Open Access eXchange (OAeX): an economic model and platform...

Abstract

Authors’ names are listed in alphabetical order.

This article describes the Open Access eXchange (OAeX) project, a pragmatic and comprehensive economic model and fundraising platform for open scholarship initiatives. OAeX connects bidders with funders at scale and right across the open scholarship spectrum through crowdfunding: financial expenditure is regulated by a market of freely competing providers and financial transactions and transparency are assured by a clearing-house entity. Specifically, OAeX seeks to facilitate open access publishing without the barrier of article processing charges (APCs), as well as contribute to solving challenges of transparency and economic sustainability in open scholarship projects in the broader sense.

References

1 Marc Schiltz, “Science without Publication Paywalls: COAlition S for the Realisation of Full and Immediate Open Access,” PLOS Biology 16, no. 9 (4 September 2018): e3000031, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000031; Joachim Schöpfel, et al., “Ready for the Future? A Survey on Open Access with Scientists from the French National Research Center (CNRS),” Interlending & Document Supply 44, no. 4 (21 November 2016): 141–49, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ILDS-06-2016-0023; Stuart Lawson, “Open Access Policy in the UK: From Neoliberalism to the Commons,” PhD Thesis, Birkbeck, University of London, 2019, DOI: https://doi.org/10.17613/ktz2-w249; Paul Ayris et al., “LIBER Open Science Roadmap,” Zenodo, 2 July 2018, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1303002; ACRL, “Scholarly Communication Toolkit: Public Access & Funder Mandates,” ACRL - Association of College and Research Libraries, 14 October 2019, https://acrl.libguides.com/c.php?g=539108&p=3694721 (all accessed 14 January 2020).
Back to article
2 Claire Redhead, “Rate of Growth for CC BY Articles in Fully-OA Journals Continues for OASPA Members,” OASPA, 3 July 2019, https://oaspa.org/growth-continues-for-oaspa-member-oa-content/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
3 “Open Access Policies,” eifl, https://www.eifl.net/programme/open-access-programme/open-access-policies (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
4 “What Is COALition S?”, Science Europe, Plan S, 2019, https://www.coalition-s.org/about/, (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
5 “Open Access,” Science Europe, 2019, https://www.scienceeurope.org/our-priorities/open-access/, (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
6 “Principles and Implementation,” Science Europe, Plan S, 2019, https://www.coalition-s.org/principles-and-implementation/, (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
7 “COAlition S Appoints Johan Rooryck as Open Access Champion,” Science Europe, Plan S, 28 August 2019, https://www.coalition-s.org/oa-champion-announced/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
8 DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment), https://sfdora.org/; Johan Rooryck, “ACTION: Open Letter - Help Liberate Our Science – Please Help! (#119),” GitLab / Publishing Reform/discussion, 10 June 2019, https://gitlab.com/publishing-reform/discussion/issues/119; Stephen Buranyi, “Is the Staggeringly Profitable Business of Scientific Publishing Bad for Science?,” The Guardian, 27 June 2017, sec. Science, https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science; Kirsi Pauliina Kallio, “Subtle Radical Moves in Scientific Publishing,” Fennia - International Journal of Geography 195, no. 1 (20 June 2017): 1–4, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11143/fennia.63678 (all accessed 14 January 2020).
Back to article
9 “LIBER (Ligue Des Bibliothèques Européennes de Recherche – Association of European Research Libraries), https://libereurope.eu/ (accessed 14 January 2014).
Back to article
10 David Prosser, “The Costs of Double Dipping,” Research Libraries UK (blog), 6 February 2015, https://www.rluk.ac.uk/the-costs-of-double-dipping/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
11 “Open Access: Five Principles for Negotiations with Publishers,” LIBER - Association of European Research Libraries (blog), 7 September 2017, https://libereurope.eu/blog/2017/09/07/open-access-five-principles-for-negotiations-with-publishers/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
12 “About us,” Wellcome, https://wellcome.ac.uk/about-us; “Grant conditions,” Wellcome, https://wellcome.ac.uk/funding/guidance/grant-conditions; “Open access policy,” Wellcome, https://wellcome.ac.uk/funding/guidance/open-access-policy (all accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
