Funders open access mandates: uneven uptake and challenging models

TL;DR

This study analyzes how different research funder policies impact Open Access adoption worldwide, revealing growth trends, disparities, and the influence of initiatives like Plan S, with variations across regions and OA types.

Contribution

It provides a comprehensive empirical analysis of OA policy effects on publication practices across multiple countries and funders, highlighting regional disparities and policy impacts.

Findings

Funded papers are more likely to be OA than unfunded papers.

Growth in hybrid and gold OA is significant, influenced by policies like Plan S.

Regional disparities exist, with low Diamond OA uptake in Latin America.

Abstract

Over the last two decades, research funders have adopted Open Access (OA) mandates, with various forms and success. While some funders emphasize gold OA through article processing charges, others favour green OA and repositories, leading to a fragmented policy landscape. Compliance with these mandates depends on several factors, including disciplinary field, monitoring, and availability of repository infrastructure. Based on 5 million papers supported by 36 funders from 20 countries, 11 million papers funded by other organisations, and 10 million papers without any funding reported, this study explores how different policies influence the adoption of OA. Findings indicate a sustained growth in OA overall, especially hybrid and gold OA, and that funded papers are more likely to be OA than unfunded papers. Those results suggest that policies such as Plan S, as well as read-and-publish agreements, have had a strong influence on OA adoption, especially among European funders. However, the global low uptake of Diamond OA and limited indexing of OA outputs in Latin American countries highlight ongoing disparities, influenced by funding constraints, journal visibility, and regional infrastructure challenges.