From 2014 to 2021, the number of universities in India rose from 760 to 1,113. Yet, many lack essential resources such as instrumental access and sophisticated labs, not to mention access to the literature that underpins research. File | Photo Credit: The Hindu
A recent editorial piece in Naturelauded India’s ascent towards becoming a scientific juggernaut, paralleling its burgeoning economic clout. The Indian science ecosystem is indeed on an impressive trajectory, now ranking third globally in research output, and eleventh in quality, according to the Nature Index. However, ‘ease of doing science’ that can lead to great discoveries and innovation hinges on robust infrastructure and resources — a glaring shortfall in India’s research landscape.
From 2014 to 2021, the number of universities in India rose from 760 to 1,113. Yet, many lack essential resources such as instrumental access and sophisticated labs, not to mention access to the literature that underpins research. There has been a pioneering initiative, I-STEM, to bridge this gap by cataloguing all publicly funded research facilities nationwide and making them available to researchers based on need. This demand-supply mapping aims to democratise the availability of advanced research infrastructure.
Similarly, the call for ‘One Nation, One Subscription (ONOS)’ proposes a centralised model of subscription to scientific journals, making them universally available to all publicly funded institutions. It is costly to get access to these commercial journals. It is estimated that institutions in India annually spend ₹1,500 crore to access journals and databases. But the fruits of this expenditure are reaped by only the top few institutes. What of the rest? ONOS negotiation by the government is currently underway with the five major commercial publishers who dominate the market.
The optimal solution?
But is ONOS the optimal solution for facilitating access to scientific literature? When it was conceptualised around 2019, a significant portion of scholarly articles was behind paywalls. Now, a much larger fraction of articles is available via Open Access (OA), which means that articles are available freely for everyone online. An analysis of publications indexed in the Web of Science shows that the fraction of OA publications globally increased from 38% in 2018 to 50% in 2022. This shift raises a query about the necessity and efficiency of paying for content that is increasingly available for free. Currently, there is a strong push for OA by the U.S. and European Union. The U.S. released its updated OA policy in 2023 that mandates immediate open accessibility of all publicly funded research articles by 2025. Similarly, major philanthropic funding sources such as the Wellcome Trust have mandated OA to the research they fund.
Considering this trend, it is reasonable to argue that we should be paying less than before. The oligopolistic academic publishing market, dominated by a handful of powerful publishers in the global north, allows these publishers to set stringent terms, making any negotiation on ONOS a challenge. The entrenched reputation and authority of these publishers also stymie any discussion of alternatives.
In any other government procurement, the use of public funds is stringently regulated to ensure maximum cost efficiency and benefit. Why, then, should the procurement of academic journals be any different? If significant portions of research are already accessible without cost, the rationale for a unified, costly subscription becomes less compelling. It is also important to note that ONOS will not help make Indian research globally accessible; rather, it primarily facilitates access for Indian researchers to journals owned by big publishing oligarchs.
Further, even if one pays and subscribes to the journal, there is no guarantee of continued access. Today, most academic journals are only digitally available. Most articles have a digital object identifier (DOI), but DOI does not ensure long-term preservation. A recent study highlights that “approximately 28% of academic journal articles with DOIs appear entirely unpreserved.” This finding suggests that millions of research papers risk vanishing from the Internet. For example, over 17,000 research papers from a chemistry journal, distributed by Elsevier globally, except in Japan, disappeared when the journal was discontinued in December 2023.
Green Open Access
Considering commercial publishers have not taken up the responsibility of long-term availability of the content they profit from, it is only logical that every article authored by Indian researchers and funded by taxpayer money should be archived in publicly funded OA repositories. This practice exemplifies what we refer to as Green Open Access. This allows authors to deposit a version of their work in a university repository, making it freely accessible to everyone globally. Indian funding agencies have mandated green OA for a long time, but this has never been enforced. However, the recent troubles should catalyse a stronger push for green OA.
Major publishers such as Elsevier (Netherlands), Thomson Reuters (Canada), Taylor Francis (U.K.), Springer Nature (Germany), and Wiley and SAGE (U.S.) have headquarters in the global north. They are extremely profitable enterprises. Much of this profit is derived from the unpaid labour provided by researchers in the form of peer reviews and editorial works. To become atmanirbhar (self-reliant), India needs to make its own journal system better, with no burden of payment to authors or readers. Further, with its capabilities in digital technology, India should also become a pioneer for the global south by creating and sharing digital public infrastructure for low-cost, high-quality scientific publishing.
Moumita Koley is Consultant with the International Science Council and visiting scholar at the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru; Suryesh Kumar Namdeo is a Senior Research Analyst at the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru
