Can Diamond Open Access be a Sustainable Model?

Introduction

For decades, the dominant academic publishing ecosystem has been one where research, often funded by public money, is locked behind expensive subscription paywalls. This has fueled a crisis of access, disproportionately affecting institutions and scholars in the Global South and the public at large. Enter open access, a movement aiming to liberate research from these walls, with its various models. The Gold Open Access requires authors to pay a substantial Article Processing Charge (APC). Green Open Access relies on institutional or subject repositories. The third one, the Diamond Open Access, is arguably the least discussed.

Diamond Open Access is a model in which scholarly articles are made available immediately and permanently free of charge, for readers and authors alike. It’s publishing without paywalls on either end of the transaction. For many, this sounds like a utopia, but the persistent, often cynical question remains: Can this beautiful, equitable model truly be sustainable? Can a publishing system thrive without the direct financial contributions of its users, be they subscribers or authors?

This is not just a theoretical query; it cuts to the heart of research dissemination, equity, and the economic realities of running high-quality scholarly infrastructure. The write-up assesses the mechanisms, challenges, and viable strategies that could propel Diamond Open Access from a noble ideal into a robust, sustainable pillar of the global knowledge commons.

Deconstructing Diamond Open Access

To understand its sustainability, we must first clearly define what Diamond Open Access is and how it fundamentally differs from other open access models, particularly the dominant Gold Open Access. Diamond Open Access refers to a diverse collection of journals, platforms, and infrastructures that provide free access to readers and do not charge authors an APC or any other publication fee. This stands in stark contrast to Gold Open Access, which is often characterized by reliance on APCs that can range from a few hundred dollars to upwards of $10,000 for prestigious journals.

While Gold Open Access certainly increases reader access, it simply shifts the financial burden, creating what is sometimes called an “author-pays” model, which can be a significant barrier for researchers without robust funding or institutional support. This can exacerbate existing inequalities, creating an “APC wall” that mirrors the old subscription wall. Diamond Open Access embodies the spirit of open knowledge dissemination. It relies instead on a diverse array of funding sources that are typically external to the article-processing transaction. These entities are not just small, niche journals.

A study funded by Science Europe and cOAlition S estimated that there are between 17,000 and 29,000 Diamond Open Access journals globally, which publish approximately 8–9% of all scholarly articles. These Diamond journals represent about 45% of all open access journals by count, with most published by universities, and tend to be smaller in size with fewer articles annually than APC-based journals. This volume demonstrates that it’s a functioning, albeit often under-recognized, segment of the ecosystem. The average Diamond journal is smaller and less centralized than commercial publishers, but its collective impact is undeniable.

The Ecosystem of Diamond OA

The current Diamond Open Access landscape is incredibly heterogeneous. It includes:

University Presses and Library Consortia: Many academic libraries and university presses support Diamond Open Access journals as part of their commitment to scholarly communication infrastructure. They absorb the costs as a service to the academic community, much as they do when maintaining a repository or providing research data management tools.

Scholarly Societies and Associations: Professional societies often run journals not primarily for profit, but as a central benefit to their members and a core activity in advancing their discipline. Funding comes from membership dues, conference fees, and sometimes institutional grants.
Research Institutions and Government Agencies: Some institutions establish or host Diamond Open Access journals directly, viewing them as a necessary public good. Funding is drawn from institutional budgets or specific governmental grants designed to support research dissemination.
Independent, Volunteer-Run Platforms: A large number of smaller journals, particularly in the humanities and social sciences, are run by dedicated volunteers, often senior academics, who handle peer review, editing, and basic web hosting as a service to their field. Their costs are minimal, mainly limited to hosting and domain fees.

This diverse foundation is both a strength and a weakness. The strength lies in its decentralization and resistance to commercial pressures. The weakness is the fragmentation and variability of funding, which can lead to precarious operational stability and make scaling up difficult. The journals often run on “love, labor, and duct tape,” relying heavily on in-kind contributions and the goodwill of the academic community rather than secure, long-term financial streams.

The Economics of Open: Funding Diamond Open Access

The central challenge to Diamond Open Access sustainability is replacing the guaranteed revenue streams of subscriptions or APCs, which can be expensive. This requires a shift in mindset: seeing the cost of publishing not as a transaction to be paid by the reader or author, but as a necessary infrastructure cost to be underwritten by the same entities that fund research and education.

A sustainable Diamond Open Access model relies on a mosaic of funding sources. No single stream provides the answer; rather, a resilient system uses multiple inputs to hedge against the volatility of any one source.

Institutional Budgets and Libraries

This is arguably the most common and stable source. Universities and research libraries can reallocate a portion of their massive subscription budgets to fund Diamond Open Access publishing services directly. Instead of paying Elsevier or Springer Nature for access to research, they pay for the systems that allow their own faculty and the global community to publish and access research freely. This concept is sometimes called “flipping the money.” For instance, a consortium of libraries might collectively fund a small but professional open access journal in their area of specialization.

