News & Views: Market Sizing Update 2024: Has OA Hit A Peak?

Dan Pollock, Ann Michael • October 22, 2024

Overview


Each year, Delta Think’s Market Sizing analyzes the value of the open access (OA) scholarly journals market. This is the revenue generated by providers or the costs incurred by buyers of content.


We estimate the OA segment of the market to have grown to just over $2.2bn in 2023. This is only a marginal growth over the previous year. It is a small fraction of the long-term historical growth of the OA segment.

A reduction in the output of the large OA-only publishers has had a profound effect on the market. It has benefited established publishers, who are seeing a growth in OA, even while the overall market softens. We expect this pattern to continue in 2024.


Have we reached peak open access? Have the underlying drivers of OA changed? And are we now in an era of lower OA growth?


Headline findings


Our models suggest the following headlines for open access market sizing:

We estimate that the OA market grew to just over $2.2bn in 2023.


  • 2023’s OA market grew by just under 1.7% from 2022. This less than one tenth of its historic growth.


  • We estimate the total scholarly journals market to have increased by 1.2% in 2023, compared with its long-term low single-digit growth around 5%.


  • Around 50% of all scholarly articles were published as paid-for open access in 2023, accounting for just over 20% of corresponding market value.


  • The large fully open access publishers saw a significant drop in their output in 2023. We are likely also seeing the tail-end of the correction from the very high OA growth during COVID. This has led to a collapse in growth of fully OA output and revenue.


  • Hybrid OA has taken up some of the shrinkage in fully OA. Growth in hybrid output and hybrid revenues continues to be strong.


  • Without currency effects, growth would be even slower than the headline numbers suggest. Total OA value would have shrunk by 0.2%, and the overall journals market would have grown at 0.3%. This suggests that underlying growth in the OA market has stalled and that of the overall market grew at around one tenth of long-term trends.


  • Growth in OA has shrunk to that of the underlying scholarly journals market.


  • We anticipate a 2023-2026 CAGR (average growth each year) of 4.9% in OA output and 6.3% in OA market value. This is significantly lower than historical averages.


A note about our method

As ever, we are very grateful to the organizations that participate in our annual survey, which we anonymize and aggregate to inform our estimates. We will shortly send our usual detailed market update and analysis to participants, which breaks out fully OA and hybrid details.


Our market estimates focus on research publications for which money is likely to be paid, either to read or to publish. Our definition of open access excludes “bronze” (public access) and “green” (repository-only) articles.

Rather than simply looking at annual figures, we extract underlying trends to inform strategic decision-making. Each year our source data improves, and we can refine our view on resulting trends as more information becomes available. Therefore, each year we restate historic figures as needed to keep them up to date.


Trends

We have seen a stalling of OA growth in 2023, particularly in fully OA output. We are likely seeing a systemic shift to slower long-term growth as the underlying drivers of the market change.

The large OA-only publishers saw a significant drop in their output in 2023, and this has had a profound effect on the market.


  • Clarivate’s delisting of journals from Web of Science had a knock-on effect across OA-only publishers’ portfolios and was likely the major driver of their decline in output, as authors chose other publication venues. OA publishers’ reduction in the use of special issues greatly reduces a major driver of their growth. Taken together, these two factors suggest we will see a much lower growth rate of fully OA output in future.


  • Established publishers saw an increase in OA volume and value, even if the overall OA market has stalled. They have benefited from authors’ move away from the OA-only publishers. Hybrid OA has increased for the same reasons, and we anticipate that it will continue to grow strongly. Non-OA publishing is also seeing a slight uptick.


  • Given the quality concerns around special issues, it seems unlikely that (many of) their articles would find other outlets, and so overall we are seeing growth in fully OA output stalling.


  • We are likely also seeing the tail-end of the correction from the very high OA growth during COVID.


The data suggest that OA’s share of output has likely peaked in 2023.


  • Our earlier sneak peek at the market suggested it peaked at 49% of output in 2022, falling to 48% in 2023. Our latest data here suggests OA just peaked at 50% share in 2022-2023 and may fall a few percentage points in the coming years.


  • Results from our survey and anecdotal feedback suggest more of the same for 2024: large OA-only publishers are likely to see continued declines, while established publishers will see continued growth.