13 “Scholarly Communication Toolkit: Public Access & Funder Mandates,” ACRL - Association of College and Research Libraries, 10 October 2019, https://acrl.libguides.com/scholcomm/toolkit/home (accessed 16 January 2020); European Commission, OSPP-REC: Open Science Policy Platform Recommendations, 2018, https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/pdf/integrated_advice_opspp_recommendations.pdf (accessed 22 January 2020); Emma Cryer (contributor), “Incorporating Open Access into Libraries,” Serials Review 37, no. 2 (1 June 2011): 103–7, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2011.10765359 (accessed 16 January 2020); Diane Harley, “Scholarly Communication: Cultural Contexts, Evolving Models,” Science 342, no. 6154 (4 October 2013): 80–82, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1243622 (accessed 16 January 2020); Gareth J. Johnson, “Cultural, ideological and practical barriers to open access adoption within the UK Academy: an ethnographically framed examination,” Insights 31, (June 2018), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.400 (accessed 16 January 2020); Alysia D. Roehrig, Devin Soper, Bradley E. Cox, and Gloria P. Colvin, “Changing the Default to Support Open Access to Education Research,” Educational Researcher 47, no. 7 (1 October 2018): 465–73, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18782974 (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
14 Christopher May, “Academic publishing and open access: Costs, benefits and options for publishing research,” Politics, 25 June 2019, DOI: 10.1177/0263395719858571 (accessed 16 January 2020); Jubb Consulting, United Kingdom, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (European Commission), Jean-Claude Guédon, et al., Future of scholarly publishing and scholarly communication: Report of the Expert Group to the European Commission, (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union), 1 January 2019, 30–37, https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/97 (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
15 Leonid Schneider, “Researchers reject APC-based OA publishing as promoted by Plan S,” For Better Science (blog), 11 June 2019, https://forbetterscience.com/2019/06/11/researchers-reject-apc-based-oa-publishing-as-promoted-by-plan-s/ (accessed 16 January 2020); University of California Libraries, Pay It Forward: Investigating a Sustainable Model of Open Access Article Processing Charges for Large North American Research Institutions, July 2016, https://www.library.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/ICIS-UC-Pay-It-Forward-Final-Report.rev_.7.18.16.pdf (accessed 16 January 2020); Marcel Knöchelmann, “Knowledge Unlatched, failed transparency, and the commercialisation of open access book publishing,” LSE Impact Blog (blog), 3 October 2018, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/10/03/knowledge-unlatched-failed-transparency-and-the-commercialisation-of-open-access-book-publishing/ (accessed 16 January 2020); Shaun Khoo, “The gold rush: Why open access will boost publisher profits,” LSE Impact Blog (blog), 4 June 2019, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/06/04/the-gold-rush-why-open-access-will-boost-publisher-profits/ (accessed 16 January 2020); Björn Brembs, “Why Open Access Big Deals Are Worse than Subscriptions,” Bjoern.Brembs.Blog (blog), 13 April 2018, http://bjoern.brembs.net/2018/04/why-open-access-big-deals-are-worse-than-subscriptions/ (accessed 16 January 2020); Toby Green, “Is open access affordable? Why current models do not work and why we need internet-era transformation of scholarly communications,” Learned Publishing 32, no. 1 (1 January 2019): 13–25, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1219 (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
16 “About,” Open Library of Humanities, https://www.openlibhums.org/site/about/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
17 SciPost, https://scipost.org/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
18 arXiv, https://arxiv.org/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
19 SCOAP³, https://scoap3.org/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
20 AmeliCA, http://amelica.org/index.php/en/home/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
21 SciELO, https://scielo.org/en/ (accessed 16 January 2020).
Back to article
22 “Subscribe to Open”, Annual Reviews, 2019, https://www.annualreviews.org/page/subscriptions/subscribe-to-open (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
23 TEANGA - The Journal of the Irish Association for Applied Linguistics, https://journal.iraal.ie/index.php/teanga (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
24 Martin Paul Eve, “Transparency Agendas Are Being Used to Legislate against Consortial Open-Access Models Even Though It Has Good Cost Outcomes,” Martin Paul Eve (blog), 3 June 2018, https://eve.gd/2018/06/03/transparency-agendas-are-used-to-legislate-against-consortial-open-access-models/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
25 María Francisca Abad, “Financial aspects of open access journals,” Contributions to science 5, no. 1, (2009), 107–114; Janneke Adema, and Graham Stone, “Changing Publishing Ecologies: A Landscape Study of New University Presses and Academic-Led Publishing,” Jisc Repository, 30 June 2017, http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/6666/ (accessed 23 January 2020).
Back to article
26 Martyn Rittman, “Sustainability in Publishing: An Open Access Publisher’s View,” in ELPUB 2018, ed. Leslie Chan and Pierre Mounier (Toronto, Canada, 2018), DOI: 10.4000/proceedings.elpub.2018.9 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
27 Jonathan Nabe, “After the Big Deals Are Done,” Against the Grain 29, no. 1 (1 February 2017), DOI: 10.7771/2380-176X.7707 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
28 Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, “Register Transformative Agreements – ESAC,” https://esac-initiative.org/about/transformative-agreements/share/ (accessed 23 January 2020).
Back to article
