Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Open Access, Closed Opportunities? Reflections on APC Equity from a Lower-Middle-Income Country
The Open Access movement has transformed scholarly communication by making research freely available to readers around the world. It has expandedaccess to knowledge, accelerated scientific collaboration, and reduced information barriers that once limited researchers in developing countries. For many institutions in Indonesia, Open Access has also provided an opportunity for university journals to gain international visibility without relying on commercial publishers.
However, after working with scholarly journals in Indonesia, I have come to realize that Open Access has solved one inequality while unintentionally creating another.
Today, many researchers can read scientific articles without paying subscription fees. Yet publishing those same articles often requires paying Article Processing Charges (APCs) that can reach several thousand US dollars. The financial barrier has shifted, from readers to authors.
For researchers in lower-middle-income countries such as Indonesia, this creates a difficult reality.
Indonesia has made remarkable progress in scholarly publishing. Hundreds of university journals have achieved international indexing, and thousands operate as Open Access journals using platforms such as Open Journal Systems (OJS). Government policies have encouraged publication productivity, while universities continue investing in editorial quality and research dissemination.
Nevertheless, publishing in internationally recognized journals remains financially challenging for many researchers. A publication fee of USD 2,000 or even USD 3,500 may appear reasonable within well-funded research systems. However, for many academics in Indonesia, particularly those from smaller universities or institutions outside major cities, such costs may exceed the available research budget. In some cases, the APC alone can be larger than the total funding allocated for an entire research project.
This is where the global discussion on Open Access deserves greater nuance.
Publishers often provide APC waivers for researchers from low-income countries. While this policy is commendable, countries classified as lower-middle-income frequently occupy a "grey zone." They may not qualify for full waivers because national economic indicators appear relatively strong, yet individual universities and researchers continue to operate under significant financial constraints.
National income classifications rarely reflect the realities of institutional funding.
The result is an uncomfortable paradox. Researchers are encouraged—even required—to publish internationally for career advancement, institutional accreditation, and research assessment. At the same time, many cannot realistically afford publication fees without external grants. Consequently, decisionsaboutwheretopublishmaybeinfluenced not onlybyscientificquality or journalsuitability, but alsobyaffordability.
The Editor's Perspective
The APC discussion becomes even more complex when viewed from the perspective of journal editors.Many university-based journals in Indonesia operate with very low APCs or charge no publication fees at all. This reflects a strong commitment to knowledge sharing and equitable access. Yet maintaining a quality journal is far from free.
Editors must coordinate peer review, perform plagiarism screening, register DOIs, maintain digital infrastructure, produce metadata, ensure long-term archiving, improve language quality, and comply with international publishing standards. In many cases, these responsibilities are carried out by academics who already balance teaching, research, community service, and administrative duties.
Editorial work often depends on dedication rather than sustainable funding.
This creates another paradox within Open Access.
Researchers struggle to pay high APCs to international journals, while local journals struggle to survive because they intentionally keep APCs low. Neither situation represents a sustainable publishing ecosystem.
The conversation, therefore, should move beyond asking whether APCs are inherently good or bad.
Instead, we should ask a more important question:
How can Open Access remain financially sustainable without excluding researchers who have valuable knowledge to share?
Several practical approaches deserve greater attention.
First, APC waiver policies could become more flexible by considering institutional capacity rather than relying solely on national income classifications. Researchers from resource-limited universities within middle-income countries may face financial challenges comparable to those in countries officially classified as low income.
Second, greater investment in Diamond Open Access deserves international support. Many university journals in Asia, Africa, and Latin America already operate without charging either readers or authors. Their greatest need is sustainable infrastructure, editorial training, technical support, and long-term funding—not commercial expansion.
Third, governments and universities should recognize scholarly publishing as research infrastructure rather than merely an administrative activity. Professional editorial management requires investment in people, technology, and quality assurance. Sustainable journals cannot rely indefinitely on voluntary academic labor.
Finally, international collaboration should focus not only on increasing publication output but also on creating a more equitable publishing ecosystem. Scientific excellence should never be constrained primarily by an author's ability to pay publication fees.
Keywords
Open Access ArticleProcessingCharges (APCs) scholarlypublishing publishingequity DiamondOpen Access lower-middle-incomecountries journalsustainability researchaccessibility editorial sustainability scholarlycommunication
Mamdukh Budiman is an Indonesian Islamic scholar and lecturer at Universitas Muhammadiyah Semarang, currently pursuing his PhD at Universiti Muhammadiyah Malaysia Perlis. He is increasingly recognized in Southeast Asia for his contributions to the development of Islam Berkemajuan (Progressive Islam), particularly in addressing contemporary issues such as digital transformation, artificial intelligence, Islamic thought, civilization, and Arabic studies. Known for his progressive Islamic thought, he has gained regional attention through academic publications, international conferences, and cross-border scholarly engagement within ASEAN networks. His role as a writer and contributor to ASEAN intellectual discourse further strengthens his reputation as one of the emerging voices shaping contemporary Islamic thought and civilization in Southeast Asia.
View All Posts by Mamdukh BudimanDisclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of their affiliated institutions, the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE), or the Editor’s Café editorial team.