  • The market will consolidate further. Long-term OA growth is likely to be less that it has been – perhaps mid-to-high single digits – but with increasing shares going to the larger publishers.


In 2023, around 50% of output was OA, accounting for around 20% of its value. This means that on average less money changes hands for OA articles than for non-OA ones.


  • The gap between shares of value and volume has been closing historically but has remained roughly the same over the last couple of years.


  • If the large OA-only publishers can recapture their early growth, then the gap will start narrowing again. However, it seems that established publishers are seeing a greater proportion of income from OA at the expense of others. This suggests the market-wide ratios will remain the same, but the specifics will vary depending on the publisher.


  • Prices have increased, and we anticipate that this will continue, although the effects of mixed-model deals on pricing dynamics have yet to become clear. Hybrid revenues realized per article published remain higher than those published in fully OA journals, and we expect this trend to continue.


  • OA is increasingly delivered as part of mixed-model deals, combining read and publish elements. If deals have price caps, it is possible that some of the OA output moving from OA publishers to larger publisher does not translate into higher OA revenues.


Conclusion

It’s difficult to make predictions – especially about the future. That said, we think that 2023 could prove to be a pivotal year for open access.


The challenges facing the big OA-only publishers in 2023 have been well-rehearsed. Delisting from Web of Science has led to an exodus of authors from across their portfolios. In 2022, we estimated that the big OA publishers – MDPI, Frontiers and Hindawi – together accounted for over 30% of OA market volume. It’s not surprising, then, that a decline in output from these publishers had a profound effect on the marketplace.


The results have been a mix of cannibalization and leakage. Established publishers and other access models have captured some of the publishing demand. Some content may have been subsumed into fixed-price deals, and so has not led to an increase in overall revenue. Then, given the quality concerns of special issues, it’s likely that a good proportion has simply disappeared. The signal to noise ratio has improved, and special issues are no longer fueling the growth that they once did.


The fundamental driver of OA used to be the policies of funder organizations. Now it appears to be those of Clarivate.


We have therefore seen a flatlining of OA growth, and OA share of output is struggling to get beyond 50%. Our models suggest it may pick up in the long term. But for now, at least, we estimate that its share has peaked.


Our industry does not systematically report comprehensive data about market volumes or value. So, any market sizing is an approximation, and figures should be taken as approximate. Subscribers to our Data & Analytics Tool can drill into the numbers in much greater depth, including analyzing fully OA vs. Hybrid OA details, society-specific output and subscription output. Please get in touch if you want to know more.


This article is © 2024 Delta Think, Inc. It is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Please do get in touch if you want to use it in other contexts – we’re usually pretty accommodating.


TOP HEADLINES

Open Access Partnerships Key to Increasing the Global Impact of African Research – October 16, 2024

“The work of researchers in Africa is experiencing increased international reach, supported by new open access (OA) partnerships between research libraries and publishers. Recent forums in South Africa have highlighted the importance of this cooperation for the continued growth and impact of Africa’s rich research output.”


cOAlition S announces the release of an independent study on the impact of Plan S – October 15, 2024

“cOAlition S is pleased to announce the release of an independent, comprehensive study assessing the impact of Plan S on the scholarly communication landscape. Conducted by scidecode science consulting, following a tender process, this study provides the first assessment of the impact of Plan S five years after its launch.”


Over 50 Independent Publishers Commit to BioOne Subscribe to Open Pilot – October 8, 2024

“BioOne, the leading nonprofit aggregator in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences, today announced that 71 titles from 54 global societies, museums, and research organizations will participate in its Subscribe to Open (S2O) pilot beginning in January 2026. This represents the largest number of independent publishers under a single S2O offer to date.”


Taylor & Francis Announces Subscribe to Open Journals Pilot – October 1, 2024

“Taylor & Francis has today announced its first Subscribe to Open (S2O) pilot, one of several innovative options it is trialing to accelerate open access (OA) publishing. S2O enables a journal’s subscribers to support its conversion to OA, making new articles available to readers everywhere.”


Update on UKRI’s journey to open access – September 16, 2024

“UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) is working collaboratively with stakeholders to support implementation of its open access policy. The policy applied since April 2022 for research articles and since January 2024 for monographs, book chapters and edited collections.”



