing. New York: American Council of Learned Societies
This was a panel session at the ACLS Annual Meeting, May, 2003.  Though now seven years old, it is still worthwhile background reading.  In separate segments, the four panelists discuss the causes and offer many possible approaches and responses to the "crisis" of scholarly publishing by university presses, which particularly affects the humanities.
Bonn, M. (2010). Free exchange of ideas. College & Research Libraries News, 71(8), 436-439.
Features current initiatives, mostly by university presses, to find an economically sustainable way to publish open access monographs.
Coonin, B., & Younce, L. M. (2010). Publishing in open access education journals: The authors' perspectives. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 29(2), 118-132.
Quantitative survey of 309 authors from open access journals that explores their reasons for publishing in that venue.
Correia, A. M. R., & Teixeira, J. C. (2005). Reforming scholarly publishing and knowledge communication: From the advent of the scholarly journal to the challenges of open access. Information Services & Use, 25(1), 13-21.
Exploration of how "self-archiving" affects scholarly communication.
Hahn, K. L. (2008)  Research library publishing services: New options for university publishing and new roles for libraries. ARL: A Bimonthly Report on Research Library Issues & Actions, (258), 6-9.
Provides an overview of emerging research library publishing services, based on the results of an ARL report survey.  Key findings are bulleted.
Howard, J.  "Humanities Journals Confront Identity Crisis"  Chronicle of Higher Education 55, no. 29: A1-A10.
Journal editors appreciate that individual articles reach a wider audience, but lament the invisibility of the journal as a whole, fewer submissions from senior scholars, and the trend toward edited collections rather than journals for article length work.
Johnston, W. (2007). The library as an agent for transforming scholarly communications. IATUL Annual Conference Proceedings, 17, 1-7.
Survey that explores who publishes in open access journals, authors' access to journal literature, general publication trends, and authors' attitudes toward OA journals.
Mabe, M. A. (2010). Scholarly Communication: A Long View. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 16132-144.
Article reviews how scholars and researchers communicate with each other.
Mercer, H., Rosenblum, B., & Emmett, A. (2007). A multifaceted approach to promote a university repository. The University of Kansas' experience. OCLC Systems & Services, 23(2), 190-203.
Case study of University of Kansas' institutional repository, KU ScholarWorks. Covers entire process from conception to assessment.
Morrow, A., & Mower, A. (2009). University scholarly knowledge inventory system: A workflow system for institutional repositories. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 47(3), 286-296.
Case study of U-SKIS a system that facilitates and consistent and efficient process for building and managing a repository.
Palmer, K. L., Dill, E., & Christie, C. (2009). Where there's a will there's a way?: Survey of academic librarian attitudes about open access. College & Research Libraries, 70(4), 315-335.
2006 survey that explores librarians' attitudes toward open access. Discusses connections between attitudes and funding.
Read, K. M. (2010). Collective voice for collective good: Library consortia, open access, and the future of scholarly communication. OLA Quarterly, 16(3), 23-28.
Discusses how consortia can support collection and access initiatives in times of financial constraint. Also touches on how consortia can be used to build stable repositories.
Sale, A. (2010). Advice on filling your repository. Serials, 23(3), 207-211.
Article for the new repository manager with advice and lessons from research and experience.
Scherlen, A., & Robinson, M. (2008). Open access to criminal justice scholarship: A matter of social justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19(1), 54-74.
Discussion of open access as a social justice issue.
Suber, P.  (2004, January). Promoting open access in the humanities: Electronic publication and the classics profession panel.  Presented at 135th Annual Meeting of the American Philological Association, San Francisco, CA.
Includes a concise overview of differences between the humanities and sciences that help explain why open access is gaining acceptance much faster in the latter.
Walters, T. O., & Skinner, K. (2011) New roles for new times: Digital curation for preservation. Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries.
A report prepared for the Association of Research Libraries.  While this isn't specifically about open access and scholarly communication issues, it concerns the vision of the 21st century library, which is being shaped, in part, by changes in scholarly production and dissemination, and ultimately preservation.  Included is an excellent list and description of seven new roles for librarians.
Waltham, M. (2010). The future of scholarly journal publishing among social science and humanities associations. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 41(3), 257-324.
Discusses the shift to OA models in STM fields and whether humanities journals will follow suit.

PDF version of the bibliography. | Free download of Adobe Reader.