Science Editor and Publisher

Advanced search

Equality, equity, and reality of open access on scholarly information

Full Text:


The current statistic data on the open access (OA) journals and institutional repositories show some successes and increased awareness on OA in Asian countries. There are several concerns, however, in regards to the access and use of articles by researchers together with the continued increase of libraries’ expenditure for journals. In the present article we introduce five solutions in the global and local perspectives. OA2020 initiative is a global initiative to transform existing journals to OA. Although the practical process of OA2020 remains a challenge, the transformation will increase OA without significant increase of journals and budgets for publishing. The promotion of the local and Asian journals is the second big challenge. Because these local or Asian journals still have important roles in the local research community, they should keep current publishing model of OA at the low cost but with high quality and the better access. The restructuring of the current library budget is the third challenge. The budget for periodicals should be reduced and the saved budget can be used to pay articles processing charge for OA and for purchasing monographs. The fourth important issue is ‘the digital blind spot at the young unemployed and retired elderly’. These groups of poorly supported and potentially important researchers have to be considered as a priority issue to the policies on OA and scholarly knowledge. Lastly, we believe there should be different needs for other activities: optimization of the searchable database, governmental policy on open science and international cooperation on OA.


About the Authors

Jeong-Wook Seo
Seoul National University College of Medicine
Korea, Republic of
Department of Pathology

Hosik Chung
Contents Platform Lab, Naver Corporation
Korea, Republic of

Tae-Sul Seo
Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information
Korea, Republic of
Department of Information Service

Youngim Jung
Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information
Korea, Republic of
Department of Information Infrastructure

Eun Seong Hwang
University of Seoul
Korea, Republic of
Department of Life Science

Cheol-Heui Yun
Seoul National University
Korea, Republic of
Department of Food and Animal Biotechnology, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

Hyungsun Kim
Inha University
Korea, Republic of
Department of Materials Science and Engineering


1. New momentum for open access: Berlin Conference on the reorganisation of funding models for scholarly journals. Berlin: Max-Planck-Gesellschaft; 2015. Available at: [Accessed August 1, 2017].

2. Schimmer R, Geschuhn K. K., Vogler A. Disrupting the subscription journals’ business model for the necessary large-scale transformation to open access: a Max Planck Digital Library open access policy white paper. Max Planck Digital Library; 2015. Available at: escidoc:2149096/MPDL_OA-Transition_White_Paper.pdf [Accessed August 1, 2017].

3. Enserink M. European Commission considering leap into open-access publishing. Science; 2017. March 29. DOI: 10.1126/science.aal0977

4. Enserink M. In dramatic statement, European leaders call for ‘immediate’ open access to all scientific papers by 2020. Science; 2016, May 27. DOI: 10.1126/science.aag0577

5. Zhang X., Lin L., Fournier J., Kuster S., Zaloum M., Grosvenor A. Review of implementation of the Global Research Council action plan towards open access to publications. Global Research Council; 2014. Available at: http://www. Plan.pdf [Accessed August 1, 2017].

6. Global Research Council. Action plan towards open access to publications. Global Research Council; 2013. Available at: pdf [Accessed August 1, 2017].

7. Tickell A. Open access to research publications. Independent advice. London: Universities UK Open Access Coordination Group; 2016.

8. Solomon D. J., Laakso M., Bjork B. C. Converting scholarly journals to open access: a review of approaches and experiences. Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication; 2016. Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl. edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=scholcom [Accessed August 1, 2017].

9. Guellec D. J. Global perspectives on open science. Paper presented at: Korea-OECD Workshop on Open Science: policy to practice; 2017, June 30; Seoul, Korea.

10. Seo J. W. Open access initiatives: achievements and challenges. Paper resented at: Korea-OECD Workshop on Open Science: policy to practice; 2017, Junr 30; Seoul, Korea.

11. Seo J. W. European policy on open access from 2020. Paper resented at: 4th Asian Science Editors’ Conference and Workshop 2017; 2017, July 7; Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

12. Seo J. W., Chung H., Yun J., Park J. Y., Park E., Ahn Y. Usage trends of open access and local journals: a Korean case study. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0155843. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155843

13. Seo J. W., Ahn Y., Hong S. Y., Lee J. W. Strategic planning of open access initiative of Seoul National University. Seoul: Seoul National University; 2016.