OA JOURNAL LAUNCHES

October 17, 2024

EULAR Launches New Open-access Journal – EULAR Rheumatology Open (ERO)

“The European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) proudly announces the launch of its new open-access journal, a pioneering platform dedicated to advancing research and knowledge in the field of rheumatology.”


October 7, 2024

Penn State University Libraries Open Publishing launches Stroke Clinician journal

“Penn State University Libraries’ Open Publishing program has partnered with the Association of Neurovascular Clinicians (ANVC) to launch a new open access clinical journal, Stroke Clinician.”


October 3, 2024

AIP Publishing to Launch New Open Access Journal, APL Computational Physics

“AIP Publishing announced today the latest addition in its open access portfolio, APL Computational Physics. The new journal is slated to open for submissions in early 2025.”


September 24, 2024

ESE expands journal portfolio with the launch of Environmental Endocrinology and Obesity and Endocrinology

“The European Society of Endocrinology (ESE) is delighted to announce the launch of two new multidisciplinary, open-access journals, Environmental Endocrinology and Obesity and Endocrinology. The Journals will be published by Oxford University Press, with the launch issues scheduled for Q2 2025.”


September 17, 2024

IOP Publishing expands its open access environmental portfolio with Environmental Research: Water

“IOP Publishing (IOPP) is launching Environmental Research: Water a new open access (OA) journal which offers an interdisciplinary forum for researchers working to achieve water sustainability globally.”

Contextual Inquiry: The Science Behind User Behavior

By Lori Carlin • April 29, 2025
“I had a wonderful teacher about animal behavior.” – Jane Goodall Jane Goodall was renowned for her ability to understand chimpanzees in the wild simply by observing their day-to-day behaviors. Her subjects were her teachers. She immersed herself in their natural environment, which allowed her to gather authentic insights into her subjects’ social structures, tool use, communication, and cultural behaviors. This ethnographic style of research has now been adopted by the business world to gain deeper insights into customer needs, workflows, and challenges. What is Contextual Inquiry? Contextual Inquiry, as it’s frequently called in the commercial world, is a user-centered research method. Like Dr. Goodall in the field in Tanzania, Contextual Inquiry involves observing and interviewing users in their natural environments while they perform routine tasks, allowing market researchers to understand user behaviors, goals, motivations, and pain points in real-world contexts. The methodology is guided by four key principles: Context: Observations and interviews occur in the user’s actual environment. Partnership: Researchers collaborate with users to understand their processes. Interpretation: Insights are shared with users during the interview for clarification. Focus: The interaction is steered toward topics relevant to the research scope. Why Contextual Inquiry? Contextual Inquiry illuminates user behavior and workflows and can be used to inform solutions including product development, processes, and policies. 1. Deep Understanding of User Needs By observing users in their natural environment, contextual inquiry uncovers hidden needs, pain points, and behaviors that users may not articulate in surveys or traditional interviews. This identifies solutions that address real user challenges rather than assumed ones. 2. Authentic Data Collection Unlike lab-based studies or self-reported methods, Contextual Inquiry captures authentic behaviors as they occur. This helps reveal workarounds, unconscious habits, and environmental factors that influence user behavior. 3. User-Centered Design and Focus The method places users at the center, ensuring solutions are tailored to their needs and preferences. 4. Reduced Risk and Costs By identifying real-world user behaviors and challenges, Contextual Inquiry increases the likelihood that resulting solutions, products, processes, and policies meet user needs. 5. Informed Strategy Insights from contextual inquiry help prioritize users’ needs and challenges, identify new opportunities, and ensure alignment of product and strategy roadmaps with market demands. 6. Empathy Building Direct observation helps teams develop empathy for users by experiencing and understanding their challenges firsthand. Use Cases and an Idea Delta Think uses a Contextual Inquiry methodology to apply the principles above in several different types of projects: Understanding specialized work processes and designing complex systems or workflows Exploring new product opportunities Redesigning existing products Informing processes and policies One way Delta Think can use Contextual Inquiry to help publishers is around the use of AI by researchers and authors. For example, before developing any guidelines, it is critical that publishers first understand how these tools are being used. Using Contextual Inquiry to observe how researchers and authors are currently using AI allows you to build policies that address specific use cases and provide meaningful guidelines based on actual behaviors. At Delta Think, we know how powerful a tool Contextual Inquiry can be for creating a user-centered culture grounded in decisions based on real-world insights and observations. We specialize in uncovering evidence for our clients, discovering what that evidence means for them, and using the knowledge gained to build customer-driven products, policies, and actionable business and publishing strategies. Ready to start the conversation? Please reach out today to discuss how our market research expertise, including Contextual Inquiry, can help your organization unlock key insights to support development and growth.