Grants and Public Subsidies

Many Diamond Open Access efforts are supported by dedicated grants from national research councils (such as the National Science Foundation in the US or UK Research and Innovation) or philanthropic organizations (such as the Wellcome Trust or the Gates Foundation). These grants may be short-term but are essential for launching new journals, developing advanced publishing technology, or covering initial staffing costs. The European Commission and national governments are increasingly recognizing this need, with initiatives aimed explicitly at strengthening non-commercial publishing infrastructure.

Consortial and Collective Funding

This model involves multiple stakeholders pooling resources. The Sustaining the Canada/France Open Science in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology initiative, for example, is a collaborative effort in which universities and research institutes, based on their size or research output, contribute to support a portfolio of Diamond Open Access journals. This shared burden keeps costs minimal for any single institution while providing stable, collective funding. The Open Library of Humanities (OLH) is a successful, high-profile example that uses a library partnership model, in which institutions pay a small annual fee to support its portfolio of journals.

In-Kind and Volunteer Support

While not a direct monetary stream, the value of volunteer academic labor (editors, peer reviewers, and journal staff) is an immense subsidy to the system. The challenge is formalizing and professionalizing key roles to ensure continuity and quality, which requires a budget for core professional staff. A journal might rely on volunteer academic editors but hire a paid managing editor and a copyeditor.

The Role of Technology and Efficiency

A key to reducing the cost of Diamond Open Access is leveraging technology to increase efficiency and reduce the need for human labor. Commercial publishers often maintain significant profit margins (sometimes exceeding 30-40%) due to high overheads, massive sales teams, and proprietary technology. Diamond Open Access can drastically undercut these costs.

Open Source Publishing Platforms

Using open-source software like Open Journal Systems (OJS), developed by the Public Knowledge Project (PKP), eliminates licensing fees and allows journals to customize their workflow cheaply. OJS is a globally dominant platform for small- and mid-sized journals, significantly lowering barriers to entry and ongoing costs.

Automation in Production

Tools that automate copyediting, typesetting, XML tagging, and metadata generation can reduce the reliance on expensive production staff. The shift toward standardized, machine-readable formats like JATS XML is crucial here, streamlining the process from manuscript acceptance to final publication.

Shared Infrastructure

The most efficient way to run Diamond Open Access is to share infrastructure across multiple journals. Instead of 20 small journals each paying for their own server, persistent identifier registration (like DOIs), and archiving, a university press or consortium can host hundreds of journals on a single, centralized system. This economy of scale dramatically lowers the cost per article.

Challenges and Pitfalls to Sustainability

While the models for Diamond Open Access funding exist, the journey to true sustainability is fraught with structural, cultural, and financial obstacles.

The Precariousness of Funding

The most immediate threat is the short-term nature of many funding sources. Grant funding, while helpful, typically lasts three to five years. Once the grant ends, the journal must find a new source, leading to a constant cycle of fundraising anxiety. This financial instability makes it difficult to plan for the long term, invest in necessary technology upgrades, or hire and retain professional staff. Many Diamond journals exist in a semi-permanent state of crisis management, relying on key individuals whose eventual departure can threaten the entire operation.

Furthermore, the collective funding model is only as stable as its participants’ commitment. If a major library partner in a consortium faces budget cuts and withdraws its support, the entire financial structure can be destabilized, proving the need for a very broad and diverse funding base. The commitment to reallocating subscription money to open access infrastructure is often debated within universities, as large commercial publishers aggressively lobby to maintain the status quo. The transition period is inherently risky, as universities may be hesitant to cancel Big Deal subscriptions before a sustainable open access alternative is fully proven.

Quality, Visibility, and Prestige

In the academic world, prestige is currency. For better or worse, the perceived quality of a journal is often tied to its Impact Factor and its association with a large, commercial brand. Many researchers, particularly early-career scholars, feel immense pressure to publish in high-impact Gold Open Access or subscription journals, regardless of the cost.

Perceived Inferiority: There is a lingering, if often unfounded, perception that Diamond Open Access journals, because large commercial entities do not back them, are somehow less rigorous or prestigious. This is a significant cultural hurdle. The reality is that peer review in a Diamond journal is just as rigorous as in any other journal; the financial model does not determine intellectual quality.
Lack of Professionalism: Because many Diamond journals are volunteer-run, they sometimes suffer from slower turnaround times, less professional production quality, or less sophisticated indexing and visibility compared to commercial counterparts. Sustainability means moving beyond amateur operations to having professional managing editors and a robust technical infrastructure.
Need for Robust Metrics: Diamond journals need better, universally accepted ways to demonstrate their quality and impact beyond traditional, publisher-controlled metrics. Showcasing fast publication times, high download rates, strong peer-review integrity, and institutional support can help to build the necessary academic confidence.

