Introduction to the Community
Shared Values, Stakeholder Groups and Expertise
Six stakeholder groups are involved in a vision of collaborative and fair Diamond Open Access: academic libraries, Diamond Open Access publishers, Open Access projects, initiatives and infrastructures, research funding, scientific associations, and Diamond Open Access journals. These six groups are based on the stakeholder mapping of the AuROA project (2022), which in turn emerged from surveys of authors, workshops, other events, and personal discussions. Stakeholders in the Open Access publication process in the humanities were identified and adapted by us with regard to organisational and funding issues of Diamond Open Access.
The six stakeholder groups are closely interconnected and work together on fair Diamond Open Access. Diamond Open Access is understood in the sense of the definition by Hahn et al. (2023, p. 8):
“Diamond OA is based on the idea of sharing knowledge and on a commitment to social values such as embracing diversity (in subjects, disciplines, and languages) and equity in access and participation. In this way, Diamond OA stands for the autonomy of scholarly publishing and providing service to research communities without commercial interests.”
The goal of the entire process is collaboratively supported Diamond Open Access publishing, characterised by a scholar-led approach, shared values and principles, and the binding commitment of all participating stakeholder groups. This so-called values-based publishing puts a non-profit orientation and orientation towards the common good in the foreground. The focus is on transparency and fairness in the sense of free access, fair working conditions and fair licenses. We therefore also speak of commons-based Diamond Open Access. Successful collaboration in such a collaborative model is based on principles such as reliability, clear division of tasks, open communication, a discourse space for different perspectives, and active networking within the Open Access community.
All stakeholders can make a concrete, individual contribution to such a commons-based publication model, as illustrated by the individual arrows in the graphic. The following section explains the stakeholder groups and their individual tasks in more detail.
A Collaborative Process
Stakeholders and Central Topics of Diamond Open Access and their Interrelations
We understand Diamond Open Access as the result of a collaborative process. It is crucial to make the individual stakeholder groups and their contributions to key topics visible. Central topics through which Diamond Open Access becomes tangible as a holistic model are: sustainable funding, robust governance and organisational principles, quality, reputation and transparency, as well as networks and community work. We have identified these topics through literature research and interviews and conducted four thematic multi-stakeholder workshops each to deepen the discussion.
The four central Diamond Open Access topics are influenced by the various stakeholder groups. On the other hand, there are also connections between the topics, which are represented by the arrows. These relationships are explained in more detail in the Topics subsection.
Stakeholders
In the following, we present the specific expertise of the six participating stakeholder groups. Each group brings special skills and perspectives to a collaborative publication project.
Each actor is first introduced using brief examples. We then examine the respective participation opportunities using three different categories:
- Teamwork: What steps can the stakeholder group take within their own institution to promote collaborative structures?
- Sustainability: How can the group contribute to making Diamond Open Access sustainable in the long term?
- Contribution: What concrete content or structural contributions can the stakeholder group bring to a collaborative publication structure based on their expertise?
Diamond Open Access Journals
Diamond Open Access Journals play an important role in the Diamond Open Access transformation in many disciplines. On the one hand, long-term funding of infrastructure and personnel is a central prerequisite for their work. At the same time, they can carry out pioneering work through their flexible structures by developing new solution approaches, with particular attention to the needs of their own subject area. They can also contribute to the reputation of Diamond Open Access by involving renowned researchers.
Teamwork
- Journals can particularly utilise their flexible and efficient structures to initiate changes and carry out Diamond Open Access advocacy work. Many editors have independently acquired their knowledge on Open Access topics. This enables them to understand the perspective of people and institutions who are not yet familiar with Diamond Open Access and to communicate the advantages in a particularly comprehensible and convincing way.
- Through their experiences in editorial work, they can develop governance structures ('good practices') for editorial teams and write recommendations ('use cases') on transformation and flipping processes.
- It is of central importance that journals involve actors less familiar with Diamond Open Access in the transformation process and actively shape it.
Sustainability
- Journals can promote the sustainability of Diamond Open Access particularly through reputation – for example by involving renowned international researchers in editorial boards or as guest editors.
- Instead of quantitative metrics, content quality and target-group-specific addressing should take centre stage. This can be increased, for example, by indexing publications in subject-specific databases, as certain quality criteria must be met in this process.
- Another central point for the community is the transparent communication of internal quality criteria (for example peer review procedures), ethics guidelines and production processes, in order to build trust and sustainably strengthen the perception of the publication. Targeted public relations work also contributes to this by increasing visibility and relevance.
- Ultimately, an internal definition of precise Diamond Open Access goals and a clear division of tasks by the editors is required.
