Apply publication-charge waivers across hybrid journals, too

Daniel Keirs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00021-y

IF: 64.8

2024-01-09

Nature

Abstract:Letter to the Editor

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Waiving article processing charges for least developed countries: a keystone of a large-scale open access transformation

Niels Taubert,Andre Bruns,Christopher Lenke,Graham Stone

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.526

2021-01-01

Insights the UKSG journal

Abstract:This article investigates whether it is economically feasible for a large publishing house to waive article processing charges for the group of 47 so-called least developed countries (LDC). As an example, Springer Nature is selected. The analysis is based on the Web of Science, OpenAPC and the Jisc Collections' Springer Compact journal list. As a result, it estimates an average yearly publication output of 520 publications (or 0.26% of the worldwide publication output in Springer Nature journals) for the LDC country group. The loss of revenues for Springer Nature would be US$1.1 million if a waiver was applied for all of these countries. Given that the subject categories of these publications indicate the output is of high societal relevance for LDC, and given that money is indispensable for development in these countries (e.g. life expectancy, health, education), it is not only desirable but also possible in economic terms for a publisher like Springer Nature to waive APCs for these countries without much loss in revenues. Published on 2021-01-06 11:30:09
Waiving Article Processing Charges for Least Developed Countries. A Brick Stone of a Large-scale Open Access Transformation

Niels Taubert,Andre Bruns,Christopher Lenke,Graham Stone

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2008.04180

2020-08-10

Digital Libraries

Abstract:This article investigates the question, if it is economically feasible for a large publishing house to waive article processing charges for the group of 47 so called least developed countries (LDC). As an example Springer-Nature is selected. The analysis is based on the Web of Science, OpenAPC and the Jisc collections Springer compact journal list. As a result, it estimates an average yearly publication output of 520 publications (or a share of 0,26% of the worldwide publication output in Springer-Nature journals) for the LDC country group. The loss of revenues for Springer-Nature would be 1,1 million $ if a waiver would be applied for all of these countries. Given that money is indispensable for development in the case of LDC (e.g. life expectancy, health, education), it is not only desirable but also possible in economic terms for a publisher like Springer-Nature to waive APCs for these countries without much loss in revenues.
How research funders can finance APCs in full OA and hybrid journals

Bo‐Christer BJÖRK,David SOLOMON,Bo-Christer Björk,David Solomon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1087/20140203

2014-04-01

Learned Publishing

Abstract:Open access (OA) publishing is steadily growing in both full OA journals and hybrid journals where authors can pay to open up individual articles. Funding for article processing charges (APCs) is still a strong barrier for many authors, particularly for subscription journals where the hybrid option is expensive and an added extra feature after an article is accepted for publication. Many research funders in Europe have started or are considering mechanisms for paying APCs with earmarked funding in order to increase the uptake of OA. At the same time they are well aware that their actions may influence the way the OA market will develop in the near future. This article discusses a number of scenarios for ways in which funders could cover the cost of APCs, while encouraging the development of a competitive and transparent market for APC‐funded OA scholarly publishing. We provide evidence that the current APC‐funded full OA market is sensitive to journal prestige/impact. We present a value‐based cap funding scheme which could help maintain transparency, bringing hybrid market pricing in line with the full OA market. We also consider a scenario that addresses hybrid ‘double dipping’ while limiting the cost of transitioning to full OA for research‐intensive universities as well as cost‐sharing as a mechanism for providing authors with an incentive for considering cost as well as value in choosing where to publish.

information science & library science
Requiem for Impact Factors and High Publication Charges

Chris R. Triggle,Ross MacDonald,David J. Triggle,Donald Grierson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2021.1909481

2022-01-01

Abstract:Journal impact factors, publication charges and assessment of quality and accuracy of scientific research are critical for researchers, managers, funders, policy makers, and society. Editors and publishers compete for impact factor rankings, to demonstrate how important their journals are, and researchers strive to publish in perceived top journals, despite high publication and access charges. This raises questions of how top journals are identified, whether assessments of impacts are accurate and whether high publication charges borne by the research community are justified, bearing in mind that they also collectively provide free peer-review to the publishers. Although traditional journals accelerated peer review and publication during the COVID-19 pandemic, preprint servers made a greater impact with over 30,000 open access articles becoming available and accelerating a trend already seen in other fields of research. We review and comment on the advantages and disadvantages of a range of assessment methods and the way in which they are used by researchers, managers, employers and publishers. We argue that new approaches to assessment are required to provide a realistic and comprehensive measure of the value of research and journals and we support open access publishing at a modest, affordable price to benefit research producers and consumers.
Article Processing Charges may not be sustainable for academic researchers

