The way researchers share their work is changing fast. As of 2024, 40% of all scholarly articles, reviews, and conference papers worldwide are published through gold open access — up from just 14% a decade earlier, according to the STM Association. Open access publishing has moved from a niche ideal to a defining force in how science reaches the world. Yet for many researchers, navigating the landscape of open access models, funder mandates, and article processing charges remains confusing at best. This open access publishing guide breaks down everything you need to know — from the different OA pathways to practical strategies for managing open access workflows across your research projects.
What is open access publishing?
Open access (OA) publishing is the practice of making peer-reviewed research freely available online, with no paywalls or subscription barriers for readers. Instead of locking articles behind costly journal subscriptions, open access ensures that anyone — researchers, clinicians, policymakers, students, and the public — can read, download, and build upon published findings immediately upon publication.
Traditional scholarly publishing relies on subscription fees paid by libraries and institutions to fund journal operations. Open access shifts this model. The costs of publication are typically covered through article processing charges (APCs) paid by authors, their institutions, or their funders — or in some cases, through community-funded models that charge no fees at all.
Open access is not a single model but a spectrum of approaches, each with different implications for cost, copyright, and discoverability. The four main pathways — gold, green, diamond, and hybrid — give researchers flexibility depending on their field, funding, and goals.
Types of open access: gold, green, diamond, and hybrid
Understanding the different open access pathways is essential for choosing the right approach for your research. Each model has distinct characteristics regarding where, when, and how your work becomes freely available.
Gold open access
Gold open access means your article is published in a fully open access journal and is immediately free to read on the publisher's website. The journal handles peer review, production, and hosting — just like a subscription journal — but all content is openly available from the moment of publication.
Gold OA journals typically charge an article processing charge to cover publication costs. Prominent examples include journals published by PLOS, MDPI, Frontiers, and many titles from Springer Nature and Wiley. In 2024, Springer Nature reported that 50% of its primary research articles were published open access, with 240,000 OA articles published that year alone — a 31% increase over the previous year.
Gold OA articles usually carry a Creative Commons license (most commonly CC BY), which allows readers to share and reuse the work with proper attribution.
Green open access (self-archiving)
Green open access — also known as self-archiving — means depositing a version of your published article in an open repository, such as an institutional repository, a disciplinary archive like PubMed Central or arXiv, or a personal academic website.
With green OA, the article is still published in a traditional subscription journal. The freely available version is often the author's accepted manuscript (the peer-reviewed version before final typesetting) rather than the publisher's formatted PDF. Some publishers impose an embargo period — typically 6 to 12 months — before the self-archived version can be made publicly accessible.
Green OA is often the most accessible route for researchers who lack funding for APCs, as it usually costs nothing to the author. You can find suitable repositories through the Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR) or the Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR).
Diamond open access
Diamond open access (sometimes called platinum OA) is a form of gold OA where no fees are charged to either authors or readers. Publication costs are covered through institutional funding, scholarly societies, volunteer labor, or consortial models.
Diamond OA journals are typically community-driven, non-commercial, and operated by academic institutions or scholarly organizations. According to the OA Diamond Journals Study by Bosman et al. (2021), these journals often rely on a mix of institutional support, crowdfunding, and membership models. In 2024, UNESCO launched the Global Diamond Open Access Alliance to promote and connect these initiatives worldwide, and the Council of the European Union recommended that diamond open access be promoted across member states.
Diamond OA is especially significant in the humanities and social sciences, where APCs can be a substantial barrier to publishing.
Hybrid open access
Hybrid journals are subscription-based journals that offer authors the option to make individual articles open access by paying an APC. The rest of the journal's content remains behind a paywall.
While hybrid journals provide flexibility, they have drawn criticism for "double dipping" — collecting both subscription fees from libraries and APCs from authors for the same journal. Many funders, including those under the cOAlition S Plan S initiative, have placed restrictions on funding APCs for hybrid journals unless the journal is covered by a transformative agreement that commits the journal to transitioning toward full open access.
What are article processing charges and how much do they cost?
Article processing charges (APCs) are fees paid by authors, their institutions, or their funders to cover the costs of publishing an open access article. APCs fund peer review management, copyediting, typesetting, hosting, and long-term digital preservation. They vary widely depending on the journal, publisher, and discipline.