Contribution
- The pioneering work of journals could consist of developing experimental solutions to advance Diamond Open Access – for example through innovative publication formats. Since no standard solutions for Diamond Open Access exist so far, independent testing enables experience to be gathered and this in turn to be brought into collaborative models.
- Journals possess particular expertise in the publishing process and in internal quality assurance procedures. Sharing this knowledge with other stakeholder groups in a collaborative publication project represents an essential contribution. In addition, they can provide infrastructures for publishing processes and editorial work.
Academic Libraries
Academic Libraries can be located between science and publication service providers as well as publishing and funding institutions. Through this position, they have insight into the perspectives of various actors involved in the publication process and can thereby assume a mediating role. At the same time, they bring numerous legal, technical and editorial expertises to a collaborative publication project.
Teamwork
- In a first step, it is about critically questioning one's own structures and processes. Academic libraries can also do this by first appealing to their own values as a library and awakening motivation within the library to advocate for the expansion of Diamond Open Access based on their own values.
- In this context, there is also the question of the information budget of libraries. Quite specifically, a first step would be to conduct an inventory in one's own library, create transparency and examine: Who publishes where? What is actually supported? What proportion of this is Diamond Open Access? What do we want to continue funding? In this way, funds in the budget can be made visible and it can be prevented that only funds left over at the end are used for Diamond Open Access. On this basis, the acquisition logic of a library, i.e. the strategy according to which it maintains and expands its databases, must also be put to the test. In this way, for example, smaller Diamond Open Access initiatives and journals can be supported or recommended, instead of investing a large proportion of funds in DEAL contracts and APCs/BPCs.
Sustainability
- To promote Diamond Open Access sustainably, academic libraries can commit themselves to long-term funding of explicitly collaborative and fair Diamond Open Access. However, budget and constitutional questions regarding the funding of Diamond Open Access with public funds are still unresolved and create legal uncertainty for institutions and publications. An in-depth legal review by Verfassungsblog suggests that academic freedom and university autonomy within the framework of economic considerations in acquisition have been neglected as much as the tasks assigned to universities and academic libraries.
- Network work and collaboration with other libraries are also of central importance. This includes, for example, joint action in consortia – not least with regard to negotiating power with large publishers – and promoting the reuse and continuation of successful consortial models. Community work within one's own institution and in partnership with other libraries is also essential. Together with other libraries, universities and publishers, the development of overarching publication infrastructures can be initiated.
Contribution
- Academic libraries possess numerous expertise that they can contribute to a collaborative model in the form of advisory services. These include, for example, information services for researchers on legal and technical questions, optimisation of work flows or services for education about publication ethics. The development of mechanisms for recruiting young talent for editorial teams and the development of recommendations for editors on journal flipping are also concrete approaches to contribute expertise.
- In addition to such advisory services, academic libraries can also provide editorial resources and technical infrastructures.
- Apart from providing such advisory services, academic libraries can also provide editorial resources and technical infrastructures.
- Also the reputation of Diamond Open Access publications can be strengthened by libraries, for example through increased promotion and recommendation of Diamond Open Access. Libraries can recommend journal flipping to journal publishers or contribute to making Diamond Open Access more attractive to researchers by optimising workflows and processes.
- Not least, libraries can engage in educational work by making Diamond Open Access visible as an alternative to commercial publishing and at the same time advising on central questions such as costs, dependencies and the preservation of scientific integrity.
However, it is essential to integrate libraries into the governance structures of collaborative publication projects so that they are appreciated by other stakeholder groups as equal partners and not merely perceived as funders. This is also evident in our interview study.
“And many, or the feedback from many, that we receive there is actually that [the librarians] very much welcome this, because they thereby also feel more actively involved and [are] not just, as they say in English, the Purseholders, i.e. funders.”
“Und viele, oder die Rückmeldung von vielen, die wir dort erhalten, ist tatsächlich, dass [die Bibliothekar:innen] das sehr begrüßen, weil sie sich dadurch eben auch mehr aktiv eingebunden fühlen und eben nicht nur, wie man im Englischen sagt, die Purseholders, also Geldgeber [sind].”
Diamond Open Access Publishers
Diamond Open Access Publishers are, in some cases, academically led and have made diamond open access publishing their central mission — without operating for profit. Here too, the lack of funding for editorial work poses a major challenge. These publishers possess particular expertise in organisational structures and have the potential to drive innovation, as they operate outside of traditional publishing logics (Deville et al., 2019, p. 5).
Teamwork
- A particular strength of publishers lies in their experience in the publication process, which they can pass on to publications with advisory needs, for example.
- They can also provide a legal form as a basis for a collaborative publication structure.
- One form of community engagement can be sharing information about one's own operational and financial foundations, and creating transparency around services, costs, and pricing. This can also contribute internally to avoiding self-exploitation that can arise from a lack of cost transparency (Expert Interview Study, Transcription 2, Para. 65).
Sustainability
- Publishers can contribute to the sustainability of Diamond Open Access by strengthening the reputation of the open publication form. This can be achieved through establishing quality standards with editorial teams and transparency in the publishing process.
- In addition, they can help to make visible the strengths of small, university or locally operating publishers in contrast to large commercial providers.
- A contribution to sustainability can also be "co-editing", i.e. sharing resources, costs and infrastructures with other publishers (Maniero do Amaral & Furnival, 2023, p. 6-8).
Contribution
- Like journals, publishers can carry out pioneering and advocacy work through their rather flexible and efficient structures. Small, agile publishers can convince others of the Diamond model, as the transition to Gold Open Access has already shown (Henkes et al., 2025, p. 38). One of the interviewed experts says:
“So that smaller, agile publishers then also simply accept the experiment and then have a look, and whether it [referring to Diamond Open Access] works, and if it doesn't work, then you have to find another way and then you can also feed that back into the community.”
“So, dass so kleinere, agile Verlage dann halt auch einfach das Experiment annehmen und dann halt mal gucken, und ob es [bezogen auf Diamond Open Access] funktioniert, und wenns halt nicht funktioniert, dann muss man halt wieder einen anderen Weg finden und dann kann man das halt auch dann wieder in die Community so reintragen.”
- Through their well-established editorial work, publishers can set standards in collaborative projects to ensure high quality.
- Cooperation with commercial publishers and service providers for exchanging expertise in publishing and governance can take place, provided certain criteria are considered. Central is the preservation of individual independence, the scholar-led approach, cost transparency and a shared understanding of scholarly publishing as a service to society. Concretely, this means that rights to the work continue to lie with the authors and that there is an orientation towards discipline- and cross-country standards.
Open Access Projects, Initiatives and Infrastructures
Open Access Projects and Initiatives have the means and/or networks to bring the scholarly community together and encourage exchange of experience. They can therefore engage particularly in areas such as community work and the active further development of Diamond Open Access. Openly available infrastructures and corresponding services can also enable actors with limited resources to educate themselves and publish in the field of Diamond Open Access. Projects, initiatives and infrastructures can be institutionalised to varying degrees – from models firmly integrated into existing structures to informal associations supported by researchers or the community.
Teamwork
- Within the framework of collaborative Diamond Open Access publishing, initiatives and projects can particularly advocate for the development of community-led infrastructures in order to actively prevent possible dependence on commercial providers (Barnes & Gatti, 2019).
- At the same time, it is important to find ways to jointly use technical expertise as well as existing community-led infrastructures, tools and services.
Sustainability
- The institutionalisation of community work in existing structures is an important aspect for achieving sustainability.
- Projects, initiatives and infrastructures can provide special support services through training and skills development in the field of Diamond Open Access.
- They can also educate academic disciplines that have few points of contact or a small budget about Diamond Open Access.
- In addition to educational work, lobbying and promoting Diamond Open Access models to political actors or universities is also part of this, as one interviewed person emphasises.
“So I do believe that different expertises are needed in these non-profit organisational forms to really make it fly. So, clearly money. But yes, we know that journals are confronted with many challenges simultaneously and need support there. In that respect I believe [...] that projects can be a useful addition there, especially when it comes to lobbying. With the political actors, at the universities, so with the leaders of institutions and the like, to repeatedly wave the flag for Diamond Open Access and be able to make the advantages clear again and again, because I believe it takes time and a lot of lobbying, because the scene is also developing further and then you have to keep looking at where we actually stand.”
“Also ich glaube schon, dass es unterschiedliche Expertisen braucht in diesen gemeinwirtschaftlichen Organisationsformen, um das wirklich zum Fliegen zu bringen. Also, klar Geld. Aber ja, wir wissen, dass die Zeitschrift mit vielen Herausforderungen gleichzeitig konfrontiert sind und da Support brauchen. Insofern glaube ich [...], dass Projekte da eine sinnvolle Ergänzung sein können, gerade auch was die Lobbyarbeit angeht. Bei den politischen Akteuren, bei den Hochschulen, also bei den Leitenden von Institutionen und dergleichen, immer wieder auch ja quasi die Fahne schwenken für Diamond Open Access und die Vorteile immer wieder klar machen können, weil ich glaube, es braucht Zeit und viel Lobbyarbeit, weil sich die Szene auch weiterentwickelt und dann immer wieder geschaut werden muss, wo stehen wir eigentlich?”
Contribution
- As "awareness platforms", initiatives and projects can promote exchange among authors who are interested in establishing collaborative publication structures, sharing experiences and maintaining networks.
- Initiating, supporting and promoting collaborative structures such as consortial funding is also one of the strengths of this stakeholder group.
- Finally, projects, initiatives and infrastructures can take a leading role in advancing Diamond Open Access. The example of the national service centre for Diamond Open Access (SeDOA) demonstrates this particularly well:
“The DFG-funded project SeDOA aims to increase the efficiency of Diamond Open Access (DOA) publishing in Germany through better coordination and optimisation of decentralised services, provision of central information as well as innovations.”
“Das DFG-geförderte Projekt SeDOA hat zum Ziel, die Effizienz des Diamond Open Access (DOA) Publizierens in Deutschland durch bessere Koordinierung und Optimierung von dezentralen Dienstleistungen, Bereitstellung zentraler Informationen sowie Innovationen zu steigern.”
Research Funding
Research Funding can make a decisive contribution to the dissemination of collaborative Diamond Open Access – particularly through precise guidelines and standards for improving Diamond Open Access funding. It can also initiate urgently needed science policy changes.
Teamwork
- To realise Diamond Open Access as a collaborative project, the frameworks for funding must be improved. To this end, research funders can use their contacts with political decision-makers and lobby.
- However, advocacy work for Diamond Open Access must be carried out not only in science policy, but also directly with researchers. Many continue to decide against publishing their research results in Diamond Open Access. At the same time, funders orient themselves towards the publication venues of the researchers they fund. For example, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft supports Diamond Open Access monographs with only 4% of the total funding amount in its Open Access publications funding programme. To win researchers over to Diamond Open Access, investments in science communication by research funders are also required.
Sustainability
- To ensure sustainable funding, funding institutions must permanently support not only publications but also editorial teams and infrastructures, and above all independently of projects. The importance of project-independent funding is also visible in our interview study.
“A major shortcoming in terms of sustainability is that, naturally, in the entire scientific field, as also here, much of what happens is initially project-based. And many funders, who I believe would also fundamentally have an interest in funding Diamond Open Access long-term, are not allowed to provide funding that is not project-based. Like the DFG, which knows very precisely that it produces the dilemma of funding infrastructures on a project basis in the entire area where it's about scientific infrastructures, which actually can't work at all, because infrastructures are something permanent.”
“Ein großes Manko bei der Nachhaltigkeit ist, dass natürlich im gesamten Wissenschaftsbereich, so auch hier, vieles was passiert erst mal projektbasiert ist. Und viele Geldgeber, die grundsätzlich auch glaube ich ein Interesse daran hätten, Diamond Open Access langfristig zu finanzieren, keine Förderung machen dürfen, die nicht projektbasiert ist. Also wie die DFG, die ja sehr genau weiß, dass sie sozusagen in dem gesamten Bereich, wo es um wissenschaftliche Infrastrukturen geht, immer das Dilemma produziert, Infrastrukturen projektbasiert zu finanzieren, was sozusagen eigentlich gar nicht gehen kann, weil Infrastrukturen was Dauerhaftes sind.”
- To enable sustainable funding, existing funding logics should be critically questioned in order to invest financial resources specifically in systemic and structural support for publications. An exchange with funding institutions from other countries and federal states is also sensible. Concretely, this can mean prioritising small initiatives such as KOALA over DEAL contracts. Furthermore, funding should not primarily focus on paying APCs or supporting hybrid Open Access models, but should focus on Diamond Open Access. In this way, impulses can also be set for funding and institutionalising community structures.
- Finally, research funding can also act as an incubator for new initiatives and support journals, books or infrastructures with limited start-up funding within a realistic timeframe.
Contribution
- To make a concrete contribution to collaborative and fair Diamond Open Access, research funders can develop, standardise and communicate common funding criteria ("common good criteria"). These should be negotiated together with the specialist communities and coordinated nationally and internationally. Cooperation with other national and international research funders is essential for this. A concrete approach would be to include the existence and quality of longer-term funding concepts as an evaluation criterion.
- A drastic but effective step would be to establish a commitment to Diamond Open Access publishing or, alternatively, to establish a minimum share of public funding for collaborative Diamond Open Access.
- Last but not least, research funders can also contribute to changing research evaluation. The decisive factor is to move away from purely quantitative metrics such as the Journal Impact Factor and to include qualitative metrics such as target-group-specific addressing in order to be able to appropriately evaluate and support research.
