Open Access business models for journals
Intro Video on the Funding of Open Access Articles Source: Becklas Dorow, C., Hauss, J. (2026). Funding Open Access Articles – What Are the Options?. Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB), open-access.network. https://doi.org/10.5446/73596 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM THIS ARTICLE 1 There are various business and funding models for open access journals. 2 Three basic types of funding models can be distinguished: APC-based, institutional, and consortial models. 3 Within the framework of the open access transformation, efficient, transparent, and fair models should preferably be used. Journal Costs Open access means free access to and reuse of scientific information. Because open access journals can be accessed by readers free of charge, the production costs ( Borrego 2023 ) cannot be recovered through subscriptions but rather must be funded through alternative business models. The serials crisis and the associated large profits earned by scholarly publishers from public funds were key reasons for the emergence of the open access movement . When discussing business models, it is therefore meaningful to distinguish between covering costs and making a profit, especially in cases where it is a matter of reallocating costs for the purpose of converting journals to open access . In all cases, the operating and personnel costs required to receive, manage, publish, and distribute works must be financed. In addition, there are infrastructural costs, for example for server capacities and websites. Added to this are new cost demands for the publication of research data or multimedia content. In the area of gold open access , there are a number of different business models ( Keller, 2017 ; Russell, 2019 ; Waidlein et al., 2021 ). Basically, open access journals can be financed through article processing charges ( APCs ), by institutions, or by consortia. Models that manage entirely without APCs are referred to as diamond open access . Practical Tip Here you can find the slides of the open access talk Open-Access-Finanzierung: Fragen und Probleme (Funding Open Access: Issues and Problems). Source: based on Oberländer, A. (2020). Open Access – Es ist nicht alles Gold, was glänzt. In: Open Science. Von Daten zu Publikationen. Zenodo. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4018594 ( CC BY 4.0 International ) Alternative Business Models for Open Access Publications Source: Strauß, H., Rücknagel, J., & Hauss, J. (2022). Alternative Geschäftsmodelle für Open-Access-Publikationen. https://doi.org/10.5446/60353 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) Author-Pays Model Article Processing Charges (APCs) The central feature of the author-pays model is that in the interval between manuscript acceptance and article publication, APCs are payable by the authors or their institutions. The availability of funds for and the acceptance of such payments depends also on the publication culture of the discipline in question. Other factors include access to third-party funding and the authors’ professional status. APCs are therefore often viewed critically . It is feared that they create access barriers, especially for authors from countries in the Global South or for early career researchers. On the other hand, many commercial open access journals offer fee waivers in individual cases (e.g. for authors from low- and medium-income countries; Lawson, 2015) and pass on these costs to APC-paying authors. Many research funding organisations require that publications resulting from the projects they fund be published open access; in return, they cover the cost of APCs. However, the spread of APC models may lead to a burden on research budgets. Publication Funds Publication funds are one instrument for the institutional support of authors in paying APCs. Many universities and non-university research organisations have such publication funds, from which they pay APCs on their authors’ behalf ( Bruch et al., 2014 ; see the overview in the Open Access Directory). In many cases, funds earmarked for the procurement of literature, and especially for journal subscriptions, also flow into the publication funds. In this way, although the research organisations still pay for the publications, they are now freely accessible worldwide. In Germany, the establishment of publication funds has long been associated with institutional funding programmes of the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft , DFG) . Since 2020, higher education institutions and non-university research organisations can apply for a fixed allowance for the open access publication of research results from the realigned DFG funding programme Open Access Publication Funding . With this partial funding of individual publications, the operation of publication funds continues to be supported. Subsidies for open access publication fees are possible inter alia for journal articles, including