14. Suber P. Open access overview: focusing on open access to peer-reviewed research articles and their preprints. Boston, MA: Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication; 2013. Available at: fos/overview.htm [Accessed August 1, 2017].

15. DOAJ. Directory of Open Access Journals: journals vs. articles. DOAJ; 2017. Available at: [Accessed August 1, 2017].

16. Bi X. Quality open access publishing and registration to Directory of Open Access Journals. Science Editing. 2017;4(1):3–11. DOI: 10.6087/kcse.82

17. Wiryawan K. G. The current status of science journals in Indonesia. Science Editing. 2014;1(2):71–75. DOI: 10.6087/ kcse.2014.1.71

18. Huh S., Cho H. M., Kim H. Opinions of Korean science editors on open access policies, editorial difficulties, and government’s support for publishing. Science Editing. 2015;2(2):55–58. DOI: 10.6087/kcse.44

19. Mongeon P., Paul-Hus A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics. 2016;106(1):213–228. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

20. Miguel S., Tannuri de Oliveira E. F., Cabrini Gracio M. C. Scientific production on open access: a worldwide bibliometric analysis in the academic and scientific context. Publications.2016;4(1):1. DOI: 10.3390/publications4010001

21. Kim K. Open access publishing in the internet age. Science Editing. 2016;3(1):1–2. DOI: 10.6087/kcse.55

22. Khabsa M., Giles C. L. The number of scholarly documents on the public web. PLoS One. 2014;9:e93949. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093949

23. Alberts B. Impact factor distortions. Science. 2013;340(6134):787. DOI: 10.1126/science.1240319

24. American Society for Cell Biology. The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). Bethesda, MD: American Society for Cell Biology; 2013.

25. Finch J., Bell S., Bellingan L., et al. Accessibility, sustainability, excellence: how to expand access to research publications. Executive summary. International Microbiology. 2013;16:125–132. DOI: 10.2436/20.1501.01.187

26. JISC Collections. Principles for Offset Agreements. London: JISC Collections; 2016.

27. VSNU. The Netherlands: paving the way for open access. VSNU; 2016. Available at: [Accessed August 1, 2017].

28. Harvard University Library. Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication. Harvard University Library; 2016. Available at: [Accessed August 1, 2017].

29. Seo J. W., An F., Han Y. M., Tao D. Dissemination of knowledge on health: multiple resources and multiple steps. Basic and Applied Pathology. 2011;4(2):35–37. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-9294.2011.01106.x

30. Jawaid S. A. Lessons learnt from the Asia-Pacific Association of Medical Journal Editors (APAME) Congress. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences. 2011;27(5):955–957. Available at: article/view/1866/359 [Accessed August 1, 2017].

31. Kim K. Editing and publishing scholarly journals in the internet age. Science Editing. 2014;1(1):2–3. DOI: 10.6087/kcse.2014.1.2

32. Seo J. W. Medical journal editors’ association in the Western Pacific Region. European Science Editing. 2010;36:102–104.

33. Sakai Y., Sato K., Suwabe N., et al. International trends in health science librarianship part 11: Japan and Korea. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 2014;31(3):239–242. DOI: 10.1111/hir.12074

34. Hwang Y., Lim Y. H., Ahn Y. K., et al. Trend analysis of scholarly publication by medical librarians. Journal of the Korean Medical Library Association. 2013;40:1–12.

35. Solomon D. J. Digital distribution of academic journals and its impact on scholarly communication: looking back after 20 years. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2013;39(1):23–28. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2012.10.001

36. Schmitt J. Can’t disrupt this: Elsevier and the 25.2 billion dollar a year academic publishing business. Medium; 2015. Available at: [Accessed August 1, 2017].

37. Kyrillidou M., Morris S., Roebuck G. ARL statistics 2013–2014. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries; 2015.

38. Story in Pictures. Equality and equity. Twitter; 2016. Available at: [Accessed August 1, 2017].

39. KISTI. National digital science library. Daejeon: KISTI; 2017. Available at: [Accessed August 1, 2017].

40. Naver. Naver Academic. Seongnam: Naver; 2017. Available at: [Accessed August 1, 2017].


For citations:

Seo J., Chung H., Seo T., Jung Y., Hwang E., Yun C., Kim H. Equality, equity, and reality of open access on scholarly information. Science Editor and Publisher. 2019;4(1-2):63-75. (In Russ.)

Views: 952

ISSN 2542-0267 (Print)
ISSN 2541-8122 (Online)