The Mounting Challenges in Higher Education
As we approach a new academic year, the UK’s higher education sector is facing an escalating financial crisis, with universities grappling with a range of challenges that threaten to undermine their core missions and responsibilities. This crisis is unfolding unevenly across the sector, with some institutions hit harder than others, but its impact is increasingly felt throughout the system.
The visible signs of this crisis are the dozens of redundancy schemes being implemented at universities across the UK, leading to the near-total destruction of some arts, humanities, and social science departments, along with numerous other funding cuts. As ever more universities appear to be governed by cut-throat market logics, it seems reasonable to assume that an inevitable casualty will be their wider civic responsibilities, even as funders and mandates expect academic engagement and impact beyond the ivory towers.
The current funding pressures facing higher education are multi-faceted and complex. University libraries, in particular, are feeling the strain, as they contend with rising costs of journal subscriptions, data providers demanding annual price increases, and the unsustainable burden of “transitional agreements” – deals aimed at facilitating the shift to open access publishing. These financial challenges are forcing libraries to reconfigure their priorities, potentially leading to significant shifts away from funding subscription agreements and towards supporting alternative open access models, such as “Diamond” open access.
The Promise of Diamond Open Access
The growth of open access publishing over the past decade has been a significant development, making high volumes of research publications accessible to diverse public audiences without the need for expensive subscriptions. University libraries have played a crucial role in supporting this rapid expansion of open access, and many are now exploring ways to further this transition, including by directing funding towards Diamond open access programmes.
Diamond open access refers to publishing models that collectively fund open access scholarship, enabling any author to participate without paying article processing charges (APCs). This approach allows universities to allocate funding towards types of publishing that make research freely available, rather than tying funding directly from individual institutions to specific publications.
The potential benefits of Diamond open access are manifold. By removing financial barriers for authors, these models can help to promote greater equity and inclusion in scholarly communication, enabling researchers from diverse backgrounds to contribute to the knowledge ecosystem. Furthermore, Diamond open access can reduce the financial burden on university libraries, freeing up resources that could be redirected towards other priorities, such as expanding collections, enhancing user services, or supporting other open initiatives.
Navigating the Crisis: Opportunities and Challenges
The current crisis in higher education has understandably generated a sense of pessimism among many in the sector. However, there are also grounds for optimism, particularly when it comes to the future of Diamond open access publishing. This tension between pessimism and optimism was a central focus of a recent event hosted by the COPIM community, in collaboration with the LSE Library and LSE Press.
The event brought together a panel of experts, including librarians, scholarly publishing practitioners, and academics, to explore the implications of the higher education funding crisis for Diamond open access. The discussion centered on several key questions:
What lessons do emerging changes in library funding decisions hold for higher education more widely?
As libraries grapple with budget constraints and reconfigure their priorities, their decision-making processes and the resulting changes can provide valuable insights into the broader challenges facing the higher education sector. Niamh Tumelty, Director of LSE Library and Managing Director of LSE Press, shared her dual perspective, highlighting how the financial pressures experienced by libraries intersect with the operational realities of running a university press.
Tumelty emphasized that the current crisis is not just about numbers and budgets; it is also about the threat to the civic responsibilities of universities, which are increasingly driven by market logics. However, she also noted signs of progress, such as the growing number of scholars requesting their monographs to be published open access, and the recognition of the value and prestige of open access publishing, exemplified by awards won by books from new open access presses.
Is it unrealistic to expect an expansion of Diamond open access models given the funding crisis in higher education?
This question was explored by Professor Joe Deville from Lancaster University, who highlighted the apparent contradiction between the optimism around Diamond open access and the widespread harm being done to many in the higher education sector. Drawing on the work of sociologist Stuart Hall, Deville suggested that further critical examination is needed, not just of the marketization of higher education, but also the threat posed by dominant systems of scholarly publishing.
Deville pointed to the significant resources being drained from universities by large, commercial publishers, such as Elsevier’s reported £3 billion annual profit and the estimated $9 billion paid to the six largest publishers in article processing charges between 2019 and 2023. He argued that librarians, often unrecognized by their academic colleagues, have begun pushing back against the status quo, incorporating analyses of how different models promote or undermine equity in the scholarly system and aligning their budgets to include support for Diamond open access. Deville emphasized that for these promising developments to scale, librarians and scholarly libraries need more support from academics, senior managers, and funders.
How can libraries be supported as they reconfigure their priorities and budgets towards Diamond open access?
Hannah Crago, Open Research Development Librarian at the University of Essex, provided insights into the challenges and issues that libraries face when supporting Diamond open access initiatives. In response to the financial crisis, many libraries are being forced to review their budgets and reprioritize their investments, often leading to the discontinuation of support for Diamond open access schemes unless they are embedded within a broader open access strategy.
Crago highlighted the bureaucratic barriers that libraries encounter, such as confusion about whether Diamond open access is a subscription and the time-consuming process of getting suppliers set up on university procurement systems. She emphasized the need for a cultural shift at Essex, where open access becomes the default, with budgets allocated accordingly. Crago argued that the processing charges associated with the Gold open access model are unsustainable and that the values and benefits of Diamond open access offer a viable alternative as a community endeavor.
Could the current crisis make it even more necessary to clearly and confidently argue for the benefits of Diamond open access?
The final speaker, Dr. Caroline Edwards from Birkbeck, University of London, focused on the work of the Open Library of Humanities (OLH), a non-profit, academic-led Diamond open access journal publisher. Edwards highlighted OLH’s collective library membership funding model, which removes the financial burden on authors and readers, and its support for academics who wish to leave financially-motivated, large commercial publishers.
Edwards emphasized that collective funding can create significant financial savings for libraries by undercutting expensive transitional agreements and traditional subscriptions, which could be crucial during the current crisis. She argued that this collective funding is not a handout, but an evidence-based investment by the library in the academic community. Edwards’s presentation underscored the potential for Diamond open access to mitigate some of the challenges facing the arts and humanities in UK higher education institutions.
The Path Forward: Collaboration and Commitment
The event generated considerable interest, attracting over 150 participants, highlighting the importance of this topic in the current climate. The discussions revealed the complex and multifaceted nature of the challenges facing higher education, as well as the potential for Diamond open access to play a role in addressing some of these issues.
Ultimately, the path forward will require sustained collaboration and commitment from various stakeholders within the higher education ecosystem. Librarians, academics, university administrators, and policymakers will need to work together to support the growth and advancement of Diamond open access publishing, while also addressing the broader systemic challenges that threaten the core missions and responsibilities of universities.
As the Stanley Park High School community navigates this period of uncertainty, it is crucial to stay informed and engaged with the evolving landscape of higher education and scholarly communication. By understanding the challenges and opportunities presented by Diamond open access, students and parents can become advocates for this transformative model, championing its potential to promote equity, accessibility, and the continued vitality of the academic enterprise.
Conclusion
The crisis in higher education is multifaceted and complex, with far-reaching implications for research, teaching, and the broader civic responsibilities of universities. However, amidst the understandable pessimism, there are also glimmers of hope, particularly in the potential of Diamond open access to address some of the systemic issues plaguing the sector.
By supporting the growth and development of Diamond open access models, universities, libraries, and the wider academic community can work towards a more equitable, sustainable, and publicly engaged system of scholarly communication. This will require collaborative efforts, bold decision-making, and a steadfast commitment to the core values of higher education. But the potential rewards – in terms of increased access to knowledge, greater diversity and inclusion, and the long-term resilience of the academic enterprise – make this a worthy pursuit for the Stanley Park High School community and beyond.