Aditya Limaye

DOI: https://doi.org/10.38105/spr.stvcknibc5

2022-08-29

MIT Science Policy Review

Abstract:Concerns related to stressed library budgets and equitable access to publicly funded research have fomented a movement towards open access (OA) scholarly publishing, in which academic journal articles are made available online free of charge. OA challenges the traditional subscription-based revenue model of major publishing companies; to supplant lost revenue, many have introduced a new Article Processing Charge (APC) based model, in which the authors of a study pay to ensure their article is available on an OA basis. In the past several years, APCs have risen considerably, shifting the publishing cost burden from university libraries to individual research groups, who often pay APCs out of research funds. Focusing primarily on scientific publishing in North America and Europe, we review the circumstances that brought about the APC model, and argue that rising APCs may present a real threat to research productivity. We conclude by presenting some concrete actions that stakeholders in the academic research enterprise could take to uphold the OA standard and mollify the impact of rising APCs.
The rent's too high: Self-archive for fair online publication costs

Robert T. Thibault,Amanda MacPherson,Stevan Harnad,Amir Raza

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1808.06130

2018-08-19

Abstract:The main contributors of scientific knowledge, researchers, generally aim to disseminate their findings far and wide. And yet, publishing companies have largely kept these findings behind a paywall. With digital publication technology markedly reducing cost, this enduring wall seems disproportionate and unjustified; moreover, it has sparked a topical exchange concerning how to modernize academic publishing. This discussion, however, seems to focus on how to compensate major publishers for providing open access through a "pay to publish" model, in turn transferring financial burdens from libraries to authors and their funders. Large publishing companies, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, PLoS, and Frontiers, continue to earn exorbitant revenues each year, hundreds of millions of dollars of which now come from processing charges for open-access articles. A less expensive and equally accessible alternative exists: widespread self-archiving of peer-reviewed articles. All we need is awareness of this alternative and the will to employ it

Digital Libraries
Does it pay to pay? A comparison of the benefits of open-access publishing across various sub-fields in biology

Amanda D. Clark,Tanner C. Myers,Todd D. Steury,Ali Krzton,Julio Yanes,Angela Barber,Jacqueline Barry,Subarna Barua,Katherine Eaton,Devadatta Gosavi,Rebecca Nance,Zahida Pervaiz,Chidozie Ugochukwu,Patricia Hartman,Laurie S. Stevison

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.16824

IF: 3.061

2024-02-27

PeerJ

Abstract:Authors are often faced with the decision of whether to maximize traditional impact metrics or minimize costs when choosing where to publish the results of their research. Many subscription-based journals now offer the option of paying an article processing charge (APC) to make their work open. Though such “hybrid” journals make research more accessible to readers, their APCs often come with high price tags and can exclude authors who lack the capacity to pay to make their research accessible. Here, we tested if paying to publish open access in a subscription-based journal benefited authors by conferring more citations relative to closed access articles. We identified 146,415 articles published in 152 hybrid journals in the field of biology from 2013–2018 to compare the number of citations between various types of open access and closed access articles. In a simple generalized linear model analysis of our full dataset, we found that publishing open access in hybrid journals that offer the option confers an average citation advantage to authors of 17.8 citations compared to closed access articles in similar journals. After taking into account the number of authors, Journal Citation Reports 2020 Quartile, year of publication, and Web of Science category, we still found that open access generated significantly more citations than closed access ( p < 0.0001). However, results were complex, with exact differences in citation rates among access types impacted by these other variables. This citation advantage based on access type was even similar when comparing open and closed access articles published in the same issue of a journal ( p < 0.0001). However, by examining articles where the authors paid an article processing charge, we found that cost itself was not predictive of citation rates ( p = 0.14). Based on our findings of access type and other model parameters, we suggest that, in the case of the 152 journals we analyzed, paying for open access does confer a citation advantage. For authors with limited budgets, we recommend pursuing open access alternatives that do not require paying a fee as they still yielded more citations than closed access. For authors who are considering where to submit their next article, we offer additional suggestions on how to balance exposure via citations with publishing costs.

multidisciplinary sciences
How can I publish open access when I can't afford the fees?