News & Views: The Impact of Inflation on APC Costs

By Dan Pollock and Heather Staines • April 22, 2025
In March 2025, we looked at the latest Article Processing Charges (APCs) . This month we focus on how prices have risen relative to inflation. As APC price increases fall back to trend, what does this mean in real terms? Background Each year we survey the list Article Processing Charges (APCs) of more than 30 major and significant publishers. Going back to 2015, the dataset includes more than 20,000 unique titles and 150,000 title per year combinations. Going into 2025, we saw price increases fall back to long-term trends from their unusually high increases in 2024. Fully OA (“gold”) journal list prices across our sample rose by around 6.5%, compared with a 9.5% increase this time last year. Hybrid list prices rose by an average of 3%, compared with 4.2%. Last year’s price rises were above long term trends, but overall we found they were rising below inflation. How does this hold for this year’s price increases? We again use the global Consumer Price Index (CPI) as our inflation index, as we consider it to represent the most realistic view of our marketplace. Prices exclude zero APCs, so we can see the effects for instances when publishers choose to charge APCs. Are APCs becoming cheaper or more expensive? The chart below shows how increases in all list APCs work out in real terms for both hybrid and fully OA journals.

News & Views Webinar: Open Access Charges 2025

By Heather Staines • April 7, 2025
We are proud to share a video recording of our March News & Views companion online discussion forum! Join us to hear the latest trends around APC data, including APCs for both fully OA and hybrid journals. We'll talk about what we're seeing in relation to recent years and discuss the broader context for the APC market. If you missed the session, or if you attended and would like to watch/listen again, or share forward with friends, please feel free!

Author/Researcher Survey: Impact of Potential Funding Reductions on Research, Publishing, and Conference Attendance

By Lori Carlin • March 28, 2025
Delta Think is currently spearheading an industry market research survey to authors and researchers across the scholarly community designed to provide insight into the impact of potential US federal funding reductions on their research. The survey addresses topics such as publication volume, their ability/allowance for peer review, conference participation and attendance, influence on their research scope and topics, and more. Working in collaboration with nearly 25 scholarly societies, we are launching this initiative to capture the real-world impact of these potential changes in order to help societies better plan and support their members, researchers, and authors. The results of the survey will provide scholarly publishers with systematic, quantitative voice-of-market data to inform evidenced-based strategy development and scenario planning in a rapidly changing funding landscape and policy environment. The survey opens this week, with each participating society distributing the link to their own communities. All participating societies will receive an in-depth analysis of the full survey results, filtered by various demographics such as country, career stage, and discipline, as well as options for Delta Think to analyze their specific community data or the raw data from their specific community so they can analyze it themselves. Delta Think has designed the survey and will conduct all the analysis of the results.