Scientific Societies
Scientific Societies play a key role in the reputation of collaborative Diamond Open Access publications. They can bring the reputation of their respective discipline into collaborative projects whilst simultaneously taking a pioneering role for Diamond Open Access within their discipline. In addition, they can create continuity through long-term positions.
Teamwork
- Scientific societies can begin by enquiring about the Diamond Open Access status in their own community. This stocktaking can form the starting point for advocacy work within their own discipline. Scientific societies can spread Diamond Open Access within their own discipline by clarifying the relevance of the open publication form and demanding active engagement from researchers. This can be done, for example, through an ambassador model in which individual researchers within the discipline inform and educate about Diamond Open Access. Continuing education opportunities can also help to increase motivation for Diamond Open Access. Due to their proximity to researchers and editors, scientific societies are also particularly suitable as multipliers, for example as contact persons for journal flipping.
- Not all scientific societies are equally well positioned with regard to Diamond Open Access. This is also shown by our interview study.
“And there are areas and disciplines where it works. That's linguistics, that's geology here. In a certain sense it's physics and/or maths. But various scientific societies somehow don't move forward, but wait for something to happen or perhaps also try to find problems rather than solutions.”
“Und es gibt Bereiche und Disziplinen, in denen es funktioniert. Das ist die Sprachwissenschaft, das ist hier die Geologie. In gewisser Hinsicht ist es Physik und/oder Mathe. Aber verschiedene Fachcommunities gehen irgendwie nicht nach vorne, sondern warten darauf, dass was passiert oder probieren vielleicht auch eher Probleme zu finden als Lösungen.”
Here, subject information services and individual researchers can work to mobilise thematically related scientific societies more strongly for the topic of Diamond Open Access.
- Scientific societies can also exert influence at the international level by maintaining contacts with international representatives of the same discipline, encouraging exchange and promoting, for example, the shared use of infrastructures.
Sustainability
- As an interface between science and the information sector, scientific societies can assume a bridging function and initiate permanent cooperation between these two areas.
- As our interview study shows, they can contribute to continuity and stability in collaborative publication projects.
“Therefore I do believe that it's good if scientific societies also get involved a bit more strongly [...] and they also often have, perhaps also a business office and so on, where there's simply a bit more continuity. Well, I believe you generally need some kind of good mix of people from the information sector and from science, who commit more strongly and work together long-term.”
“Von daher glaube ich schon, dass es gut ist, wenn auch Fachgesellschaften sich da ein bisschen stärker einbringen [...] und die haben ja auch oft, vielleicht auch eine Geschäftsstelle und so, wo einfach ein bisschen mehr Kontinuität ist. Naja, ich glaube, man braucht generell irgendwie eine gute Mischung aus Leuten aus dem Informationsbereich und aus der Wissenschaft, die sich stärker committen und längerfristig zusammenarbeiten.”
However, it should be noted that not all scientific societies are professionally organised or have long-term positions and an office.
- By budgeting fixed funds for collaborative Diamond Open Access, scientific societies can – according to their individual financial possibilities – support the sustainable funding of a collaborative project.
- In addition to an inventory of the spread of Diamond Open Access in one's own discipline, it is equally important to define clear goals for this publication form.
Contribution
- For collaborative Diamond Open Access publications in the respective field, respected scientific societies can create trustworthiness and reputation. Concretely, this can be done, for example, through a direct connection of the publication to the scientific societiy. This in turn increases the willingness of researchers to publish Diamond Open Access.
- Scientific societies of individual disciplines should take a stronger pioneering role and develop creative solutions. A certain willingness to take risks is also required, for example in journal flipping.
- Furthermore, scientific societies can contribute particularly to the governance structures of a collaborative publication project – for example, if they are the carriers of the corresponding Diamond Open Access publication venues.
Below are some discussion points that are repeatedly raised in the community – sorted by stakeholder groups. These are not exhaustive and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the authors. Rather, they are intended to provide food for thought and encourage further exchange.
DIAMOND OPEN ACCESS JOURNALS
There is uncertainty in the community about which criteria a publisher-operated Open Access journal must meet to be classified as "Diamond". There is therefore a need for a uniform and official definition of the term.
Furthermore, it is discussed whether platforms with peer-reviewed multimedia content should also be counted among the "journals" stakeholder group and whether the term "journal" is defined too narrowly in this context. The debate also raises the question of whether journals in their current form will still be required in the future. In this scenario, there would also be no need for publishers, but only an editorial board that ensures the quality of the contributions. This type of publishing could break through previous acquisition and market logic.