Nikki Forrester

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-02849-w

IF: 64.8

2024-09-03

Nature

Abstract:To avoid the restrictions of paywalls, researchers must often pay an article-processing fee. Nature explores ways to offset the cost. To avoid the restrictions of paywalls, researchers must often pay an article-processing fee. Nature explores ways to offset the cost.

multidisciplinary sciences
Key Challenges for AAS Journals in the Next Decade

Emily M. Levesque,Lisa Prato,Christopher Sneden,Jason W. Barnes,Dawn M. Gelino,Barbara Kern,Paula Szkody,Rosemary F. G. Wyse,Leslie A. Young

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1907.11245

2019-07-26

Abstract:The American Astronomical Society (AAS) Journals are a vital asset of our professional society. With the push towards open access, page charges are a viable and sustainable option for continuing to effectively fund and publish the AAS Journals. However, the existing page charge model, which requires individual authors to pay page charges out of their grants or even out of pocket, is already challenging to some researchers and could be exacerbated in the Open Access (OA) era if charges increase. A discussion of alternative models for funding page charges and publishing costs should be part of the Astro2020 decadal survey if we wish to continue supporting the sustainable and accessible publication of US research in AAS journals in the rapidly-shifting publication landscape. The AAS Publications Committee recommends that the National Academy of Sciences form a task force to develop solutions and recommendations with respect to the urgent concerns and considerations highlighted in this White Paper.

Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics
Transformative agreements: Do they pave the way to open access?

Ángel Borrego,Lluís Anglada,Ernest Abadal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1347

2020-12-03

Learned Publishing

Abstract:Transformative agreements, also known as 'offsetting', 'read and publish', or 'publish and read' agreements, have shifted the focus of scholarly journal licensing from cost containment towards open access publication. An analysis of 36 full‐text transformative agreements recorded in the ESAC registry shows that 'transformative agreement' is an umbrella term that encompasses different kinds of contracts. We differentiate between pre‐transformative, partially transformative, and fully transformative agreements. Pre‐transformative agreements are traditional subscription licences that grant article processing charge (APC) discounts or vouchers for open access publication of a limited number of articles. Partially transformative agreements differentiate between a read fee and a publish fee to cover the processing charges of a certain number of articles. Fully transformative agreements allow unlimited open access publication of the scholarly output of the subscribing institution. In all three categories, some agreements restrict open access publication to hybrid journals, whereas others allow publication in both hybrid and gold journals. Transformative agreements are more transparent than traditional journal licences, allow authors to retain copyright, and make provisions to facilitate the management of open access workflows. It is hard to assess whether these agreements are just a temporary phase in the transition towards open access or will perpetuate the current structure of the scholarly communication system and its associated high costs.

information science & library science
How open are hybrid journals included in transformative agreements?

Najko Jahn

2024-09-26

Abstract:The ongoing controversy surrounding transformative agreements, which aim to transition subscription-based journal publishing to full open access, highlights the need for large-scale studies assessing the impact of these agreements on hybrid open access. By combining multiple open data sources, including cOAlition S Journal Checker, Crossref, and OpenAlex, this study presents a novel approach that analyses over 700 agreements. Results suggest a strong growth in open access, from 4.3% in 2018 to 15% in 2022. Over five years, 11,189 hybrid journals provided open access to 742,369 out of 8,146,958 articles (9.1%). Authors who could make use of transformative agreements contributed 328,957 open access articles (44%) during this period, reaching a peak in 2022 with 143,615 out of 249,511 open access articles (58%). While this trend was predominantly driven by the three commercial publishers Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley, open access uptake varied substantially across journals, publishers, disciplines, and countries. Particularly, the OECD and BRICS areas revealed different publication trends. In conclusion, this study suggests that current levels of implementation of transformative agreements is insufficient to bring about a large-scale transition to full open access.

Digital Libraries
An Emerging Trend of Equal Authorship Credit in Major Public Health Journals

Shui-Ying Lei,Yan-Ping Dong,Wei-Fang Zhu,Lan-Juan Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2771-7

2016-01-01

SpringerPlus

Abstract:Background This study aimed to identify the longitudinal trends and characteristics of the practice of explicitly giving equal credit to multiple authors of publications in public health journals. Manual searches were conducted to identify original research articles, published in five public health journals with the highest IFs according to the “2012 JCR Science Edition” between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2013, which awarded equal credit to multiple authors ( Epidemiologic Reviews , Environmental Health Perspectives , the International Journal of Epidemiology , Epidemiology , and the Annual Review of Public Health ). The Instructions to Authors in the five journals were also examined with regard to information about giving equal credit to multiple authors. Findings Statistically significant differences were noted in the annual prevalence in Environmental Health Perspectives , International Journal of Epidemiology , and Epidemiology ( r = 0.753, P = 0.012; r = 0.894, P = 0.000; r = 0.522, P = 0.122, respectively). The first two authors listed in the by-line received equal credit in the majority of articles, but this practice was also extended to authors in nearly every position on the by-line in some publications. The authors given equal credit in articles appearing in Environmental Health Perspectives , International Journal of Epidemiology , and Epidemiology were primarily from European and North American countries. Finally, none of the journals provided specific guidance regarding this practice in their Instructions to Authors. Conclusions An emerging trend of giving equal credit to multiple authors is observed in the public health journals. This practice should be better addressed in the guidance provided by journals to authors.
Fully Digital: Policy and Process Implications for the AAS

