Maximizing participation in scholarly communication through equitable pricing
24/10/2024
Academic knowledge shouldn’t be hindered by economic disparities. However, many researchers today, particularly in developing countries, face significant barriers to participating in scholarly communication.
Traditional publishing models have often overlooked the vast economic differences between regions, creating an uneven playing field in scholarly communication. When researchers can’t afford to publish or access research, the entire scientific community loses valuable perspectives and contributions. On the contrary, models which are open and encourage participation in scholarly communication are more equitable than those which do not.
Purchasing power varies significantly across the world, making standard pricing for products and services accessible in wealthier countries unaffordable in many others. Current pricing models in publishing fail to address these global disparities, as they do not take local purchasing power into account. This affects subscription costs, read-and-publish agreements, subscribe to open (S2O) agreements, collective funding models, article processing charges (APCs), and more.
While some publishers do offer discounts to some countries, there is no consistent or transparent method for determining appropriate discount levels. Often, the reasons behind these discounts are unclear, lost in outdated agreements or tied to specific or possibly arbitrary, decisions—such as a consortium’s negotiation strategy or a publisher’s attempt to expand into a new market. Whatever the origin, the process lacks transparency and equity.
Electronic Information for Libraries (EIFL) undertakes impactful work by negotiating deeply discounted agreements on behalf of its 33 member countries, but this initiative does not extend to all publishers or all developing nations. As a result, many countries still struggle to participate in scholarly communication due to unaffordable costs.
While some publishers offer waivers to authors in certain countries—typically those classified as Group A by Research4Life—this is not a universal solution. Many other countries, where the cost of APCs remains prohibitively high for researchers and institutions, are left out. There are many countries in the world that are wealthier than those classified in Group A but not wealthy enough to pay the prices paid by high-GDP countries, such as the USA, Australia or Norway.
Additionally, the practice of offering waivers can be problematic. It may be perceived as a form of charity, which risks being condescending and undermining the spirit of solidarity within the global research community.
The framework is adaptable, allowing publishers to implement changes gradually and in line with their specific circumstances. It can be applied to various pricing models, including article processing charges (APCs), subscriptions, and transformative agreements.
Key features of the framework include:
Open, transparent data: utilizing World Bank International Comparison Program data, reflecting each country’s income and ability to pay.
Banding: grouping countries into bands eases administration.
Excel-based tool: allowing publishers to explore and set their own bands and differential prices using the same transparent data.
Local currencies: raising invoices in local currencies where possible.
Where to learn more about the equitable pricing framework?
Do you want to learn more about how this framework can advance equity in scholarly publishing? Then join our webinar on the 16th of January 2025 between 17.00 and 18.00 CET. Our expert panel will include Miranda Bennett from California Digital Library, Franck Vazquez from Frontiers, César Rendón and César Pallares from Consorcio Colombia, Dave Jago and Alicia Wise from Information Power and Robert Kiley from cOAlition S.
Dr. Alicia Wise is Director of Information Power. She works at the intersection of copyright, digital technologies, policy, and people and has special expertise in open access and digital preservation. As a conceptual thinker and experienced communicator, she has expertise in driving organizational development and transformational change. Prior to joining Information Power she held roles with Elsevier, the Publishers Association, Publishers Licensing Society, Jisc, Archaeology Data Service, and in universities. She has served on the boards of organizations including Access to Research, Accessible Books Consortium, CHORUS, CLOCKSS, Digital Preservation Coalition, and Research4Life.