ACADEMIC LIBRARIES
Academic libraries are also dependent on financial frameworks and institutional requirements from the university or college, which limits decision-making scope. Acquisition funds are finite and in some cases must be concentrated on basic information provision. In addition, a high proportion of libraries' information budget is tied up in DEAL contracts (as opposed to a small budget for Diamond Open Access), which reinforces existing dependencies and reputation mechanisms. (Fischer, Neufend, & Kindling, 2024)
Like all other actors, academic libraries are also dependent on large publishers and existing reputation mechanisms (e.g. high relevance of metrics such as the Journal Impact Factor). Researchers frequently decide against a Diamond Open Access publication for supposed reputation reasons, even though certain Diamond Open Access journals or publishers are highly regarded in their discipline. Another problem is that funding institutions and appointment committees rate publications with large renowned publishers higher. To loosen the scope of action of libraries, these frameworks must change. On the other hand, academic libraries can set impulses to initiate change and break through the self-reinforcing system:
– Promote Diamond Open Access within the academic community
– Initiate discourses on the evaluation of scholarly publications
– Foster networking and exchange between researchers and Open Access stakeholders
– Support (successful) but endangered Diamond Open Access publications
Direct funding of libraries as infrastructure providers is also demanded by the community so that they can sustainably build up publication services. It is also pointed out that some libraries also appear as publishers themselves and then have to balance different roles.
DIAMOND OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHERS
One particularly controversial aspect of publishing work is the collaboration with commercial publishers. As previously discussed in the context of publishers, there is the view that the expertise and services of commercial publishers should not be categorically excluded. Even when orientation toward the public good is used as a criterion for collaboration, there is no universally applicable assessment framework, and working with commercial publishers raises concerns about losing one’s own independence. Against this background, the question arises as to which commercial publishers and service providers are fundamentally suitable for integration into the Open Access community, how such integration can be structured, and at what points profit-driven market logic limits or even excludes collaboration. Transparency is crucial in this regard.
OPEN ACCESS PROJEKTS, INITATIVES UND INFRASTRUCTURES
Within the Open Access community, there is an ongoing discussion about whether publication infrastructures (such as PKP) and information infrastructures (such as DOAJ) should be described as a single stakeholder group or considered separately.
RESEARCH FUNDING
The community does see research funders as having a responsibility to initiate a shift in research evaluation and to standardise funding criteria for Diamond Open Access, but it also holds the academic community itself accountable. This raises key questions: What constitutes a relevant publication venue? What is considered relevant? How is success measured?
One option for rethinking the funding of Diamond Open Access has been proposed by the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina, which suggests a direct funding mechanism focused on scholarly societies (Tautz et al., 2025).
SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES
Subject representatives are viewed by parts of the community as rather conservative in their commitment to Diamond Open Access. Against this background, the question arises whether it is worth the time and resources to more strongly motivate subject representatives toward Diamond Open Access, and which actors might be suitable to engage them, especially when they have had little exposure to the topic. This role could potentially be filled by subject-specific information services (Fachinformationsdienste) or individual researchers.
A central challenge for the dissemination of Diamond Open Access is that subject representatives often publish their own journals and show little interest in supporting external Diamond Open Access journals. Conversely, there are journals that, despite close thematic alignment, have little to no connection with the relevant subject representatives. Furthermore, subject representatives are not equally relevant for all journals. This raises the question of how scientific societies can become more attractive partners for journals.
Furthermore, the question arises of how journals from scientific societies can gain popularity and reputation in order to compete with leading journals from commercial publishers. Open questions here are: What do professional journals need to gain significance? What goals do we want to achieve? How is success defined and discussed?
Furthermore, the community points to the different structure and varying degree of organisation of scientific societies. Since not all scientific societies are professionally set up and can create long-term positions, academic libraries could instead provide stability within the framework of a collaborative model.
Topics
The four central topics identified in the report from literature and interviews were discussed in individual workshops with the Open Access community in order to bring together different needs, interests and experiences. Sustainable funding has repeatedly emerged as particularly central, as it ultimately forms the basis for all other dimensions of collaborative and fair Diamond Open Access publishing.
To understand scholarly publishing as a holistic model, it also requires robust governance, quality and reputation of publications as well as structured community work. These areas are closely intertwined, as the arrows in the graphic above also illustrate. As already mentioned, reliable funding is a prerequisite for functioning community work, governance structures and high publication quality. Conversely, increased reputation can open up new funding opportunities. At the same time, it is important to integrate funding stakeholder groups such as academic libraries into governance structures and grant them participation rights. Furthermore, the Open Access community can strengthen the quality and reputation of publications by actively supporting alternative qualitative reputation mechanisms. Governance structures must be designed in such a way that they promote the institutionalisation of community structures, whilst the community can simultaneously influence the design of these organisational structures.
