The Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA) 2024 Conference, held in Lisbon from September 16-18, gathered key voices from the scholarly publishing community to discuss the evolving landscape of open access (OA). One of the most critical themes throughout the event was understanding the real-world return on investment (ROI) of OA publishing and how it benefits various stakeholders, including researchers, funders, and publishers. The discussions touched on both financial returns and the broader impact on society and research equity, exploring how OA publishing can democratize knowledge while ensuring sustainability.
Exploring ROI in Open Access
One of the key sessions, Assessing Real-World ROI: Tracing the Value of Open Access Publishing, featured a panel of experts, including Tasha Mellins-Cohen from COUNTER, Blessing Mawire from Research4Life and CLIR, Rhodri Jackson from Oxford University Press, and Manisha Bolina from BMJ Impact Analytics. Moderated by Hannah Heckner-Swain from Silverchair, the session explored the financial and practical implications of OA. It tackled the importance of looking beyond traditional citation metrics to assess the broader societal impact, such as increased public engagement and global research equity.
Rhodri Jackson of Oxford University Press (OUP) highlighted the transformative role that transformative agreements (TAs) have played in increasing open access (OA) publishing. In 2020, only 25% of OUP’s articles were published as OA, but by 2023, this number had risen significantly to 55%. The volume of OA articles increased from around 1,500 in 2020 to over 6,000 by 2023, showcasing the substantial impact these agreements have had on accelerating OA adoption.
Beyond the increase in OA uptake, transformative agreements have also led to a notable expansion in subject diversity within OA publishing. Prior to the agreements in 2020, 63% of OUP UK OA content came from the sciences, while only 12% was from the humanities and social sciences (HUMSOC). By 2023, the share of HUMSOC articles had grown to 31%, while science articles decreased to 33%, demonstrating a more balanced representation of subjects. This shift reflects how transformative agreements have enabled broader participation across disciplines, particularly in fields like law and the humanities, which had previously been underrepresented in OA publishing.
Jackson also discussed the positive impact of OA on altmetric scores, which measure the online attention that articles receive through social media, news outlets, and other platforms. In many fields, OA articles performed significantly better in terms of altmetric engagement than their non-OA counterparts. For example, in the field of medicine, full OA articles achieved an altmetric score of 49.95 in 2023, compared to 16.83 for hybrid non-OA articles. Similarly, in the social sciences, OA articles garnered an altmetric score of 21.17, while non-OA articles scored only 10.93. These numbers highlight the increased visibility and engagement that OA articles typically enjoy. However, in some fields, such as life sciences, OA articles saw a slight decline in altmetric scores compared to non-OA articles, with OA articles scoring 13.11 versus their non-OA counterparts.
Real-World Impact Beyond Metrics
Manisha Bolina from BMJ Impact Analytics emphasized that open access (OA) extends beyond simple metrics such as article downloads and views. One of the most profound effects of OA is its impact on health policy and clinical guidelines. From 2013 to 2023, over 206,000 open access articles were funded by top medical funders and government organizations. These publications, supported by entities such as the Wellcome Trust, the European Commission, and the National Institutes of Health, have played a critical role in influencing healthcare practices and informing clinical guidelines worldwide.
The decade-long support from these major funders has contributed to over 1.3 million OA articles being cited in health policy and clinical guidelines across 146 countries, showcasing the global reach of this research. In terms of geographical impact, the United States leads with over 416,000 citations, followed closely by intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) and the United Kingdom. Other significant contributors include Germany, Canada, and Australia. This highlights the international scope of OA and its essential role in disseminating research findings that directly influence patient care and health outcomes.
The real-world value of OA research is further underscored by its integration into critical areas of healthcare. Research cited in clinical guidelines often focuses on priority areas such as cancer treatment, public health policy, and infectious disease management. OA’s contribution to these fields is not just about making articles more accessible, but about facilitating rapid, evidence-based responses to global health challenges.
OA publishing has made a profound difference by enabling the dissemination of research that is immediately actionable. From 2015 to 2023, we saw a steady increase in publications funded by major organizations, with notable peaks in the years following significant global health events, demonstrating OA’s role in addressing emerging healthcare needs. This long-term trend shows how open access has become indispensable for ensuring that cutting-edge research is available to policymakers, clinicians, and the public.
COUNTER Metrics: The Gold Standard for Measuring OA Impact
Tasha Mellins-Cohen of COUNTER emphasized the crucial role that standardized metrics play in demonstrating the effectiveness of open access. COUNTER is a community-driven standard that provides trustworthy and comparable data across platforms, making it easier for libraries, consortia, and publishers to track the usage of OA articles and to assess trends over time. The development of COUNTER metrics has been a progressive effort, with the inclusion of OA tracking starting in Release 4 in 2014 and global OA reporting being enabled by Release 5 in 2019. The latest version, Release 5.1, is specifically optimized for OA and allows for even more detailed reporting.
COUNTER’s open and transparent methodology provides a reliable way to measure the impact of OA. One key advantage is its ability to compare “like with like,” ensuring that OA articles can be measured against subscription-based content in terms of usage. This comparative analysis helps prove that OA often leads to higher usage, which is a critical metric for determining the return on investment (ROI) for open access models. For instance, COUNTER metrics allow stakeholders to evaluate the cost per download for articles, which is essential for demonstrating the financial viability of OA publishing.
Moreover, COUNTER metrics provide a comprehensive approach to measuring research impact. Beyond traditional citations—which can be slow to accrue—COUNTER tracks altmetrics, which reflect the immediate attention that articles receive via social media, news outlets, and other digital platforms. This combination of metrics offers a balanced view of both short-term engagement and long-term academic impact, ensuring that OA’s value can be assessed from multiple angles.
COUNTER also provides a detailed system for global reporting, which helps institutions understand both local and worldwide usage of their OA content. Institutional reports show usage attributed to specific organizations, while global reports reveal how widely research is accessed beyond institutional borders. This data is critical for stakeholders, particularly funders, who need to demonstrate the broader reach and influence of the research they support. COUNTER’s standardized reporting system enables accurate tracking of usage, ensuring that the value of OA is visible and comparable across the scholarly publishing ecosystem.
From showcasing real-world impact through policy citations and patient care to emphasizing the importance of standardized metrics like COUNTER, these discussions underscore the need for the community to invest not only in the infrastructure and technology that support OA but also in the metrics that help demonstrate its value. With $1.75 billion invested annually in global open access publishing, it is crucial for stakeholders to adopt reliable, transparent, and standardized metrics like COUNTER to evaluate usage, impact, and ROI effectively. The future of OA depends on this continued focus on demonstrating its societal and economic benefits while ensuring that scholarly publishing remains equitable and accessible to all.
– by Tony Alves