29 Fiona M. Scott Morton, “The Problems of Price Controls,” Cato Institute, 20 June 2001, https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/problems-price-controls (accessed 17 January 2020); Richard Poynder, “Open Access: Whom Would You Back?” Open and Shut? (blog), 10 March 2009, https://poynder.blogspot.com/2009/03/open-access-who-would-you-back.html (accessed 22 January 2020).
Back to article
30 Jim Giles, “PR’s ‘pit bull’ takes on open access,” News, Nature, 445, 347, 24 January 2007, DOI: 10.1038/445347a (accessed 17 January 2020); Ludovico Bullini Orlandi, Francesca Ricciardi, Cecilia Rossignoli, and Marco De Marco, “Scholarly Work in the Internet Age: Co-Evolving Technologies, Institutions and Workflows,” Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 4, no. 1 (January 2019): 55–61, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2017.11.001 (accessed 17 January 2020); John Willinsky, “Scholarly Associations and the Economic Viability of Open Access Publishing (Published April 8, 2005),” Demonstration Journal of the Health Sciences Theme 1, no. 2 (2018), https://demo.publicknowledgeproject.org/ojs3/demo/index.php/health-sciences/article/view/693 (accessed 17 January 2020); George Chen, Alejandro Posada, and Leslie Chan, “Vertical Integration in Academic Publishing,” in Connecting the Knowledge Commons — From Projects to Sustainable Infrastructure, ed. Leslie Chan and Pierre Mounier (OpenEdition Press, 2019), DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/books.oep.9068 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
31 George Machovec, “Strategies for Transformational Publish and Read Agreements in North America,” Journal of Library Administration 59, no. 5 (4 July 2019): 548–55, DOI: 10.1080/01930826.2019.1616969 (accessed 17 January 2020); Mercedes Baquero-Arribas, Luis Dorado, and Isabel Bernal, “Open Access Routes Dichotomy and Opportunities: Consolidation, Analysis and Trends at the Spanish National Research Council,” Publications 7, no. 3 (September 2019): 49, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7030049 (accessed 17 January 2020); Jeffrey Brainard, “New deals could help scientific societies survive open access,” Science 365, no. 6459 (20 September 2019): 1229–1229, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.365.6459.1229 (accessed 17 January 2020); Brigitte Kromp, and Frank Koren-Wilhelmer, “Finanzierung von Open Access-Übergangsmodellen: Leitlinie für Verlagsverträge für die Open Access-Transformation,” Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare 72, no. 1 (17 May 2019): 66–73, DOI: https://doi.org/10.31263/voebm.v72i1.2277 (accessed 17 January 2020); Martin Paul Eve, “All That Glisters: Investigating Collective Funding Mechanisms for Gold Open Access in Humanities Disciplines,” Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication 2, no. 3 (2014). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1131 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
32 Bregt Saenen and Lidia Borrell-Damián, “EUA Briefing. Reflections on University Research Assessment. Key Concepts, Issues and Actors,” European University Association, April 2019, https://www.ouvrirlascience.fr/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/EUA_Reflections-on-University-Research-Assessment_2.pdf (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
33 Aileen Fyfe et al., “Untangling Academic Publishing: A history of the relationship between commercial interests, academic prestige and the circulation of research,” (Zenodo, 25 May 2017), DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.546100 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
34 Hamid R. Jamali, et al., “How scholars implement trust in their reading, citing and publishing activities: Geographical differences,” Library & Information Science Research 36, no. 3 (1 October 2014): 192–202, DOI: 10.1016/j.lisr.2014.08.002 (accessed 17 January 2020); Gary Barron, “Universities in the Making: Rankings, Performance Metrics and Control in Academia,” ERA, June 2019, DOI: https://doi.org/10.7939/r3-w9vx-vw08 (accessed 17 January 2020); Jo Ann Oravec, “The manipulation of scholarly rating and measurement systems: constructing excellence in an era of academic stardom,” Teaching in Higher Education 22, no. 4 (19 May 2017): 423–36, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1301909 (accessed 17 January 2020); Eti Herman, “Scholarly reputation,” FEMS Microbiology Letters 365, no. 18 (1 September 2018), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fny200 (accessed 17 January 2020); Icy Lee, “Publish or perish: The myth and reality of academic publishing,” Language Teaching 47, no. 2 (April 2014): 250–61, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000504 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
35 Paul Belleflamme, Thomas Lambert, and Armin Schwienbacher, “Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd,” Journal of Business Venturing 29, no. 5 (1 September 2014): 585–609, DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.07.003 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
36 Kickstarter, https://www.kickstarter.com/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
37 Indiegogo, https://www.indiegogo.com/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
38 “Funding the wonderful,” Crowdcube, 19 March 2019, https://www.crowdcube.com/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
