Open Access; at what cost?

Internet Health 2003;1:8

Vinod Scaria

   Open Access- the buzzword seems to be attractive and interesting indeed. Getting things for free is something irresistible, but as in all those killer advertisements that run on our televisions, the notice in fine print takes the charm away. In an attempt to create freely accessible medical literature, I am afraid, something is going wrong somewhere.

First of all, charging a researcher an exorbitant fee for publishing his works does not seem to be so attractive. [At least for the developing world] The people behind the open Access Initiatives need to keep in mind $1500 is still mind boggling to a researcher from the developing world [and that is almost equal to the yearly pay of an average researcher in many developing countries]. Most often the research is funded from one’s own pocket, out of motivation and dedication to the science [possibly unheard in the western world]. This would mean what meager research these talented researchers bring out would have to meet closed doors when it comes to publication. Almost 25% of all researchers live in the developing countries, but they publish less than 3% of the total scientific articles published [1]. A non peer reviewed article [2] on the acceptance rates of papers submitted to BMJ pointed out that The acceptance rate for the period 1989-1998 was 7.9 for developing and 16.7% for developed countries (x2=137.4, p. 001). In other words, articles from developed countries were 2.1 (95% CI 1.8-2.4) times as likely to have their articles accepted. The economic bias that would emerge in the new publishing scenario would only worsen this situation. Secondly researchers from the developing countries have not been taken into confidence. The Budapest open access Initiative signatory list speaks for it[ [LINKOUT]  & [LINKOUT]]. I am afraid that the researchers/organizations of the developing world are severely kept away [possibly not informed] from the initiative. I am also afraid that the high cost of publication [with the already rising costs and sophistication of research] would in turn promote ‘safari research’ in a big way, thus depriving the researchers of the third world their last drop of self-esteem.

I am afraid that the proposed fee waiver for researchers who cannot afford would turn out to be a marketing trick [eventually destabilizing the present model and leaving it into the hands of a few newly emerging monopolies]. The grants and funds that support the new publication model would not be eternal. This would mean someday when the grants are over, the amount of the fee waived and the number of papers for which the fee is waived will solely depend upon the economic motives [as profit] rather than scholarship

The new policy would threaten the existence of smaller journals. I would add that the new initiative would be the most harmful to journals published from the developing countries. The journals published in developing countries rely on the small profit [most of them cost about $4 per issue compared to the cost of single articles as high as $16per article which I tried to access yesterday  [LINKOUT] , another clear evidence that we are thinking in the opposite direction. The Initiative and the economic framework that would emerge would eventually strip these journals of what little profit (?) they generate. The present line of thought should be directed on as to publish journals cost effectively. I also share the disbelief that even with a $9million grant, they [the PLoS] are charging $ 1500 per article.

 I don’t think the present publishing model is too bad to be discarded. What is essentially needed is the optimization of cost of publishing and creation of a differential pricing system/access [which institutes in developed countries would possibly object at any cost]. I am really amazed by the hue and cry raised by the people in developed countries on the prices of journals. It seems that they are rather unhappy that they are not buying more , which would rather be perceived as sadistic to many in the developing world. I personally know of many medical libraries in developing countries in Africa and Asia who have not bought a SINGLE foreign Medical journal last year due to lack of funds. The propounders of the so-called Open access would jump up to say “that is exactly what we are trying to change”. And I would rather say there is still hope in the existing system to create a change, without leaving anything in fine print.

a)      Differential access is not something new or hard to implement on the Internet. Researchers from developing countries could access the literature free/ at a reasonable cost 

b) Differential pricing: Publishers could agree to provide journals to developing countries at a subsidized cost, recovering the damage by differentially pricing journals in developed countries [which institutes in developed countries would possibly object at any cost] 

c) Provide free electronic archives through PubMedCentral or any other open archive. d) Provide free electronic access to all [like the BMJ] 

What I would like to emphasize here is that there are no ethical guidelines that guide journal publication. The only motive that guides one to publish a journal is PROFIT. There has been no attempt to mobilize one’s own resources to free scholastic communication. I had always wondered why anybody would start a Journal at BioMedCentral [LINKOUT] . Though the basic services like peer review and editing are done free of cost, and a fee is charged for each article published, the Journal eternally belongs to BioMedCentral [LINKOUT]  .Even at the lowest cost of as institutional membership at BioMedCentral which costs $ 1550 per annum, [LINKOUT]  one could get the web space, domain and designed pages at a fraction of that cost. For institutions, which own websites, the publication cost can be still be lowered.

So we can formulate possible alternative strategies to provide open access literature:

a) Research institutions publish their research on their websites in open access format. 

b) Creation of a framework for such publications to ensure uniformity &interoperability [RDF or XML based meta data could be possibly used] 

c) Creation of a framework for Online Open peer review with utilization of multiple modalities like Mailing Lists, Wikis etc]*, which would in turn lead to direct publication by the author which would be peer reviewed and published by the author himself, and at the same time ensuring interoperability. 

d) Promotions of alternative methods like Net Prints and Research archives and creation of frameworks for peer review and publication.

I am not totally against the Open Access Initiatives, but afraid at the fact that the Open access initiatives are treading the wrong way. Alternative methods that would take into confidence everybody involved is the need of the day. I am also of the opinion that the Initiatives should go further and promote research and formulate guidelines/frameworks rather than directly intervene in a competitive field and potentially destabilize the system. Technology should open up opportunities in fulfilling this dream. And I am optimistic that new thoughts would emerge to guide us through the dark.

REFERENCES

1) LaPorte RE. Internet server with targeted access would cure information deficiency in developing countries. BMJ;314:980 

2) Scientific Colonialism and Safari ResearchBenjamin Acosta-Cazares Edmund Browne Ronald E. LaPorte Dieter Neuvians ,Kenneth Rochel de Camargo Roberto Tapia Yang Ze clinmed/2000010008v1 (January 13, 2000) 

3) *The Author is working on formulating such a framework. Peer Review on the authors open Journal utilizes Discussion Lists and is in the process of utilizing the Wiki technology . [LINKOUT] 

Competing interests:   The author owns VirtualMed and MedLib, and publishes an open peer reviewed-open access journal ‘Health library Online’ on the Medlib Website. He is also working towards creation of a framework for direct publication and open peer review of scholastic communication.

Vinod Scaria is the founder Editor of Internet Health and Asian Student Medical Journal.He has written a number of articles on this topic and regularly writes in many newspapers and other publications.He is a consultant to many Indian Medical websites, and he maintains MedLib http://www.medlib.netfirms.com, the largest index of online Medical Libraries.He is also the founder of VirtualMed .

E-Mail: vinodscaria@yahoo.co.in 

© Copyright of articles belongs to the respective authors. Verbatim copying, redistribution and storage of this article permitted provided no restrictions are imposed on the access and a hyperlink to the original article in Internet Health maintained. The author would be interested in critical appraisal of this article. Please contact him at the correspondence e-mail provided. All opinion stated in this article are exclusively that of the author(s). Internet Health takes no responsibility of articles published. Please read carefully the Terms and Conditions of use and disclaimer notice .Information in Internet health is not a substitute for your Physician's advice.