articles published under transformative agreements such as those negotiated by Projekt Deal . Some German federal states, for example Schleswig-Holstein (until 2024), provide state support for open access by making funding available for publication funds. Furthermore, agreements concluded between open access publishers and research organisations can regulate the payment of APCs and possible discounts. Hybrid Journals: Open Access as an Exception Fee-based open access options for individual articles in subscription journals (which are then often known as hybrid journals ) are a very controversial business model,as the journal not only earns revenue from subscriptions but also from articles that are made open access against payment of APCs. The costs per article are generally much higher than in the case of gold open access journals, although revenue is obtained from two sources. Often referred to as double dipping , this double financing is practised mainly by commercial journals and applied to existing journals that are not earmarked for conversion to open access . Other reservations against hybrid models relate to the fact that they do not contribute to the transformation of the scholarly publishing market to open access, that costing is not transparent, and that individual open access articles in closed access journals do not achieve adequate visibility.In negotiations with publishers (e.g. in the case of individual subscriptions, but also in the case of national licences and consortial models), public institutions usually urge publishers to take measures to counter double dipping, for example by offsetting APCs for open access articles against subscription fees. In Germany, the DEAL Konsortium has concluded transformative agreements with the scholarly publishers Springer Nature, Wiley, and Elsevier to effectively address this problem. The author-pays model is now widespread and is often erroneously used as a synonym for open access business models. However, even before the emergence of the open access movement, journals required their authors to contribute to the financing. Conversely, very many open access journals do not charge their authors any fees. Of the 20,949 journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) as of August 2025, 13,824 did not levy any article processing charges ( APCs ). Institutional Funding Business models that rely on direct payments by authors create a large administrative burden. Moreover, it is feared that APCs give rise to unequal prerequisites for access to publishing opportunities. Hence the interest in models that rely directly on funding by institutions. Institutions can, for example, provide publishing services or fund open access journals completely, so that other authors also benefit. One traditional variant is the (partial) funding of publications via professional associations or other institutions of a discipline. Some professional associations traditionally fund their publishing activities from membership fees. Thus, their members are usually both users and authors of the articles published, so that the costs of publishing open access are shared by both groups. One example of a community-funded journal is Documenta Mathematica , which was founded by the Deutsche Mathematiker-Vereinigung (German Mathematical Society). The digital edition is open access; a print edition is available for a small fee. According to the society, the costs of producing the journal are low and are covered mainly by the society. Ultimately, many open access journals rely on the commitment of those involved, who either work on the journal as part of their employment or on a voluntary basis. Support by staff, and possibly the assumption of material costs, can be regarded as an important form of institutional support. Furthermore, nowadays, many academic institutions invest in their own publishing services, for example platforms and services for the production of journals with the help of the open source software Open Journal Systems (OJS) . In this case, the institution subsidises the costs of making the content available and may be responsible for parts of the publishing process. Practical Tips The OA Journals Toolkit provides practice-oriented tips for setting up new open access journals. In addition, the guides published [MG1] [PSM2] by the project Scholar-led Plus offer valuable support in further developing and professionalising scholar-led publishing activities at your institution and making them sustainable in the long term. Since May 2025, these offerings have been supplemented by the Servicestelle Diamond Open Access (SeDOA) . As a DFG-funded project, SeDOA is taking a coordinating role with the aim of sustainably increasing the efficiency of diamond open access (DOA) publishing in Germany through the optimisation of hitherto decentralised services, the centralised provision of relevant information, and the targeted promotion of structural and technical innovations Publishing Open Access Journals