News & Views: Open Access Charges – Price Increases Back on Trend

By Dan Pollock and Heather Staines • March 13, 2025
This month we look at our latest data about Article Processing Charges (APCs). Per article pricing is a fundamental building block for all paid publishing models, so our review provides an invaluable insight into how costs of open access continue to evolve. APC prices in general continue to increase, but at a slower rate compared with this time last year. Important nuances in the distribution of prices continue to affect the value and cost of paid publishing models. Background Each year we survey the list Article Processing Charges (APCs) of a sample of major and significant publishers. Covering more than 20,000 titles going back to 2016, our dataset represents one of the most comprehensive reviews of open access pricing. To compare like for like, we consistently analyze non-discounted, CC BY charges. We take a snapshot at the end of every January, so we can track yearly changes while controlling for the different times of year that publishers may update prices. Our statistics exclude zero or unspecified APCs, although these are included in our underlying data. This allows us to understand trends where publishers choose to charge APCs without skewing averages. We run separate analyses around APC-free models. Headline Changes Going into 2025, we have seen APC pricing increasing but falling back to long-term trends. Fully OA APC list prices across our sample have risen by around 6.5% compared with 9.5% this time last year. Hybrid APC list prices have risen by an average of 3% compared with 4.2% this time last year. Maximum APCs for fully OA journals remain at $8,900. Maximum APCs for hybrid journals now top out at $12,690 (up $400 from last year). Big jumps in prices happened last year, driven by high inflation. In 2020-2021 prices were driven up when high-impact journals began offering OA options for the first time. In both cases, increases subsequently fell back to averages. Underlying trends continue. There are around 2.6x more hybrid journals than fully OA ones, down from 2.9x a year ago. Hybrid journals follow (or, rather, set) a similar pattern to the market overall. On average, fully OA prices are around 64% of those of hybrids. This is a couple of percentage points higher than long term trends. Around 31% of our sample of fully OA journals charge no APCs. (We have separately analyzed the number of articles in OA journals.) Price rises vary significantly by discipline. Arts & Humanities and Social Sciences have seen particularly large average increases, especially in fully OA journal prices. Price Distribution Market-wide headline price changes mask important nuances. We have discussed previously that the most important nuance lies in the spread of prices within a given publisher’s portfolio. For example, if the bulk of a publisher’s journals lie toward the lower end of its pricing, with just a few journals priced at the high end, the average (mean) price will be higher than most authors pay. The following figures show how the spread of prices plays out in the market across our sample of publishers. The figures are outlines of histograms, showing how many titles sit in various price bands over the successive years of data we have curated. The red line shows the most recent year’s prices. The lines become greener as they go further back in time. Subscribers to Delta Think’s Data and Analytics Tool can see full details of axes. Hybrid Prices The spread of price bands for hybrid journals is shown in Figure 1 below.

Books: The Hidden Goldmine in Your 2025 Content Strategy

By Diane Harnish and Meg White • February 27, 2025
User information needs as well as funding models are evolving rapidly, as evidenced by Clarivate’s recent move to phase out perpetual access purchases for print, eBooks, and digital collections by the end of 2025. Taking a hard look at how these assets contribute to your portfolio and overall organizational strategy has never been more critical. A holistic books program assessment can help you think intentionally about how books and book-based content can help meet customer and market needs. Publishing and Product Strategy A market-driven publishing and product strategy begins with an understanding of customer information needs. What markets, segments, information needs, and challenges are present? How can customer information needs be addressed? What role can our book content play? How can we differentiate our solutions? Can our book content contribute to a unique value proposition? Thinking creatively about how your content meets market needs is critical; think solutions, not printed pages and chapters. Commercial Strategy A detailed commercial strategy, supported by proper resources, is fundamental to success. Leveraging a clear understanding of customer preferences and delivering messaging that resonates with your specific market segments and use cases is essential. What are the best methods to generate market awareness? When and how should we communicate with key audiences? What messages resonate best? What sales and marketing capabilities do we have internally? Where do we need to partner to reach core audiences? How do we meet global needs? Do we have the appropriate access, pricing, and distribution models in place to meet customer expectations? What do we need to do directly? Where should we cultivate successful channel partnerships? And you don’t have to go it alone; a commercial strategy is best formulated and executed by a combination of internal and external resources. Technology Infrastructure Is your technology optimized to support your book program? From agile content management systems to product platforms to customer relationship management tools, the right tools enable your content and commercial strategy. What systems do we need to ensure efficiency in our publishing processes and quality and integrity in our content? What technologies and platforms do we need to build market-responsive products? What systems do we need to communicate effectively and meaningfully with our customers, including authors? Are we best served by building these systems or partnering? Successfully integrating and leveraging new technologies, such as AI, requires a fundamental understanding of markets and customer information needs . The Numbers Financial metrics are a key measure of the health of any program. An in-depth assessment of a program’s recent performance is a vital tool to help identify strengths, weaknesses, and gaps, and help to surface areas for improvement and corrective action. A financial analysis will clarify: What is our book and content annual output? Is it sufficient to support our strategy and meet customer and market needs? What is our cost structure? Our pricing strategy? Do they align with industry and market norms and expectations? Do we have the appropriate mix of internal and external resources in place to support our strategy? How can we best align our financial performance to contribute to the organization’s larger strategy? Beyond red ink or black ink, financial analysis will provide answers to these questions. Assessing Your Book Program Delta Think partners with publishers to do the foundational analysis necessary to understand how your book and book-based content can be a vital part of your content portfolio and support your organization’s goals and objectives. Our processes, including program benchmarking, stakeholder interviews, surveys, and workshops, combined with expert landscape research and analysis ensure you are building a content strategy that is market-focused and customer-driven. Contact Delta Think at info@deltathink.com to set up a time for a video call to learn more. We will also be attending the London Book Fair, March 11-13, 2025, if you’d like to schedule an in-person chat.

