Open access could reduce cost of scientific publishing

Making scientific research available for free on the internet rather than through subscription journals could reduce the cost of publishing research by up to 30%, a report published this week says.

The report, Costs and Business Models in Scientific Research Publishing(available at www.wellcome.ac.uk/publications) indicates that an open access model of scientific publishing—where authors of a research paper pay for their research to be peer reviewed and made available on the web free of charge to readers—is economically viable.

It was based on a study by the Wellcome Trust, a research funding charity, that analysed the costs of publishing scientific, technical, and medical research articles by comparing two options: the “subscriber pays” model, in which readers pay for printed journals or online access, and the “author pays” model. Estimates of cost were based on discussions with senior staff across a range of journals and online publishing organisations, as well as a literature review.

The analysis found that a £1100 ($1950; €1630) payment by authors would allow a workable, high quality, and sustainable publishing model. This compared with an average cost of £1500 per paper for papers published under the traditional system. Overall, the author pays model was found to be a viable option. The report concluded that the model seemed to be less costly and to have the potential to serve the scientific community successfully.

“The benefits of research are derived principally from access to research results,” the report argues, suggesting that the current subscriber pays system gave a small number of publishers almost complete control over the distribution of the research they published—research that in 90% of cases had public funding. It estimates that profits of up to 40% were being made through this system.

Subscription fees to journals and online versions had risen by 200% in the last decade and currently cost UK universities £76m a year. Using the report's findings, the Wellcome Trust calculated that the total cost of access to research for its own funded scientists under an open access system would add an additional 1% to the costs of research.

Dr Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, said: “The results of scientific research must be freely and widely available to help scientists throughout the world make the discoveries we need to improve health. That is why we have supported the principle of open access publishing.

“However, up to now there have been unanswered questions about the economic and practical viability of this system. Our report now shows this is a win-win situation: high quality, peer reviewed research available to everyone free of charge within a sustainable online market—plus savings of as much as 30%.”

One example of open access publishing is the human genome project. The data from the project were made immediately available on the internet and can be used by anyone for free. Since its publication many thousands of scientists from around the world have been able to access the information as many times as they need, without having to pay subscription fees.

Dr Walport added: “Now we can get rid of the ludicrous situation where the scientific community has to pay to look at the results of their own research. The internet has revolutionised retailing, travel, and the media; now it's the turn of publishing. It's time for serious discussion, particularly with the learned societies, who, as the report makes clear, should have nothing to fear from a new publishing model.”

The report has been presented to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee's inquiry into publishing of research.

It was dismissed as “nonsense” by one publishing society, however. Sally Morris, chief executive of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers, Worthing, said: “It is suggested that publishing costs could be reduced by up to 30% by a move to Open Access. This is nonsense; most of the saving would be due to a move to online-only. Indeed, reduction of publishing revenues by 30% would put many very valuable journals out of business.

“The report includes sensible cost figures but lacks an adequate distinction between savings made by dropping print, and savings (and new costs) made by moving to open access. It fails to make any allowance whatever for overheads or profit/surplus.”

Costs and Business Models in Scientific Research Publishingis accessible at www.wellcome.ac.uk/publications