39 Unglue.it, https://unglue.it (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
40 Paula J. Hane, “New Crowdfunding Initiative to ‘Unglue’ Ebooks Launches in Alpha,” Information Today, Inc., 30 January 2012, http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/New-Crowdfunding-Initiative-to-Unglue-Ebooks-Launches-in-Alpha-80293.asp (accessed 17 January 2020); Corilee Christou, “Unglue.It Builds a Supply Chain for Free Ebooks,” Information Today, Inc., 19 April 2016, http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/Unglueit-Builds-a-Supply-Chain-for-Free-Ebooks-110480.asp (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
41 “What Is SCOAP³,” SCOAP³, https://scoap3.org/what-is-scoap3/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
42 Martin Borchert, and Vanessa Proudman, “Someone has to pay: The global sustainability coalition for open science services (SCOSS),” in Proceedings of the IATUL Conferences, 2018, https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/iatul/2018/collaboration/2 (accessed 17 January 2020); “SCOSS”, SCOSS, https://scoss.org/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
43 “Kotilava – Finnish Academic Journals towards Immediate Open Access,” Kotilava, http://www.kotilava.fi/ (accessed 17 January 2020); Journal.Fi, https://journal.fi/ (accessed 17 January 2020); Jyrki Ilva, “Looking for commitment: Finnish open access journals, infrastructure and funding,” Insights 31, (27 June 2018), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.414 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
44 LIBRARIA, “LIBRARIA: A Cooperative Approach to Scholarly Publishing in the Social Sciences”, 2019, http://libraria.cc/open-access-for-anthropology-a-model-for-universal-oa (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
45 Peter Suber, “The taxpayer argument for open access,” SPARC Open Access Newsletter 2003, https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4725013 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
46 Palie Smart et al., “Open Science and Open Innovation in a socio-political context: knowledge production for societal impact in an age of post-truth populism,” R&D Management 49, no. 3 (2019): 279–97, DOI: 10.1111/radm.12377 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
47 Suzan Koseoglu and Aras Bozkurt, “An exploratory literature review on open educational practices,” Distance Education 39, no. 4 (2 October 2018): 441–61, DOI: 10.1080/01587919.2018.1520042 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
48 Peter Kraker et al., “The Vienna Principles: A Vision for Scholarly Communication in the 21st Century,” Open Access Network Austria (OANA), 2016, https://viennaprinciples.org/v1/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
49 Toby Green, “Is open access affordable? Why current models do not work and why we need internet-era transformation of scholarly communications,” Learned Publishing 32, no. 1 (1 January 2019): 13–25, DOI: 10.1002/leap.1219 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
50 Green, “Is open access affordable?”.
Back to article
51 Annual Reviews, “Subscribe to Open”.
Back to article
52 “NOS-HS: The joint committee for Nordic research councils in the humanities and social sciences”, NOS-HS, https://www.aka.fi/en/nos-hs (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
53 “SciPost”, https://scipost.org/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
54 ICOLC. “Participating Consortia,” ICOLC, https://icolc.net/consortia (accessed 22 January 2020).
Back to article
55 David W. Lewis, “The 2.5% Commitment,” ScholarWorks, 2017, DOI: 10.7912/c2jd29 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
56 “Principles and Implementation,” Science Europe.
Back to article
57 Lewis, “The 2.5% Commitment”.
Back to article
58 “FAQs – SCOAP3,” SCOAP3 – Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics, 3, https://scoap3.org/faqs/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
59 Martin Paul Eve on Twitter: “The final grant report for the Open Library of Humanities has now been filed. As of the last few months we’ve been funded entirely by our LPS model, not grants. Our continued existence is due to our library members. We’ve shown it can work. We now need others to adopt this model.” Twitter, 30 October 2019, https://twitter.com/martin_eve/status/1189497007448252417 (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
60 Sarah Rouhi, “‘Flipping’ to (more) open when you’re already open”, The Official PLOS Blog (blog), 25 October 2019, https://blogs.plos.org/plos/2019/10/flipping-to-more-open-when-youre-already-open/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
61 Kaitlin Mulhere, “Journals and Money at Risk,” Inside Higher Ed, 1 February 2015, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/02/swets-bankruptcy-will-cost-libraries-time-money (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
62 Roger C. Schonfeld, “Reflections on ‘Elsevier Acquires Bepress’,” Ithaka S+R (blog), 7 August 2017, https://sr.ithaka.org/blog/reflections-on-elsevier-acquires-bepress/ (accessed 17 January 2020).
Back to article
63 Marcel Knöchelmann, “Knowledge Unlatched”.
Back to article
64 OLH, “Frequently Asked Questions”.
Back to article

Open Access eXchange (OAeX): an economic model and platform for fundraising open scholarship services

Abstract

Paradigm

My account