Chris Biemesderfer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8369-5_9

2012-05-01

Abstract:Over the past two decades, every scholarly publisher has migrated at least the mechanical aspects of their journal publishing so that they utilize digital means. The academy was comfortable with that for a while, but publishers are under increasing pressure to adapt further. At the American Astronomical Society (AAS), we think that means bringing our publishing program to the point of being fully digital, by establishing procedures and policies that regard the digital objects of publication primarily. We have always thought about our electronic journals as databases of digital articles, from which we can publish and syndicate articles one at a time, and we must now put flesh on those bones by developing practices that are consistent with the realities of article at a time publication online. As a learned society that holds the long-term rights to the literature, we have actively taken responsibility for the preservation of the digital assets that constitute our journals, and in so doing we have not forsaken the legacy pre-digital assets. All of us who serve as the long-term stewards of scholarship must begin to evolve into fully digital publishers.

Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics,Digital Libraries
The oligopoly’s shift to open access publishing

Leigh-Ann Butler,Lisa Matthias,Marc-André Simard,Phil Mongeon,Stefanie Haustein

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29173/cais1262

2022-08-06

Abstract:This study estimates fees paid for gold and hybrid open access articles in journals published by the oligopoly of academic publishers, which acknowledge funding from the Canadian Tri-Agency. It employs bibliometric methods using data from Web of Science, Unpaywall, open datasets of article processing charges list prices as well as historical fees retrieved via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine for journals published by Elsevier, Springer-Nature, Wiley, Sage and Taylor & Francis to estimate article processing charges for open access articles published between 2015 and 2018 that acknowledge funding from the Canadian Federal funding agencies CIHR, NSERC, and SSHRC, as well as grants jointly administered by the Tri-Agency. During the four-year period analyzed, a total of 6,892 gold and 4,097 hybrid articles that acknowledge Tri-Agency funding were identified, for which the total list prices amount to $US 27.6 million.
Business as Usual with Article Processing Charges in the Transition towards OA Publishing: A Case Study Based on Elsevier

Sergio Copiello

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications8010003

2020-01-06

Publications

Abstract:This paper addresses the topic of the article processing charges (APCs) that are paid when publishing articles using the open access (OA) option. Building on the Elsevier OA price list, company balance sheet figures, and ScienceDirect data, tentative answers to three questions are outlined using a Monte Carlo approach to deal with the uncertainty inherent in the inputs. The first question refers to the level of APCs from the market perspective, under the hypothesis that all the articles published in Elsevier journals exploit the OA model so that the subscription to ScienceDirect becomes worthless. The second question is how much Elsevier should charge for publishing all the articles under the OA model, assuming the profit margin reduces and adheres to the market benchmark. The third issue is how many articles would have to be accepted, in an OA-only publishing landscape, so that the publisher benefits from the same revenue and profit margin as in the recent past. The results point to high APCs, nearly twice the current level, being required to preserve the publisher’s profit margin. Otherwise, by relaxing that constraint, a downward shift of APCs can be expected so they would tend to get close to current values. Accordingly, the article acceptance rate could be likely to grow from 26–27% to about 35–55%.
Publish, Don’t Perish: Recommendations for Mitigating Impacts of the New Federal Open Access Policy

Alexander B. Belles,Karen E. Beatty,Claire H. Rodman,Charles J. Connolly

DOI: https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg220101

2023-03-06

Journal of Science Policy & Governance

Abstract:In August, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy issued a new policy requiring that all federally funded scholarly research be accessible to the public immediately upon publication. While this open access policy will ultimately benefit society by increasing the availability of data and research outputs, it could place a heavy burden on researchers due to the relatively high cost of open access alongside an academic culture that tends to favor publishing in high impact subscription journals. We examine the complexities of the traditional publishing landscape and offer recommendations for agencies, universities, and publishers to mitigate the impacts on researchers. Specifically, we recommend a short-term increase in funding to cover higher publishing costs, but contributions from all stakeholders are needed to facilitate a long-term solution.
Subscribe to Open: A practical approach for converting subscription journals to open access

Raym Crow,Richard Gallagher,Kamran Naim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1262

