Open access publishing is an interesting and relatively new business model that’s received a lot of attention lately in academia. As defined by the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, it’s “the free, immediate, online availability of scholarly research articles coupled with the rights to use these articles fully in the digital environment.”

Generally speaking, open access publishing refers to journal publishing where access is free of charge to the readers. Authors or their institutions pay for articles to be published so, for readers, the use restrictions on open access publishing are typically minimal.

Technologies are disrupting traditional scholarly publishing models, radically changing our capacity to reproduce, distribute, control and publish information…and enabling open access.

It’s important to note that regardless of the publishing model, academic journal content is never “free.” In fact, open access has been hampered by the sense that the content can be created and distributed at no cost. Although readers do not directly pay for what they read under open access, the content still needs to be financially supported, which often means the authors and researchers pay for their work to be published. Therefore, it’s worth noting that open access is best defined as an alternative publishing business model, and not a publishing model divorced from business.

Either way, tenure is not so easily ignored

You’re probably familiar with the phrase, “publish or perish.” It’s a tenet in the academic world that in order to advance your career as a scientist or researcher, you need to produce research that is published in academic, peer-reviewed journals.

Understandably, the average researcher will typically aim to publish in the highest quality journals to gain the widest possible audience and to secure prestige and recognition in support of tenure, promotion and grant-funding success. Facing the choice of publishing in an often more obscure, open access journal versus a well-regarded traditional for-profit journal, scientists often opt to continue to publish their research in for-profit journals, no matter how well-meaning or accessible open access publications are. At the end of the day, promotion and tenure requirements are not so easily ignored.

But journal subscription costs are escalating

Scholarly, peer-reviewed literature is often funded by government grants and is highly valued by researchers and medical professionals alike. While scientists and clinicians will provide free peer-review during the publication process, publishers who charge libraries substantial subscription and per-article fees to view this material control access to the final product.

From the librarian’s perspective:

• Post-secondary institutions and granting agencies pay academic faculty to do research and report on results in scholarly articles.
• Then, faculty give articles to traditional scholarly publishers for free. Other researchers will then peer-review and edit the articles, also for free.
• In the meantime, increased consolidation in the publishing industry combined with the market power commanded by the largest publishers has increased profitability for traditional publishers.
• Due to this market power, subscription rates charged by traditional publishers for academic libraries to subscribe to journals continue to increase more quickly than budgets or inflation.
• Due to increasing subscription costs, libraries may no longer be able to afford all the resources needed to support research and teaching.

Academic researchers are therefore frustrated by a lack of access to research, since no library can afford to subscribe to all relevant journals. Librarians are frustrated by the budgetary pressure to subscribe only to “core” journals, limiting cost, but also limiting shared research between disciplines. Meanwhile, the public is frustrated by being denied access to reliable peer-reviewed medical research findings, which is especially ironic when so much dubious medical information is openly accessible on the web.

Enter the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy

The Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineer Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), otherwise known as the “Tri-Agency,” are federal granting agencies that promote and support research and innovation in Canada. As publicly funded organizations, these agencies have a fundamental interest in promoting the availability of findings that result from the research they fund. The growth of open access has changed the landscape of publishing, facilitating widespread dissemination of research results – as well as the use and application of results. Effective January 1, 2008 (for CIHR) and May 1, 2015 (for NSERC and SSHRC), the Tri-Agency policy on publications stipulates that grant recipients are required to ensure that any peer-reviewed journal publications arising from Agency-supported research are freely accessible within 12 months of publication.

In conclusion – more questions:

From the perspective of an academic institution where research is conducted, what’s an acceptable open access repository? In Canada, are there any scalable and sustainable solutions to help the institutions comply with the Tri-Agency Policy – including making the repository barrier-free to the Canadian public?

Without undermining the value of the publishing industry, how will the precipitating problem of the escalating costs of peer-reviewed journals published under the traditional model be resolved?

How can the researchers’ rights be supported in negotiations with traditional publishers? Can a model be created to ensure protection of copyright to publish in an institutional open access repository in accordance with funding agencies’ policy?

Open access has multiplied the underclass of journals represented by titles with poor quality control and the volume of papers they publish. How can these open access journals be managed?

Both the source and the market for much of the scholarly content provided by large traditional publishers are academic research institutions. While the libraries at these institutions are facing ever-increasing journal subscription costs as demanded by the publishers, academics remain incented to provide their research and editorial services to these same publishers with little or no compensation. How will this model change?

As the business model for academic publishing continues to evolve, these and other questions need to be resolved to ensure success for both researchers and publishers. Open access journals and traditionally published journals will continue to co-exist for the foreseeable future. The challenge will be to continue to negotiate the fine line of access to knowledge and the profit requirement of the market.