Find an introduction here. Editorial process at Open Journal Systems (OJS) Quelle: OJS-net.de Community Funding: Consortial Funding, Membership Models, and Crowdfunding Source: Wrzesinski, M. (2023). Nachhaltige Finanzierung und Organisation von Zeitschriften. https://doi.org/ 10.5446/62588 ( CC BY 3.0 DE ) KOALA – Establishing, Expanding and Anchoring Consortial Open Access Solutions The KOALA consortial model enables sustainable funding for diamond open access publications. KOALA creates bundles of thematically focused journals, which are then offered to academic institutions – especially libraries and research institutions – for community funding. The level of the contributions depends on the size and type of the institution, the number of academic staff members, and the number of students. As soon as the pledging target for a journal bundle has been reached, the titles it contains are securely funded and made freely accessible for a period of 3 years. Regular Operations at the TIB Hanover The Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology University Library ( TIB ) acts as a central service provider and coordinator for the KOALA model and operates the service for journals in its subject range (natural sciences and engineering) as part of its regular operations. It is responsible for hosting, consortial management, and communication with the publishers and partner institutions. This organisational framework guarantees stable, transparent, and fair funding of open access journals in the STEM fields. KOALA at the SLUB Dresden Since 2024, the KOALA model is also being piloted at the Saxon State and University Library Dresden (SLUB). Under the name KOALA-SLUB , several subject-specific journal bundles have been established. The SLUB Dresden is responsible for organising the KOALA funding solution – a role equivalent to that of the TIB Hanover. OLEcon Open Library Economics (OLEcon ) supports diamond open access journals of economics by organising consortial co-funding for journals that are either already open access, that are just getting started , or that want to flip (i.e. convert from a subscription model to open access) The OLEcon journal bundle is growing steadily. Journals can apply for funding within the framework of regular calls for applications. Already funded journals are evaluated after 3 years. In addition to the desired institutional participation, OLEcon is establishing a success monitoring system to ensure that the consortium can operate in the most stable and sustainable way possible. edu_consort_oa The project network edu_consort_oa aims to sustainably fund open access publications in educational science, educational research, and subject didactics through crowdfunding and consortial funding. In edu_consort_oa, libraries can participate in annual funding rounds for the financing of open access monographs and diamond open access journals. At present, a package of around 20 e-books, and – for the first time – up to five diamond open access journals (individually, not as part of a package) per year are currently funded for a period of 2 years. An overview of the funded e-books can be found on the Education Research Portal (Fachportal Pädagogik) website. All funded titles can be accessed via peDOCS and the German Education Index (FIS Bildung Literaturdatenbank ). OACIP The Open Access Community Investment Program (OACIP) aims to support non-commercial diamond open access journals in the long term through a consortial funding model. Academic institutions can provided targeted support for quality assured publications, which are evaluated based on standardised transparency and sustainability criteria. The funding period is 3 years. Institutions can either co-fund all the journals or individual journals in the OACIP bundle. A further option is to contribute to the OACIP General Fund, which is used to fill any funding gaps at the OACIP journals. In 2024, OACIP funded eight journals from the STEM fields and the humanities and social sciences. SCOAP³ (Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics) SCOAP³ is an international consortium dedicated to funding open access in high-energy physics. It aims to make high-energy physics articles freely accessible worldwide – without article processing charges for authors. The funding is provided by over 3,000 libraries, research performing organisations, and research funding organisations from over 40 countries. SCOAP³ is coordinated by CERN (the European Organisation for Nuclear Research) in collaboration with scholarly publishers. The partners’ contributions are based on their publication output and are centrally administered. SCOAP³ transforms existing subscription models into a community-funded open access model. In the current funding phase (2025–2027), 11 high-energy physics journals are freely accessible worldwide. Community funding models for open access publications eliminate both article processing charges ( APCs ) and subscription fees ( diamond