Net benefit of scholarly communication and a new framework for analyzing the pros and cons of Open Access

Abstract

<p indent="0mm">Open Access has been in full swing around the world, with 1251434 academic papers published Open Access in 2021 <sc>(or 45.55%</sc> of 2747405 totally published) and indexed in the Science Citation Index Expanded database. Open Access is surpassing the subscription publication model globally and continues to grow rapidly. China has been actively participating in the global Open Access initiatives since 2003, as landmarked by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the National Natural Science Foundation of China signing the <italic>Berlin Declaration</italic> on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities, followed by mandating China’s Open Access policies in 2014. Open Science was written into <italic>the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Progress of Science and Technology</italic> (amended in December 2021) for the first time. Even though the great progress achieved, there still exist numerous debates, doubts and misunderstandings on the Open Access, especially the pros and cons from the economic aspect. This paper defines a new concept: The net benefit of scholarly communication (NBSC), which equals the benefit of scholarly communication (BSC) minus the cost of scholarly communication (CSC). Based on this concept, a new framework for analyzing the pros and cons of Open Access is proposed. We hope Open Access bring ΔNBSC&gt;0, which can happen in four paths: (1) ΔBSC&gt;0 and ΔCSC&lt;0, Open Access adds BSC and saves CSC; (2) ΔBSC=0 and ΔCSC&lt;0, BSC keeps no change and CSC gets saved; (3) ΔBSC&gt;0 and ΔCSC=0, BSC gets added and CSC keeps no change; and <sc>(4) ΔBSC&gt;0,</sc> ΔCSC&gt;0, however, ΔBSC–ΔCSC&gt;0, both BSC and CSC get added, but ΔBSC&gt;ΔCSC. Each path will contribute a net benefit to NBSC and is positive. Using this new framework, we briefly analyzed whether China should embrace Open Access. Open Access may add both the BSC and CSC to China, however, if the increment of BSC is expected to surpass the increment of CSC, i.e., as that in Path 4, China shall take the decision to embrace Open Access. Some specific policy-making suggestions are provided about the Open Access policy in China including, (1) funding agencies, universities and research institutes to issue organizational level Open Access mandates with proper Rights Retention Strategy; (2) the central government to issue the national level Open Access mandates to thesis and dissertations; (3) to build interdisciplinary and multilingual international high-end scholarly communication platforms; and (4) to adopt the Transformative Agreements (TAs) to save the cost of scholarly communication as much as possible.