According to data from the National Institutes of Health and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the average APC worldwide is approximately $1,236, with a median of $950. For journals published in the United States, the average APC is higher — $2,177, with a median of $2,040. Top-tier journals charge significantly more: Nature's APC exceeds $11,000.
Between 2019 and 2023, global APC spending nearly tripled from $910 million to $2.54 billion, according to a study analyzing six major publishers. The open access journal publishing market reached $2.1 billion in revenue in 2024, with projections of $3.2 billion by 2028.
How to reduce or avoid APCs
Researchers concerned about APC costs have several practical options:
APC waivers and discounts. Many publishers offer full or partial waivers for authors from low- and middle-income countries or for those without funding to cover charges.
Institutional "read and publish" agreements. Many universities negotiate transformative agreements with publishers that cover APCs for affiliated researchers. Check with your institution's library to see if such agreements are in place.
Diamond OA journals. Publishing in diamond open access journals eliminates APCs entirely.
Green OA self-archiving. Depositing your accepted manuscript in an institutional repository costs nothing and still makes your work freely accessible.
Institutional publication funds. Many universities and research institutions maintain dedicated funds to help researchers cover OA publication costs — ask your library or grants office.
Why open access matters for research teams
Open access is not just a publishing model — it is a strategic advantage for research teams working across institutions and disciplines.
Greater visibility and citation impact. Multiple studies confirm that open access articles receive more downloads and citations than paywalled articles. Springer Nature reported a 30% increase in OA article downloads in 2024 compared to the previous year. When your work is freely accessible, more people read it, cite it, and build on it — accelerating the impact of your research.
Faster dissemination of findings. Open access eliminates the delays associated with embargo periods and subscription barriers. Your findings reach the global research community immediately upon publication, which is critical in fast-moving fields such as public health, climate science, and artificial intelligence.
Funder and institutional compliance. Major funders — including the NIH, European Research Council, Wellcome Trust, and many national funding agencies — now require open access publication of funded research. Non-compliance can jeopardize future funding, making OA awareness essential for principal investigators and lab managers.
Public engagement and policy influence. Open access makes research available not just to other academics but to clinicians, policymakers, journalists, educators, and the public. This broader reach increases the real-world impact of your work and strengthens the case for continued funding.
Smoother cross-institutional collaboration. When all team members can access the same literature without subscription barriers, collaboration becomes more efficient. This is particularly important for multi-institutional research projects where collaborators may have access to different library collections.
Open access mandates and policies every researcher should know
The regulatory landscape for open access has shifted dramatically. Researchers need to stay informed to remain compliant and protect their funding.
The Nelson Memo and US federal open access requirements
In August 2022, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) issued the landmark "Nelson Memo," requiring that all peer-reviewed publications resulting from federally funded research be made freely and immediately available to the public without any embargo period. Federal agencies were directed to finalize their updated public access policies by the end of 2024 and implement them by the end of 2025.
The NIH updated its public access policy effective July 1, 2025, requiring immediate open access for all NIH-funded research publications. Similar policies now apply across all US federal agencies, including the NSF, DOE, and DOD. These mandates apply to both peer-reviewed publications and underlying scientific data.
Plan S and European mandates
cOAlition S, a group of major European research funders, launched Plan S to require that all research funded by participating organizations be published in compliant open access journals or platforms. Plan S sets strict criteria for compliance — including requirements around licensing (CC BY), repository standards, and restrictions on hybrid journal APCs unless covered by transformative agreements.
Institutional open access policies
Many universities now have their own open access policies requiring researchers to deposit copies of their published work in institutional repositories. Institutions including Harvard, MIT, Stanford, and numerous European universities have adopted such mandates, often supported by dedicated library infrastructure and institutional repository platforms.
Why compliance tracking is a workflow problem
For research teams managing multiple projects with different funders, keeping track of open access requirements can quickly become overwhelming. Each funder may have different rules about which OA pathway is acceptable, whether hybrid journals qualify, and what embargo periods (if any) are allowed.
ScholarDock, a research project and reference management platform, helps teams track publication status across multiple projects and funders — so you always know which manuscripts need open access compliance action, which repository deposits have been made, and which deadlines are approaching. Instead of juggling compliance details in spreadsheets, you get a connected view of every project's publishing workflow.