open access ). To enable researchers to publish their works free of charge, academic institutions join forces and share the costs. Various approaches exist for this. They include consortial funding, membership models, and crowdfunding. These models cannot always be clearly distinguished from one another. However, each model has certain basic characteristics. Consortial funding is a collaborative model in which several academic institutions – typically libraries, higher education institutions, or research funding organisations – jointly fund open access journals, books, or infrastructures ( Reinsfelder & Pike, 2018 ). Examples include KOALA , OLEcon , and Scoap3 . Membership models, for example the Open Library of Humanities (OLH) , enable academic institutions to fund the infrastructure, editorial work, quality assurance, and long-term archiving of diamond open access journals through a fixed annual membership fee. In the case of crowdfunding, a specific project – for example certain journal or book packages – is usually put out to tender. One well-known platform for the crowdfunding of open access publications is Knowledge Unlatched . Crowdfunding campaigns usually have a time limit. If the funding target is reached, the project can be realized. Although crowdfunding is often project related, many initiatives aim to create longer-term structures. Successful crowdfunding can, for example, lay the foundations for a membership funding model or consortial funding. Another model is Subscribe to Open (S2O) , in which open access journals are funded through existing subscriptions. Each year, libraries and other institutions are invited to renew their subscriptions on the same conditions as before, with the aim of making the content of the journal freely accessible for everyone. If the funding target is achieved, the entire volume is published in open access. If the target is not reached, access remains restricted as before. S2O thus offers a gentle transition to open access without structural changes for libraries or additional costs for researchers. Praxistipp Der Diamond Funding Navigator von der TIB bündelt Angebote für die kollektive Finanzierung von Diamond-Open-Access-Publikationen weltweit - laufende und zurückliegende. Dies soll insbesondere Personen, die in der Literaturerwerbung und Lizenzierung tätig sind, sowie Fachreferent:innen dabei unterstützen, passende Finanzierungsangebote zu finden. Further Funding Options Another way of funding open access publications is the parallel sale of content in separate (print) editions. In the area of digital publishing, there have been various attempts to implement the so-called freemium model, where the fee-based variant provides more benefits than the cost-free variant. For example, this may involve making the HTML version of an article freely available to all Internet users but making the premium version in PDF format accessible only to subscribers. One example is the OpenEdition Freemium programme for the development of open access publishing in the humanities and social sciences. OpenEdition OpenEdition is a digital publishing platform that specialises in the humanities and social sciences. It was established in France and is supported by the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS). OpenEdition offers researchers and institutions infrastructure and services for publishing scientific content open access and making it visible. The platform comprises four key offerings: OpenEdition Journals (scholarly journals) OpenEdition Books (monographs) Hypothèses (scholarly blogs) Calenda (scholarly event calendar) OpenEdition aims to promote free access to high-quality scientific information and to provide a sustainable, non-commercial publishing environment for the academic community. Transformation und Transparency In the area of business models, the transformation of a scholarly journals landscape shaped by subscriptions to a landscape oriented mainly towards open access is very challenging. In Germany, the DEAL Konsortium is trying to contribute to the transformation of journals by negotiating transformative agreements with an open access component ( publish and read ). Whereas it appears to be possible to convert journals completely to open access while covering operational costs, the high fees charged under the author-pays model may lead to an increase in research organisations’ overall costs (Mittermaier, 2025). With ESAC (Efficiency and Standards for Article Charges) , an international initiative has been established that aims to ensure that the processing of publication costs within the framework of transformative agreements is efficient and transparent. References Borrego, A. (2023). Article processing charges for open access journal publishing: A review. Learned Publishing: Volume 36 (3), 359-378. