Lessons equitable open access for the to global transition to research

Abstract

Open access unlocks research and facilitates collaborations to address the world’s greatest challenges. It allows the public to engage with research and supports policymakers, journalists, medical professionals, teachers, students and the general public to translate research into action. Since open access (OA) was defined by the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) in 2002, a global movement has driven OA from an untested concept into the mainstream. Yet to fully realize the promise of OA that was envisioned when the BOAI was launched, we must ensure that the systems we are building are equitable and enable anyone, anywhere to both access and contribute to the global record of scholarship. To achieve this goal, we can take lessons from countries that pioneered the equitable development of scholarly communications. This paper is based on a series of interviews conducted with OA leaders who are implementing equitable OA models. Today, approximately half of all research articles are OA and freely available to read, yet new barriers have been created for authors to publish. These barriers, including Article Processing Charges (APCs) and the current research assessment system, are not impacting authors evenly. APCs are fees charged by publishers to authors (or their institution) to make their research articles OA. The rise in use of APCs essentially shifts the paywall from the reader to the author. There is growing recognition that OA publishing models that rely on APCs paid by authors are neither equitable nor sustainable. Researchers, including those early in their careers, as well as those in the Global South, often lack the financial resources necessary to pay APCs. Globally, there is a need to reform research assessment and rewards to improve incentives. The current assessment system faces challenges including a focus on metrics over quality, marginalization of important research areas, and a lack of recognition for diverse research outputs and contributions. Many countries in the Global South now use the Web of Science, 1a commercial platform which uses the Journal Impact Factor. While there are myriad problems with the use of such metrics, including a bias towards English-language research, these metrics are often used to determine university rankings. In the Global South, where some institutions do not have the funds to purchase journal subscriptions, leaders have developed their own systems and structures, including publishing platforms and repositories. What they have created is an ecosystem of community-led infrastructure, institutional support for publishing and alternative forms of research assessment which have allowed academics to be involved in the creation of the publishing enterprise and not simply to adopt the governance structures imposed by private interests. Yet these successful initiatives, such as the publishing platforms, Redalyc and SciELO in Latin America, are under threat from commercial models, particularly the APC-based business model, being driven from the Global North. The BOAI20 Recommendations emphasize that “OA is not an end in itself, but a means to further ends. Above all, it is a means to the equity, quality, usability, and sustainability of research.” Equitable models of OA do not charge authors to publish and are openly available online. OA journals which do not charge fees to read or publish in have become known as diamond journals. In addition, depositing versions of articles into institutional or subject based repositories, known as the green route, also represent an equitable form of OA. These equitable models of OA are supported by community-governed infrastructure, akin to a Public Digital Infrastructure for OA. Through interviews with OA leaders in Chile, Costa Rica, India, Indonesia, Mexico, South Africa, Türkiye, and Zimbabwe who are implementing equitable models, I offer lessons for the global transition to equitable OA.