Open access (publishing)

Open access (publishing)
Name	Open access (publishing)
Established	1990s
Discipline	Scholarly communication

Open access (publishing) is the practice of providing unrestricted, online access to scholarly works such as journal articles, monographs, and data. It emerged from interactions among advocates, institutions, and funders seeking alternatives to subscription models, and it involves a range of stakeholders including authors, libraries, publishers, and governments. Proponents include organizations and movements associated with Budapest Open Access Initiative, Berlin Declaration on Open Access, SPARC (the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition), Creative Commons, and funders like the Wellcome Trust and the European Research Council.

Definition and Principles

The core principle traces to the Budapest Open Access Initiative and the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing, which argue that peer-reviewed literature should be freely available online without access barriers. Related foundational texts and actors include Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, Directory of Open Access Journals, OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association), and institutions such as the MIT Libraries and the Harvard University Library. Complementary movements involve Creative Commons licenses, advocacy from Public Library of Science, policy from the National Institutes of Health, and practices promoted by CrossRef and ORCID. Principles emphasize reader access, author rights, and machine readability championed by initiatives like OpenAIRE and the Plan S negotiations led by cOAlition S.

History and Development

Early roots include self-archiving activities at arXiv and digitization efforts at Project Gutenberg; formalization followed through initiatives such as the Budapest Open Access Initiative, Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing, and the Berlin Declaration. Key players in development include Harvard University, Stanford University, University of California, Wellcome Trust, Max Planck Society, and publishers like Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley-Blackwell, and Taylor & Francis. Policy milestones feature mandates from the National Institutes of Health, the European Commission, and funders like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and UK Research and Innovation. Technical and infrastructural evolution involved CrossRef, DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals), PubMed Central, Scopus, and Web of Science adaptations.

Models and Types of Open Access

Common models include gold, green, and hybrid routes, each adopted by publishers such as Public Library of Science, BioMed Central, Oxford University Press, and Cambridge University Press. Repositories and archives—exemplified by arXiv, bioRxiv, SSRN, HAL (open archive), and institutional repositories at University of Oxford and University of Cambridge—support green OA. Transformative agreements negotiated between consortia like Knowledge Unlatched and publishers including Elsevier and Springer Nature seek transitions to full open models. Overlay journals, diamond/platinum models (seen at SciELO and some university presses), and preprint-driven workflows influenced by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and F1000Research expand the typology.

Licensing, Copyright, and Legal Issues

Licensing regimes center on Creative Commons options such as Creative Commons Attribution, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike, and Creative Commons Zero, with legal frameworks influenced by mandates from the European Commission, statutory exceptions in jurisdictions like United Kingdom and United States, and legal disputes involving publishers such as Elsevier and Wiley. Rights retention strategies promoted by institutions like Harvard University and initiatives like the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition alter copyright transfer norms, while organizations such as SPARC Europe and Right to Research Coalition advocate policy reform. Interplay with databases and indexing by CrossRef and citation systems used by Clarivate affect discoverability and legal interoperability.

Economic Models and Funding Mechanisms

Funding mechanisms include article processing charges used by Public Library of Science and BioMed Central, institutional subsidies common at University of California and Max Planck Society, funder mandates from Wellcome Trust and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and consortium transformative agreements negotiated by bodies like Jisc and Coalition S. Alternative funding is provided via crowdfunding platforms, philanthropic support from Gates Foundation, and library-driven models like those at MIT Press and University of Michigan Press. Commercial publisher strategies (e.g., Elsevier and Springer Nature) coexist with community-led infrastructure funded by National Science Foundation, European Research Council, and charitable organizations such as Klaus Tschira Stiftung.

Impact on Scholarship and Society

Open access affects citation practices measured in bibliometrics by Clarivate and Scopus, accelerates dissemination via preprint servers like arXiv and bioRxiv, and supports public health responses visible in collaborations with World Health Organization and funders during emergencies. It reshapes scholarly communication ecosystems involving ORCID, CrossRef, PubMed Central, and institutional repositories at Harvard University and University of Toronto, while informing policy at entities such as the European Commission and National Institutes of Health. Cultural and global equity considerations engage networks like SciELO, African Journals OnLine, and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature providers.

Criticisms and Challenges

Critiques address economic sustainability highlighted by disputes with Elsevier, quality control concerns pointed to predatory publishers criticized by Jeffrey Beall lists, and equity debates over article processing charges impacting researchers at institutions such as University of Cape Town and Indian Council of Medical Research. Tensions arise between funder mandates from Wellcome Trust and publishers like Wiley-Blackwell, technical interoperability issues involving CrossRef and ORCID, and geopolitical differences reflected in policy stances from the European Commission versus some national authorities. Debates continue over metrics-driven incentives produced by companies like Clarivate and Elsevier and governance roles played by Creative Commons, SPARC, and scholarly societies such as the Royal Society.

Category:Publishing