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1558 Bruch, C., Fournier, J., & Pampel, H. (2014). Open-Access-Publikationsfonds: Eine Handreichung (Arbeitsgruppe Open Access der Schwerpunktinitiative Digitale Information der Allianz der deutschen Wissenschaftsorganisationen, Ed.). https://doi.org/10.2312/allianzoa.006 Keller, A. (2017). Finanzierungsmodelle für Open-Access-Zeitschriften. Bibliothek Forschung und Praxis, 41(1), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1515/bfp-2017-0012 Lawson, S. (2015). Fee waivers for open access journals. Publications, 3(3), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications3030155 Mittermaier, B. (2025). Transformationsverträge sind eine Sackgasse. O-Bib. Das Offene Bibliotheksjournal, 12(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.5282/o-bib/6117 Reinsfelder, T. L., & Pike, C. A. (2018). Using library funds to support open access publishing through crowdfunding: Going beyond article processing charges. Collection Management, 48(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/01462679.2017.1415826 (Author’s accepted manuscript: https://hdl.handle.net/1805/15059 ) Russell, B. (2019, October 23). Guest post — The future of open access business models: APCs are not the only way. The Scholarly Kitchen Blog. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/10/23/guest-post-the-future-of-open-access-business-models-apcs-are-not-the-only-way/ Waidlein, N., Wrzesinski, M., Dubois, F., & Katzenbach, C. (2021). Working with budget and funding options to make open access journals sustainable (HIIG Discussion Paper No. 2021–1). HIIG. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4558790 Links for Further Reading Bickel, L., Clasen, N., & Flohr, R. (2019, November 13). Open-Access-Tage 2019: Geschäftsmodelle und ihre finanziellen Folgen für die Open-Access-Transformation. ZBW MediaTalk. https://www.zbw-mediatalk.eu/de/2019/11/open-access-tage-2019-geschaeftsmodelle-und-ihre-finanziellen-folgen-fuer-die-open-access-transformation/ Björk, B.-C., & Korkeamäki, T. (2020). Adoption of the open access business model in scientific journal publishing: A cross-disciplinary study. College & Research Libraries, 81(7). https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.81.7.1080 Bosman, J. & Kramer, B. (2018, Mai 16). Linking impact factor to ‘open access’ charges creates more inequality in academic publishing. Times Higher Education Blog. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/linking-impact-factor-open-access-charges-creates-more-inequality-academic-publishing Budzinski, O., Grebel, T., Wolling, J., & Zhang, X. (2020). Drivers of article processing charges in open access. Scientometrics, 124(3), 2185–2206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03578-3 Demeter, M., & Istratii, R. (2020). Scrutinising what open access journals mean for global inequalities. Publishing Research Quarterly, 36(4), 505–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-020-09771-9 . Frick, C., & Kaier, C. (2020). Publikationskosten für Zeitschriftenartikel abseits von Open-Access-Publikationsfonds – Lost in Transformation? o-bib – das offene Bibliotheksjournal, 7(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5282/o-bib/5586 Ginsparg , P. (2021). Lessons from arXiv’s 30 years of information sharing. Nature Review Physics, 3, 602–603. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00360-z Grossmann, A., & Brembs, B. (2021). Current market rates for scholarly publishing services. F1000Research, 10. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.27468.2 Jahn, N., & Tullney, M. (2016). A study of institutional spending on open access publication fees in Germany. PeerJ 4. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2323 Kändler, U., & Tullney, M. (2019, October 15). Jenseits von APC: Kriterien für Geschäftsmodelle. Open-Access-Tage 2019, Hannover. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3490914 Michael, A. (2020, August 27). Sustainable open access – what’s next? The Scholarly Kitchen Blog. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2020/08/27/sustainable-open-access-whats-next/ Oberländer, A., & Dreher, L. (2019, September 30). Jenseits von APC: Überblick über alternative Open-Access-Modelle. Open-Access-Tage 2019, Hannover. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3490737 Schönfelder, N. (2018). APCs—Mirroring the impact factor or legacy of the subscription-based model? Bielefeld University. https://doi.org/10.4119/UNIBI/2931061 Shamash, K. (2016). Article processing charges (APCs) and subscriptions: Monitoring open access costs. Jisc. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/apc-and-subscriptions-report.pdf Tautz, D., Holzer, A., Schmidt, K. M., Buchner, J., Grötschel, M. & Jurburg, S. (2025). Ein neues Verfahren zur direkten Finanzierung und Evaluation wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften. Diskussion Nr. 38, Halle (Saale): Nationale Akademie der Wissenschaften Leopoldina. https://doi.org/10.26164/leopoldina_03_01261 Tobschall, E. (2021, October 27). ArXiv ist 30! TIB-Blog. https://blogs.tib.eu/wp/tib/2021/10/27/arxiv-ist-30/...