Scalability and Infrastructure

The average Diamond journal is small, often publishing fewer than 50 articles per year. Scaling this fragmented system into a global, high-volume alternative to the major commercial players requires significant investment in shared infrastructure.

Technical Debt: Many Diamond journals run on aging software or non-standard hosting, creating “technical debt” that eventually needs a massive, costly overhaul. Sustaining these efforts requires a continual budget for system maintenance, security, and upgrades, something volunteer efforts often lack.
Standardization: To integrate Diamond content seamlessly into the global research ecosystem (discovery services, indexing databases, national archives), high levels of metadata standardization and technical interoperability are necessary. Achieving this across thousands of small, independent operations is a massive coordination challenge that requires centralized support bodies.

Strategies for a Sustainable Diamond Future

To move Diamond Open Access beyond its current fragmented state and toward a truly sustainable, scalable model, several key strategies must be adopted by the academic community, funders, and policymakers.

Centralized Funding and Governance

The path to sustainability lies in institutionalizing the funding. This means moving away from individual journal grants toward funding for collective infrastructure.

Establish National/Regional Funds: Governments or national research funding agencies should create dedicated, long-term funds to support Diamond Open Access infrastructure. For example, a national fund could provide guaranteed funding for all non-APC university press journals, treating them as essential national scientific assets.

Mandate Research Funders: Major research funders should mandate that a small percentage (e.g., 1-2%) of every research grant budget be allocated to supporting non-commercial open access infrastructure, including Diamond Open Access journals and repositories. This would institutionalize the idea that publication costs are an integral part of research costs.
Create Professional Hubs: Universities should establish Diamond Open Access publishing hubs within their libraries or presses. These hubs would provide shared, high-quality professional services (copyediting, technical hosting, DOI registration, long-term preservation) to a cluster of smaller scholarly society journals, achieving a critical economy of scale.

The Library and Consortium Pivot

Libraries hold the most leverage in the publishing ecosystem. Their massive subscription budgets are the capital needed to fund a sustainable open-access future.

Systemic Reallocation: Libraries must systematically and collectively pivot their spending. As Big Deal contracts expire, the portion of the budget previously sent to commercial publishers should be reallocated to support initiatives like the Open Library of Humanities (OLH) or direct institutional publishing support. This requires courage and collective action from library leadership.
Publishing as a Core Library Service: Libraries should embrace publishing support as a core service, alongside reference and data management. This includes providing training in OJS management, offering desktop publishing support, and hosting the journals on their own stable, institutional servers, ensuring their long-term preservation.
Subscribe to Open” (S2O) Model Adaptation: While typically used by non-open-access publishers to flip to open access, the principle can be adapted. Institutions could commit to a collective, fixed fee to support a Diamond Open Access platform, with the understanding that this commitment is necessary to keep the platform free for all. This is essentially the OLH model, which uses a voluntary, small membership fee from hundreds of libraries globally to sustain its platform.

Standards, Transparency, and Recognition

For Diamond Open Access to gain the trust of the wider academic community, it must be demonstrably high-quality and transparent in its operations.

Adopt Professional Standards: All professionalized Diamond journals must adhere to strict ethical and operational standards, such as those laid out by the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Clear, transparent peer-review policies and financial disclosures are non-negotiable.
Cost Transparency: Diamond journals and platforms should publish their per-article operational costs. This transparency counters the secrecy of commercial publishers and builds trust. If a platform can show its true cost per article is $500, it demonstrates efficiency and provides a credible benchmark for institutional funding requests.

Change Research Evaluation: This is the most critical cultural shift. University promotion and tenure committees must begin to value the quality of the research and the integrity of the journal over the publisher’s brand name. Funders and institutions need to sign and adhere to declarations such as the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), which explicitly rejects the use of journal-based metrics, such as the Impact Factor, in evaluating researchers.

Conclusion

So, can Diamond Open Access be a sustainable model? Yes, it can be, and in thousands of instances already is, a sustainable model. Its current fragmentation and relative lack of capitalization are not inherent flaws of the model but rather reflections of the decades-long dominance of the subscription economy. Sustainability is not about magically generating revenue from nothing; it is about reallocating existing funds and prioritizing academic values over commercial profit.

The global research and academic communities currently spend billions on academic publishing, much of which flows out of the system as pure profit. The financial cost of running the global Diamond Open Access ecosystem is estimated to be significantly lower than the cost of the current subscription system. The challenge is structural: diverting that money from the commercial stream back into non-commercial, community-controlled infrastructure.

By embracing diversified, collective funding, leveraging open-source technology for efficiency, and, most importantly, enacting a cultural shift in how we evaluate research, the academic community can build a publishing future that is open, equitable, and resilient. The Diamond path is not the easy path, but it is the one that best serves the core mission of scholarship: the unhindered sharing of knowledge for the betterment of society.