2019-10-01

Learned Publishing

Abstract:Key pointsOA business models must be sustainable over the long term, and article processing charge payments do not work for all; Subscribe to Open (S2O) is proposed, and being tested, as an alternative model.The S2O model motivates subscribers to participate through economic self‐interest, without reliance on institutional altruism or collective behaviour.The S2O offer targets current subscribers, uses existing subscription systems, and recurs annually, allowing publishers to control risk and revert to conventional subscriptions if necessary.An Annual Reviews pilot is currently testing the S2O model with five journals.

information science & library science
The growth of open access publishing in geochemistry

Olivier Pourret,Dasapta Erwin Irawan,Jonathan P. Tennant,Andrew Hursthouse,Eric D. van Hullebusch

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ringeo.2020.100001

2020-09-01

Results in Geochemistry

Abstract:In this communication, we look at Open Access (OA) publishing practices in geochemistry. We examine a list of 56 journals and assess whether Article Processing Charges (APCs) and Journal Impact Factors (JIFs) appear to influence publication or not. More than 40% of articles in 2018–2019 were published OA, and about 70% of that portion in fully OA journals. These had a mean APC of US$ 900, whereas the remaining were published in hybrid journals with a higher mean APC of more than $US 1,800. A moderate and positive correlation is found between the number of OA articles published in hybrids journals and their JIF, whereas there is a stronger positive relationship between the number of OA articles published in fully OA journals and the APC. For OA articles published in hybrid journals, it seems that the proportion of OA articles tends to increase in journals with higher JIF.
More flexibility and author friendly steps toward publication

Ji-Dong Gu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2024.105766

IF: 4.907

2024-03-06

International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation

Abstract:Scientific publications, specifically journal papers, are facing increasing challenges in a number of ways for both authors and publishers, and one of them is the friendliness of the format requirements by different journals even under the same editorial management system of the same publisher. At our most recent editors' meeting of this journal, decision were made and agreed upon for the following three items: 1) requirements on the physical form and style of manuscript will be relaxed immediately on the presentation of Results and Discussion, so that either combined or separation of them into 2 different sections are accepted for further processing; 2) citations of references in text will not be mandatorily to any specific one, so citations using Harvard or Chicago styles will be both acceptable from now on; and 3) a new category of publication will be started for a testing on experimental stage as Fast-track results. With all these new changes, it is hoped that publication will be less time consuming for authors so that precious time can be used in research than formatting or re-formatting the style for a submission.

environmental sciences,biotechnology & applied microbiology
Open access through Subscribe to Open: a society publisher’s implementation

Sara Bosshart,Rod Cookson,Philipp Hess

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.567

2022-01-01

Insights the UKSG journal

Abstract:As pressures mount from global funding mandates and initiatives like Plan S, publishers are seeking sustainable solutions to transition their subscription portfolios to open access. For self-publishing societies with niche portfolios and low publication volumes, traditional transition options such as article processing charge models or transformative agreements are limited or out of reach and often involve significant financial risk. In this article, we focus on one society publisher's implementation of Subscribe to Open (S2O): an emerging open access model that moves away from article-level charges, instead leveraging existing subscription revenues and infrastructure to achieve seamless and sustainable open access. We outline the advantages of this model for society publishers, the parameters to consider when implementing the model, the initial community response to a successful implementation and some early data highlighting the effect of the S2O model on our journals. Published on 2022-03-16 14:14:32

Apply publication-charge waivers across hybrid journals, too

Waiving article processing charges for least developed countries: a keystone of a large-scale open access transformation

Waiving Article Processing Charges for Least Developed Countries. A Brick Stone of a Large-scale Open Access Transformation

How research funders can finance APCs in full OA and hybrid journals

Requiem for Impact Factors and High Publication Charges

Article Processing Charges may not be sustainable for academic researchers

The rent's too high: Self-archive for fair online publication costs

Does it pay to pay? A comparison of the benefits of open-access publishing across various sub-fields in biology

How can I publish open access when I can't afford the fees?

Key Challenges for AAS Journals in the Next Decade

Transformative agreements: Do they pave the way to open access?

How open are hybrid journals included in transformative agreements?

An Emerging Trend of Equal Authorship Credit in Major Public Health Journals

Fully Digital: Policy and Process Implications for the AAS

The oligopoly’s shift to open access publishing

Business as Usual with Article Processing Charges in the Transition towards OA Publishing: A Case Study Based on Elsevier

Publish, Don’t Perish: Recommendations for Mitigating Impacts of the New Federal Open Access Policy

Subscribe to Open: A practical approach for converting subscription journals to open access

The growth of open access publishing in geochemistry

More flexibility and author friendly steps toward publication

Open access through Subscribe to Open: a society publisher’s implementation