SPARC

http://www.arl.org/sparc/publisher/incomemodels/guide2-1.shtml

Article Processing Fees

Article processing fees or publication charges—charging contributing authors or (more typically) their proxies fees to subsidize processing and publishing costs—are among the most frequently discussed supply-side business model components for open-access journals. Article processing fees are based on the premise that authors and their host institutions are direct beneficiaries of publication in a scholarly journal. Article fees thus distribute a journal’s publication costs across those individuals and institutions that benefit most directly from a paper’s publication.

Almost half of open-access journals levy publication fees, which can include submission charges, page charges, illustration fees, and surcharges for color, and such fees represent about 30% of the revenue generated by open-access journals.

In the digital environment, where document length and color illustration have a minimal effect on costs, author charges tend to be flat-rate fees reflecting article processing costs. Some publishers levy charges on all articles submitted, while others apply them only to articles accepted for publication. As both rejected and accepted articles incur costs (some publishers report that rejected articles cost more to process than accepted ones), charging submission fees at the outset may reduce the number of inappropriate submissions that a journal must handle.

The level at which a publisher sets such fees will typically reflect a combination of its pre-press processing costs, its policies as to which submissions will incur a charge, the number of submissions, and the extent to which the publication charges offset actual expenses (in some instances, the publication charge may be intended to completely cover the cost of processing; in others, the charge may only partially defray costs). The latter will depend both on the publisher’s cost structure (and hence the level of the fee) and on the receptivity to such fees in the journal’s field.

According to one survey, article processing fees are wholly or partially subsidized, either by a research grant (34%), a foundation grant (5%), or by the author’s host department (8%) or institutional library (27%). The payment of such fees out of an author’s personal funds appears relatively low—about 5% across all open access journals. Most publishers using the model make allowances for special situations (for example, individuals without a host institution or from less developed countries), assessing lower fees or waiving fees altogether when no institutional subsidy exists. Society publishers often discount article publication fees for members, or waive them entirely. The effect of these policies on fee revenue must be taken into account when calculating article processing fees. Appendix B describes a simple method for computing article processing fees for either submitted or accepted articles.

Several research funding agencies have policies supporting the payment of article fees, and a growing number of academic institutions have established funds to cover all or part of the article processing fee for articles submitted by affiliated authors to open-access publications. ,

2.1.1 Suitability

For journals in disciplines for which they have been a long-standing practice, article processing charges provide a logical model to support open-access dissemination. However, authors in disciplines without an established page-charge tradition (the case in much of the humanities and social sciences) may be expected to resist the practice.

As noted above, article processing fees seek to recover publication costs from the individuals and institutions that benefit most directly from a paper’s publication. While this is one of the advantages of such charges, it is also one of the principal objections to them when they are paid by the individual author seeking professional advancement. If a publisher attempts to transplant the model to a discipline without a tradition of page charges, positioning the charges as being paid by academic institutions, funding agencies, and other sponsors might prove less objectionable. Relying on such author proxies might allay author objections and dispel the perception of vanity publishing. This would also require encouraging sponsors of social scientific and humanistic research to implement policies to fund open-access publication that are similar to those in place for many scientific research funders.

2.1.2 Discretionary Open Access

Another variation on article processing charges makes payment of an article processing fee—and the availability of the article via Open Access—subject to the author’s discretion. Besides opening access to some of a journal’s content, this approach might provide a transition strategy, potentially even for disciplines in which article fees are not customary. Under this model, articles by non-participating authors may remain available only to subscribers or may be made available free online after an embargo period.

Some publishers realize substantial revenue from reprint sales to corporate buyers. Rather than assuming that such revenues would be lost under an open-access model, publishers that currently enjoy these revenues may want to reposition reprint fees as corporate sponsorships to support Open Access. Corporate purchasers may be willing to continue paying a fee where the publisher provides the reprint in a format that associates the sponsor with the publication’s identity and reputation.

2.1.3 Transitioning from a Subscription Model to Article Processing Fees

Subscription-based journals that wish to transition to open-access distribution funded by article processing fees may find themselves at an impasse: while they require a compensating income stream to offset the print journal cancellations that might result from open-access availability of the journal, some of their contributing authors may not have access to the funds necessary to pay for publication charges, and levying an article processing fee puts the journal at a competitive disadvantage. The severity of this problem may vary by discipline, depending on the policies of funders in a given field and by the practices of comparable journals.

An individual journal acting unilaterally to implement article processing fees might put itself at a competitive disadvantage in attracting author submissions. To mitigate this risk, a group of comparable journals—for example, society journals in a particular field or subfield, might transition to the new model in concert. The extent of this collective action might be limited to coordinating the timing of the transition, or it could include coordinated planning and marketing of the new approach. In addition to coordinated action with similar journals, the discretionary publication charge approach described below can help subscription-supported academic journals overcome these issues and manage financial risk in order to transition to open-access distribution funded largely or entirely by article processing fees.

In a transition to a discretionary model, a journal would lower its subscription price over time as the proportion of authors electing to pay the publication fee increases. In this way, a journal would be able to gain new revenue to support a transition to Open Access at a rate commensurate with the acceptance of publication charges by the journal’s author community. The transition period afforded by the model would also provide the time and context necessary to:

Appendix C provides a financial forecasting template for introducing discretionary article processing fees and illustrates how discretionary fees might be implemented over time. The financial forecasting model takes into account the issues that need to be considered when planning such a transition; namely:

Of course, other income sources may allow a journal to set its publication charges at a lower level. Conversely, where possible, setting the publication charge slightly higher than the actual per-article cost can provide an operating surplus to offset years in which the journal incurs an income shortfall due to the timing of subscription cancellations and/or lower than anticipated author participation.

While such a transition strategy is not without risk, the risk can be anticipated and mitigated, especially by established journals in disciplines with a strong tradition of publication or page charges.

2.1.4 Article Processing Fee Examples

Prominent examples of publishers relying entirely on article processing fees include:

The SHERPA/RoMEO site (http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/PaidOA.html) provides a list of publishers that offer optional paid Open Access. Selected examples are listed below. Peter Suber and Caroline Sutton have also analyzed society open-access journals, including those using article processing fees.

Discretionary Open Access Examples

From university presses:

From commercial publishers:

Several publishers have instituted models that package article processing fees in an institutional subscription: in some instances, a fixed fee covers all manuscript submissions from researchers at the subscribing institution; in other cases, the institutional membership fee is based on the number of article submissions.

Some publishers allow an institution’s subscription fees to cover discretionary open-access article publication charges for articles from authors affiliated with the institution. Examples of this approach include:

Some society journals waive article processing fees for members of the society; for example:

When commenting on this page, please detail your experience with the model in question. The comment area is moderated and reserved for evidence- or experience-based discussion and requests for support in experimenting with different approaches.