Abstract
Claims for Open Access are mostly underpinned with 
 a) science-related arguments (Open Access accelerates scientific communication)
 b) financial arguments (Open Access relieves the serials crisis), 
 c) social arguments (Open Access reduces the Digital Divide), 
 d) democracy-related arguments (Open Access facilitates participation)
 e) and socio-political arguments (Open Access levels disparities).
 
 Using sociological concepts and notions, this article analyses some of the assumptions mentioned above. It focuses strongly on Pierre Bourdieu's theory of (scientific) capital and its implications for the acceptance of Open Access, on Michel Foucault's discourse analysis and on the implications of Open Access for the concept of the Digital Divide. Bourdieu's theory of capital implies that the acceptance of Open Access depends on the logic of power and the accumulation of scientific capital. It does not depend on slogans derived from hagiographic self-perceptions of science (e.g. the acceleration of scientific communication) and scientists (e.g. their will to share their information freely). According to Bourdieu's theory, it is crucial for Open Access (and associated concepts like alternative impact metrics) how scientists perceive its potential influence on existing processes of capital accumulation and how Open Access will affect their demand for distinction. Concerning the Digital Divide concept, Foucault's discourse analysis suggests that Open Access may intensify disparities, scientocentrisms and ethnocentrisms. Additionally, several concepts from the philosophy of sciences (Karl Raimund Popper, Samuel Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend) and their implicit connection to the concept of Open Access are described in this paper.
Highlights
Tied to financial arguments are assumptions promising that open access will reduce the digital divide
Definitions of the digital divide indicate that opportunities to access relevant information are allocated unequally; the degree to which individuals secure these opportunities depend on social factors; and, this unequal distribution has significant social impacts: Whoever has access to relevant information secures better prospects relative to social, economic or health issues
If information is available freely, individuals usually separated from fee–based information take advantage of open access, in turn highlighting connections to theories of democracy
Summary
Open access is considered as a means to reduce social inequities, disparities and disadvantages. Seen through the prism of the arguments noted earlier, open access has a moral relevance and scope which goes far beyond the issues of scientific communication. Libraries pay licensing and subscription fees to offer scientists and their institutions access to relevant information. This access means access to the results of their colleagues. Scientists as consumers are largely not interested in changing this situation They have to pay neither for the consumption nor access to information. Bourdieu describes a field as “a universe encompassing all actors and institutions that create and disseminate art, literature or science This universe is like any other social universe, but follows more or less specific social rules. Scientific capital complements and dominates the other three types of capital
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