Sustainable Funding
To address these challenges, institutionalisation of funding structures as well as cost awareness and transparency are crucial. But diversification of funding sources and community-led funding approaches can also be means to secure reliable funding and prevent dependencies on commercial providers. Critical engagement with current developments, such as cost-intensive DEAL contracts or funding policy requirements to support Diamond Open Access, is also relevant. Furthermore, fair working conditions and the exit from unpaid, voluntary work in collaborative publication projects should move more to the centre of attention.
Overall, it should be considered that there can be no universal funding model for all collaborative publication projects, as requirements and frameworks can differ greatly from project to project and bibliodiversity should be regarded as a strength. According to the Open Access community, however, individual stakeholder groups can contribute to solving funding problems in a collaborative model. Provided legal concerns are clarified, libraries can actively decide to finance Diamond Open Access. scientific societies could likewise be more directly involved in funding and university presses could open their infrastructures for publication by other institutions. Initial successful funding rounds by KOALA demonstrate the functionality of consortial funding models and could lower the barriers for future broader financial participation by journals and libraries. Research funders could also contribute to improving Diamond Open Access funding with more precise guidelines. In particular, a focus on promoting successful collaborative approaches is an important next step. Financial commitment from stakeholder groups and clear and visible positioning of funding institutions towards Diamond Open Access as well as active advocacy work and targeted public relations can be crucial in winning new funders.
Governance structures and organisational principles
The topic of governance deals with prerequisites, opportunities and potential challenges of jointly organising Diamond Open Access publication models. The term governance is not uncontroversial in the Open Access community, as it is sometimes negatively connotated. Some voices even question the use of the term entirely. Unclear aspects include, for example, whether governance encompasses overarching control elements or concrete decision-making processes. The risks of complex governance structures (such as a slowing down of processes) as well as the degree of formalisation of organisational structures are also assessed differently. However, a certain structure and common editorial standards are necessary to overcome challenges such as voluntary work and long-term personnel management. For this reason, we consciously use the term governance within the framework of our model. Since the community expressly supports a diversity of organisational forms, collaborative models can exhibit different governance structures, including both horizontal and vertical forms of cooperation (Adema & Moore, 2018, S. 3–4).
In the organisation of Diamond Open Access, cooperation and collaboration—particularly in the area of infrastructures—are central concerns for the Open Access community. This includes the exchange of knowledge and the use and further development of existing services and open-source infrastructures. A tension becomes apparent here between decentrally organised community infrastructures and the centralisation of services. In selected areas, centralising infrastructures can make sense in terms of efficient resource use, provided that their development and operation remain in the hands of non-profit actors.
As already mentioned, essential principles for successful collaboration are shared values and principles, transparency, commitment, a clear division of tasks, regular communication, an open discourse space for different perspectives and active community work. A continuing readiness to review and adapt processes is essential, particularly when it becomes apparent that existing structures are no longer effective. Libraries in particular, due to their expertise and experience, are well positioned to contribute to governance structures, and therefore, like other key stakeholders, should be actively involved in the governance structure of a collaborative publishing project from the outset. Open Access publishers can contribute their experience with organisational structures, as well as a foundational legal framework that can serve as the basis for a collaborative publishing initiative. A specific legal form is not prescribed and can be chosen according to the needs of the collaborative organisation. However, it is essential that the business model includes, from the very beginning, dedicated capacities for innovation, networking, and professionalisation as integral components.
The role of profit-oriented actors in Diamond Open Access organisational models has been critically examined. At the same time, cooperation with small commercial publishers could contribute to the consolidation of governance structures, as long as the scholarly-led approach is maintained.
Quality and Reputation
Quality and reputation are central prerequisites for the success of collaborative Diamond Open Access publication projects. They are crucial for securing funders for funding on the one hand and motivating researchers to choose Diamond Open Access publications on the other. Since established publishers are often automatically associated with high reputation, collaborative publication projects must develop targeted measures to create trust, visibility and recognition in addition to secured funding.
Reputation can be ensured through consistent internal quality assurance procedures and transparent communication of these. Clear standards and community involvement must be ensured already in the founding phase of collaborative publication projects. Ensuring a high quality standard is also crucial during ongoing operations. This includes, for example, transparency about production processes and peer review procedures, orientation towards discipline- or cross-country standards, compliance with ethical guidelines as well as reliable technical infrastructures. In this way, collaborative Diamond Open Access publications can distinguish themselves from dubious offerings such as Predatory Publishing.