News & Views: What proportion of OA is Diamond OA? Can AI help us find out?

By Dan Pollock and Ann Michael • February 20, 2025
Overview A recent post on the Open Café listserv posed a question about the true extent of fee-free open access publishing, but it noted the incomplete coverage of the data cited. We have more comprehensive data, but just as we started our analysis, DeepSeek’s release sent markets into turmoil. The stage was set for a timely experiment. We first answer the question using our data. Then we see how the AI did. Background What proportion of open access is not paid for by APCs? In discussing this, a recent Open Café listserv post cited studies by Walt Crawford – a librarian, well-known in the academic library and OA communities for his analysis of open access. He has paid particular attention to “diamond” OA journals, which charge neither readers nor authors. His studies are based on data from the Directory of Open Access journals ( DOAJ ). Excellent though both sources may be – and, full disclosure, we contribute to the DOAJ – the DOAJ’s remit covers only fully OA (“gold”) journals. As listserv founder Rick Anderson noted, “By counting only articles published in DOAJ-listed journals, Crawford’s studies radically _undercount_ the number of APC-funded OA articles published – because DOAJ does not list hybrid journals, which always charge an APC for OA and which produce a lot of genuinely OA articles (though exactly how many, no one knows).” Using our data Actually, we do know … or at least have some fair estimates of hybrid OA. Our data allows us to determine the share of open access output in APC-free journals, as follows.

News & Views Special Edition: How much scholarly publishing is affected by US Presidential Executive Orders?

By Dan Pollock and Ann Michael • February 11, 2025
Overview Following the 2024 US election, the new US administration has instructed employees in some key federal agencies to retract publications arising from federally funded research. This is to allow representatives of the administration to review the language used, to ensure it is consistent with the administration’s political ideology. In this special edition of News & Views, we quantify how many papers might be affected and estimate their share of scholarly publishers’ output. The initial numbers may be small, but we suggest the effects on scholarly publishing could be profound. Background On 20 January 2025, Donald J. Trump took office as the 47th President of the United States. Within hours he signed an Executive Order 1 (EO) 14168 proclaiming that the US government would only recognize two sexes, and ending diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs inside federal agencies. The following day, his administration instructed federal health agencies to pause all external communications – “such as health advisories, weekly scientific reports, updates to websites and social media posts” – pending their review by presidential appointees. These instructions were delivered to staff at agencies inside the Department of Health and Human Services (DHSS), including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Prevention, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The events that followed are important, as they directly affect scholarly papers and our analysis. A memo on 29 January instructed agencies to “end all agency programs that … promote or reflect gender ideology” as defined in the EO. Department heads were instructed to immediately review and terminate any “programs, contracts, and grants” that “promote or inculcate gender ideology.” Among other things, they were to remove any public-facing documents or policies that are trans-affirming and replace the term “gender” with “sex” on official documents. By the start of February, more than 8000 web pages across more than a dozen US government websites were taken down . These included over 3000 pages from the CDC (including 1000 research articles filed under preventing chronic disease, STD treatment guidelines , information about Alzheimer’s warning signs, overdose prevention training , and vaccine guidelines for pregnancy). Other departments affected included the FDA (some clinical trials), the Office of Scientific and Technical Information (the OSTP, removing papers in optics, chemistry and experimental medicine), the Health Resources and Services Administration (covering care for women with opioid addictions, and an FAQ about the Mpox vaccine). Around this time, it further emerged that CDC staff were sent an email directing them to withdraw manuscripts that had been accepted, but not yet published, that did not comply with the EO. Agency staff members were given a list of about 20 forbidden terms, including gender, transgender, pregnant person, pregnant people, LGBT, transsexual, nonbinary, assigned male at birth, assigned female at birth, biologically male, biologically female, and he/she/they/them. All references to DEI and inclusion are also to be removed. The effects of the EO Commenting on the merits of policy and ideology lies beyond our remit. However, when these matters affect the scholarly record – as they clearly do here – then they are of interest for our analyses. Specifically, what might the effects of the EO be on the publication of papers, and what effects might accrue from withdrawal of research funding? If federal agencies are being instructed to withhold or withdraw submissions, then, to quantify what this might mean to publishers, we have estimated the volume of output from a few key federal agencies. It is summarized in the following chart. 

