- \n
- Researchers in less affluent countries report challenges getting APC discounts or waivers, posing barriers to OA publication.<\/li>\n
- Tiered pricing and alternative funding models have been suggested to improve global equity in access to OA publication.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thepublicationplan.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/AdobeStock_908650821.jpeg?resize=1024%2C683&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\nAs scientific publishing shifts to open access (OA) models<\/a>, authors\u2014particularly in less affluent countries\u2014face challenges paying article processing charges<\/a> (APCs). A recent news feature in Science<\/em><\/a> by Jeffrey Brainard highlights growing concerns about equity in OA<\/a>.<\/p>\n
Free to read, not free to publish<\/strong><\/p>\n
With ~50% of scientific papers now published under author-pays OA, 2023 saw gold and hybrid OA revenue triple for 6 large publishers versus 2019. This excludes potential reductions from discounts and waivers, relied on by many authors from low- and lower middle-income countries<\/a> to publish OA. However, processes to obtain discounts or waivers can be complex, and they may not be offered by hybrid journals (who offer free, but paywalled, publication).<\/p>\n
APCs can put financial strain on researchers worldwide when grant funding does not cover the fees: some even resort to paying from their own pocket. Brainard notes that when considering journal options likely to aid career advancement, authors in developed countries often prioritise journal reputation\u2014one factor linked to higher APCs\u2014over APC affordability. However, this may not be an option for scientists in developing regions. In the words of one researcher from Brazil, unaffordable APCs risk science from the Global South becoming \u201cnonexistent\u201d, perpetuating global disparities.<\/p>\n
\n
Unaffordable APCs risk science from the Global South becoming \u201cnonexistent\u201d, perpetuating global disparities.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Proposed solutions <\/strong><\/p>\n
Making journal articles both free to read and affordable to publish is challenging, but publishers are exploring alternatives<\/a> to author-paid APCs. Potential solutions include:<\/p>\n
- \n
- transformative agreements<\/strong> with institutions, allowing affiliated researchers to publish without paying APCs (and access paywalled content)<\/li>\n
- tiered pricing<\/strong> based on a country\u2019s wealth and purchasing power. While this would reduce APCs for many countries, costs would increase in wealthier nations if publishers offset lost revenue<\/a><\/li>\n
- diamond OA<\/strong>, with government or philanthropic funding eliminating individual APCs. Brainard notes this has boosted OA publishing in some regions already, but absent impact factors for many journals can reduce the appeal.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Brainard highlights that OA publishing is actively changing: cOAlition S<\/a>, Elsevier<\/a>, and Springer Nature<\/a> have introduced tiered pricing initiatives this year. We look forward to seeing how the OA landscape continues to evolve.<\/p>\n
\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2013<\/p>\n
- tiered pricing<\/strong> based on a country\u2019s wealth and purchasing power. While this would reduce APCs for many countries, costs would increase in wealthier nations if publishers offset lost revenue<\/a><\/li>\n
- transformative agreements<\/strong> with institutions, allowing affiliated researchers to publish without paying APCs (and access paywalled content)<\/li>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/thepublicationplan.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Aspirations_Darya-Zhamayov-Alcock_1.png?resize=1024%2C125&ssl=1\")
<\/a><\/p>\n