On how open access improves accessibility to ecological science: does it?

Recently, I attended (if virtually) the Annual Meeting of the British Ecological Society (BES), termed this year,“Festival of Ecology”. A really nice meeting, amazingly well organized and with an attractive program. Among a variety of activities which I was interested in, there was the obvious one: a visit to the BES stand where societal publications are traditionally exhibited.

Because of my interest in applied ecology, I was rapidly attracted to a new journal aimed at improving the linkage between science and solution of the increasing environmental issues related to anthropogenic activities. This is the 7th BES journal which states that the way in that scientific data and information may reach practitioners is, among several changes,  by including new article types (such as “Data Articles”) in a flexible format1. An additional aspect in this sense, is avoiding the paywall by making the journal fully open access.

This latter issue got me thinking. In fact I have  been ruminating on Open Access for some time now. One idea that comes to my mind, as an ecologist working and living in the developing world, is that many serious environmental issues related to an increasing human population (e.g., deforestation, desertification, waste accumulation) occur in the developing world. Paradoxically, open access is far from a solution to accessibility to science in these countries and regions. For starters, publication costs for open access are formidable for any one doing science on a shoe-string as many of us do. Let me illustrate: page charges for an article in say PLOS One is equivalent to 3 monthly salaries of junior, full-time researcher in Argentina today. And this is not the most expensive example.

Of course, the catch here is that, on the one hand, publications are not paid from your salary but from grants. But it takes no saying: research grants in the poorer parts of the world are also minimal and are ‘scaled” to GDP,etc. Then, there are waivers and discounts for papers submitted by authors (all authors?) from impoverished countries. The criteria here is based usually on a list that is provided by the publisher, which often has a grey zone in which several countries fall (say again as an example, Argentina). For these countries, that are not listed for automatic waivers, these do not exist straightforwardly. In any case, the waiver is applied if, a letter requesting it accompanies the submission of the manuscript (and usually not once it has been accepted). To me, this is not only not “automatic”, but in an even more unfriendly manner, it seems like begging. Pretty awful. 

Now, having a paywall is often described as strong limitation for those working in the less favored parts of the planet, to access science. This may be true to some extent although it again feels patronizing and to some degree ignores how much of world outside Europe and North America, exerts research. Some journals even boast of “opening” access of those issues published several years back (never mind the fact that scientists are keen mostly on the latest developments). With over 20 years’ experience in research in a developing country (yes, for ever “developing” Argentina!) I have some doubts which I wish to share here. 

Firstly, many publishers have special deals and arrangements with national or regional governments or even with given academic institutions where full access to their journals is provided for a global fee, which is clearly much less than an individual subscription or paper download.  I’m not sure how many publishers and countries reach these kinds of arrangements, by I’m personally aware of a few and this clearly allows for access to the latest science, if partially. Then, there is a variety of routes to access recent papers hidden behind the paywall.  Some, such as the website run by Alexandra Elbakyan are so popular that it is very unlikely that you will encounter any trouble in finding “that” paper you so badly wanted to read. I’m pretty sure that no one working in the developing world has not heard about this website or even used it more than once. If against the established rules, we can all agree on the fact that such model exists. Finally, you can e-mail the corresponding authors who, if they have not already uploaded a pre-print version of their work on personal websites, will more often than not, e-mail you their work almost immediately.

So, my take here is that open access is oversold. As an author I will always go for publication in journals with no page charges whenever possible.  As a reader, I do not feel the paywall is the most important threat to my science.  I’m fully aware of the costs of publishing and that these should not be underestimated. And that these need to be paid somehow. This is not the issue. The issue is that open access is not the "free access" alleged. If we are to forward our research on pressing environmental issues, there are much bigger issues that need our attention. We also need to think new ideas to guarantee full and unlimited access to our science. Maybe the Covid-19 pandemic- all papers dealing with it are free to access worldwide- may inspire new working models. 

1. Cadotte, M., Jones, H. &  Newton, E. (2020). Making the applied research that practitioners need and want accessible. Ecological Solution and Evidence, Vol 1:1.