In collaborative publication projects, professionalisation strategies, supported by stakeholder groups such as academic libraries, can significantly increase the quality and reputation of Diamond Open Access. These include, for example, the optimisation of work flows and the shortening of publication periods. Additional impulses come from editorial standards introduced by publishers and the involvement of renowned researchers, for example within the framework of scientific boards of journals. The participation of respected scientific societies also contributes to increasing reputation, as already described. Institutional affiliation with scientific societies or universities or research institutions can additionally provide visibility and prestige.
To make Diamond Open Access visible as a model and strengthen it permanently, transparent communication about internal quality assurance procedures and targeted public relations work are crucial. This also includes good communication of possible advantages of Diamond Open Access, such as increased visibility and an increased citation rate of freely accessible publications (Huang, Neylon & Montgomery, 2024). In this way, researchers in earlier career stages can also be motivated for Diamond Open Access publications. For these to be viewed as fundamentally equivalent to publications from renowned publishing houses, a change in research evaluation and new procedures that measure the quality of research more strongly according to professional relevance, qualitative assessments and target-group-specific addressing are urgently required.
Networks and Community
Collaborative Diamond Open Access publications require structured network and community work. They benefit from the involvement of scientific societies, which can support the visibility and reputation of publications. The motivation of researchers as carriers of content is crucial for promoting Diamond Open Access in their own field and making successful projects visible. In addition to scientific societies, the Open Access community and its diverse projects, initiatives and infrastructures also play a central role, as these educate about collaborative Diamond Open Access, convey expertise and provide community-led publication and information infrastructures. Such community-led infrastructures are crucial on the one hand to avoid dependencies on profit-oriented solutions from large publishers. On the other hand, they enable resource conservation, cost efficiency and professionalisation of work flows.
Community work faces numerous challenges. The unequal spread of Diamond Open Access and the different needs of scientific societies make it difficult to organise comprehensive advisory services and develop a shared understanding of collaborative publishing. It remains open whether specific Open Access communities within individual disciplines are required or whether priority should be given to coordinating international networks. The lack of long-term funding and the absence of institutionalisation of community structures also make it difficult to build stable community structures – impulses from science policy and research funding are also necessary here.
For successful collaborative publication projects, institutionalised structures, transparency and open communication are central prerequisites. Financial and time resources for network and community work must be explicitly planned in a collaborative governance model. At the same time, community work also depends on individual actors and their personal relationships. "Successful failure" is understood as a learning process to continuously improve advice and structures. To realise collaborative approaches requires more courage and willingness to innovate instead of the (compared to the debate about Gold Open Access) often critical and emotional debate. Here, for example, publishers and journals can take a pioneering role by doing pioneering work and developing experimental solutions.
"The community" are ultimately researchers themselves, who are closely integrated into collaborative publication structures and support the respective publication organ. In this way, science can be motivated to operate its own communication organ for its community.
What factors influence stakeholder actions?
Legal, Structural and Open Access Frameworks
As already became clear in the further discussion of the stakeholder groups, they cannot act completely freely. Their actions are embedded in various frameworks that influence their possibilities and decisions. These can be divided into three categories:
- Open Access conditions describe fundamental characteristics of the Open Access landscape, such as bibliodiversity, but also conditions of the Open Access transformation, such as the power of commercial publishers, which is also evident in DEAL contracts.
- Structural frameworks concern the scholarly publication culture as a whole, for example existing metrics of research evaluation or the fundamental problem of limited funding.
- Legal frameworks include higher education law and public budget law. These not only set the legal framework for stakeholder action, but also influence the funding of Diamond Open Access with public funds as well as the acquisition logic of individual funding institutions.
The stakeholder groups are not passively or helplessly embedded in these frameworks, but can actively influence and shape them.
Open Access frameworks can be co-shaped by all stakeholder groups by committing themselves to a diverse publication landscape and formulating clear goals for Diamond Open Access – first within their own institution and then within the framework of a collaborative publication project. Funding institutions such as libraries can specifically increase funds for Diamond Open Access in relation to funds for APCs or DEAL contracts and thus directly influence transformation conditions.
Structural frameworks can also be influenced. For example, research funders can help shape science policy requirements through lobbying and initiate project-independent funding models. Close cooperation of all six stakeholder groups is necessary for a change in research evaluation. This involves defining from within science what counts as a reputable publication venue and how scholarly success should be measured. Individual initiatives such as CoARA are already setting important impulses in this regard.
Even though legal framework conditions are difficult to change, Open Access projects and initiatives can provide food for thought and initiate reforms. An example is the legal opinion developed by Verfassungsblog in the ELADOAH project, which critically examines the economic efficiency of Diamond Open Access financing.