How to choose the right open access path for your research
Choosing the best open access model depends on your field, your funding, and your publication goals. Here is a practical framework for making that decision:
Check your funder's requirements first. Many funders mandate specific OA pathways. If your funder requires immediate gold OA in a fully open access or compliant journal, that narrows your options from the start.
Evaluate your APC budget. If you have grant funding that covers publication costs, gold OA in a reputable journal is often the most straightforward path. If not, explore diamond OA journals in your field or plan for green OA self-archiving.
Consider your discipline's norms. In STEM fields, gold OA is increasingly the standard. In humanities and social sciences, green OA and diamond OA journals are more common, more accepted, and often better suited to the publication formats used in these fields.
Check the journal's license terms. Ensure the journal uses a Creative Commons license (preferably CC BY) that meets your funder's requirements and allows maximum reuse and redistribution of your work.
Verify the journal's legitimacy. Use the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to confirm a journal is reputable. Avoid predatory publishers that charge APCs without providing genuine peer review or editorial oversight.
Plan for repository deposit. Even if you publish gold OA, many funders and institutions require a copy in a designated repository. Build this step into your publication workflow from the beginning — not as an afterthought once the paper is published.
How to manage open access workflows across multiple projects
For principal investigators and lab managers running several studies simultaneously, open access compliance is fundamentally a workflow management problem, not just a publishing decision. Each project may involve different funders, different co-authors at different institutions, and different journal targets — each with its own OA requirements and deadlines.
Tracking all of this in disconnected spreadsheets and email threads leads to missed deposits, compliance gaps, and wasted time chasing down publication statuses from co-authors.
ScholarDock brings open access workflow management into your research workspace. You can track every manuscript's publication status — from draft through submission to final publication — alongside its funder requirements and repository deposit status. Team members can see at a glance which papers need attention, which APCs need approval, and which deposits are overdue, all connected to the projects and references they belong to.
Instead of switching between a reference manager, a project tracker, and a shared drive to piece together your OA compliance picture, ScholarDock keeps everything in one connected workspace where sources, projects, and collaborators work together seamlessly.
Common open access myths and misconceptions
"Open access journals have lower quality." This is false. Many prestigious journals — including those published by PLOS, eLife, Nature Communications, and BMJ Open — are fully open access and maintain rigorous peer review standards. The quality of a journal depends on its editorial process, not its business model.
"Open access means I lose copyright." In most OA models, authors retain copyright and grant the publisher a license to distribute the work. Creative Commons licenses give readers specific reuse rights while protecting author attribution. In many cases, OA gives authors more control over their work than traditional publishing agreements.
"I cannot afford to publish open access." Between diamond OA journals (no fees), APC waivers for researchers without funding, institutional "read and publish" agreements, university publication funds, and green OA self-archiving, there are viable options for researchers at every funding level.
"Self-archiving is not real open access." Green OA is recognized by major funders, institutions, and the broader research community as a legitimate open access pathway. While the archived version may differ slightly from the publisher's formatted version, the core peer-reviewed content is the same — and it is freely accessible to anyone.
"Only STEM researchers need to worry about open access." Open access mandates increasingly apply across all disciplines, including the humanities and social sciences. The Nelson Memo covers all federally funded research regardless of field, and European mandates under Plan S apply broadly across disciplines.
Make open access work for your research team
Open access publishing is no longer optional for most researchers — it is a fundamental part of how modern science is shared, funded, and evaluated. Whether you are a PhD candidate submitting your first manuscript, a postdoctoral researcher managing multiple publications, or a principal investigator overseeing a lab with dozens of active projects, understanding your open access options and building OA compliance into your workflow saves time, protects your funding, and amplifies the reach of your research.
The key is not just knowing which model to choose but having a system that helps you manage the entire process — from identifying the right journal and securing APC funding to depositing the final version and tracking compliance across every active project.
If your research team is tired of juggling publication statuses across scattered spreadsheets and email chains, ScholarDock brings your entire research workflow — sources, projects, manuscripts, and collaborators — into one connected workspace where open access compliance is built into how you work, not bolted on as an afterthought.