New Year – New Technology: What Problem Are You Trying to Solve?

By Lori Carlin • January 23, 2025
Emerging technologies are reshaping how we create, distribute, and consume content. Publishers face the critical task of making smart technology investments to stay competitive and enable strategic objectives. How do you ensure that your next tech purchase aligns with your organization's needs and goals? Enter the needs assessment process – your roadmap to making informed, strategic technology decisions. From defining clear objectives to creating a comprehensive RFP, these best practices will help you navigate the decision-making process with confidence and ensure that your investments deliver value for your organization and your customers. Technology is not a solution; it is a tool. The temptation to adopt technology without a clear definition of what you are trying to achieve is an all too common (and usually very costly) mistake. Does your strategy include delivering a more personalized experience for your users? A customer data platform may be the right technology. Interested in using AI to build research integrity into your editorial process? Perhaps it’s time to revisit the capabilities of your editorial management system. Looking to support education and learning for students, faculty, and professional learners? Maybe it is time to evaluate formal learning management systems. Once you are confident about what you are seeking to achieve, the real work begins. Here are the key components that will help lay the foundation for a successful process from inception to deployment: Analyze Current State: Audit existing systems and processes to understand current capabilities and limitations. Conduct a Gap Analysis: Identify gaps between current capabilities and desired future state. Collect and Analyze Data: Gather qualitative and quantitative data from staff, users, customers, industry benchmarks, and about existing systems. Consider Resources and Constraints: Assess available resources, including budget, skills, and time. Research Solutions: Investigate potential technologies and/or types of solutions that could address identified gaps. Prioritize Needs: Work with stakeholders to prioritize needs based on impact and feasibility. Create RFP: After identifying prioritized needs and potential solutions, develop an RFP that clearly outlines project objectives, specific requirements, evaluation criteria, budget, and timelines. Distribute the RFP: Identify vendors with fit for purpose solutions and capabilities and distribute. Evaluate Proposals: Review vendor responses against established criteria and prioritize them based on how well they meet your needs. Plan for Adoption and Training: Consider the change management aspects of introducing new technology and processes. Be sure to develop a plan for user adoption, training, and ongoing support in your new systems. Technology as a Strategic Ally A methodical needs assessment is not just a procurement exercise – it is a strategic opportunity to reimagine how technology can transform your organization. The most successful technology investments are those that solve real problems, align with organizational goals, and empower your team to work more efficiently and creatively. Don’t fall into the trap of just moving what you are currently doing over to a new system. This is an ideal occasion to think about how you would design workflows and processes if you were to start from scratch and use that framework to evaluate the new capabilities available. You don’t want to duplicate what you are doing today; you want to step back and take the opportunity to build something better whenever possible. Customer Data Platform? Editorial Management System? Learning Management System? Something Else? Delta Think partners with publishers to do the foundational and implementation work required to ensure that technology decisions match the organization’s capabilities, fit the budget, and are grounded in voice-of-customer data. Our processes, including stakeholder interviews, surveys, and workshops, combined with expert landscape research, analysis, and assessments, underpin technology decision-making that is market-focused and customer-driven. If your 2025 objectives depend on or are enabled by technology, we’d welcome the opportunity to help you learn, plan, achieve. Please contact us today to start the conversation.

News & Views: How reliable are the headlines you read in reports?

By Dan Pollock and Heather Staines • January 14, 2025
A number of sources provide information about patterns in the overall scholarly journals market. However, as we so often mention in our analyses, important nuances lie beneath the headlines. This month we explore just how much variation exists and highlight the importance of specificity. Background As part of our annual market updates, we estimate the proportions of open vs. subscription access content each year. Over the last few years, we have observed how OA has approached 50% of output, but we note that it has yet to punch through that number. However, this headline varies greatly depending on your area of publishing. An example from physics The chart below shows the nuances across just a few of the 200+ subjects that we track.
More Posts