1. Chapter 3: Implementing Open Access Models
第三章 开放获取模式的应用
Financing Open Access Models / Stefan Gradmann, Department of Library and Information Science,
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
开放获取模式的财务 / 斯蒂文·柯莱恩, 柏林洪堡大学图书信息学系
From the outset, one of the most controversial issues surrounding Open Access has been the financing
of Open Access models, or indeed the question of whether they can be financed at all. This question
was also one of the original motivations for Open Access as a possible answer to the general problem
of the affordability of academic publication routes. In the beginning, this complex subject was
discussed in a very one-dimensional fashion, focusing on the paradigm of what is frequently referred to
as the ‘serials crisis’. In the meantime, however, the multifarious aspects of the problem have become
apparent, and it has become clear that their treatment must not stop at the frontline question of how the
publication of journals should be financed. In this context, it is also important to consider what services
Open Access stands for within the academic value-creation chain, and who is ultimately to pay for
them. Finally, with regard to the question of finance, the fact that the publication economics of the
various academic cultures are just as fundamentally different as their forms of publication must be
taken into account.
从一开始，围绕开放获取模式的财务就是争议最多的问题，或者换个角度问，开放获取到底能
否筹措到资金。解决学术出版道路的可承受性，正是产生开放获取的原始动机之一。刚开始
时，这个复杂的主题局限在被称为“连续性出版物危机”的范式上。然而与此同时，该问题的多
个方面浮现，很明显，不能把这个问题停留在期刊出版的财务上，重要的是考虑开放获取所代
表的学术增值链上的服务，以及谁最终为之付费。最后，从财务角度来看，必须考虑到，学术
文化的出版经济学，其多样化的程度基本上等同于出版物形式的多样化。
The traditional ‘Closed Access’ finance model• ••••
传统的“封闭获取”财务模式
For a long time, the dominant model of publishing scientific and scholarly articles in academic journals
was based on a chain of production and exploitation in which, as a rule, academics drawing their
salaries from public funds transferred the exclusive exploitation rights of their articles to publishers.
The publisher would ensure the quality of the content of these contributions prior to publication by
means of a peer review process, in which the referees were in most cases academics who drew their
salaries from the public purse. At the end of the chain, publicly funded libraries acquired the rights to
use these publications by subscribing to academic journals whose prices have shot up in recent years
and are increasingly regarded as being disproportionate to procedural costs.
长期以来，在学术期刊发表科学与学术论文的主导模式，是基于生产及利用的环节，作为一个
规则，薪水来自公共资金的学者，将使用其论文的权利，独家转移给出版社。出版社以同行评
审的方式，保证出版内容的质量，大多数情况下，评审者同样是领取来自公共资金薪水的学
者。到了学术活动链的末端，公共资助的图书馆以订阅学术期刊的方式，取得使用这些出版物
的权利。然而，近年来飞涨的期刊价格，已经被认为与其成本不相称。
Many argue that ultimately, this is an extremely expensive outsourcing model, in which public funds
flow in three places at the same time. During the 1990s, it became more and more apparent that this
could no longer be afforded. In addition, with the appearance of electronic forms of dissemination,

2. libraries have found that they are now increasingly acquiring only limited and time-restricted rights to
publications, in other words a very limited return on the considerable outlay. A final point of criticism
has been that commercial dissemination routes no longer or inadequately serve maximum
dissemination of academic publications among the specialist readership for which they are intended.
归根结底，许多人认为这是一个极为昂贵的外包模式，公共资金同时从三个地方流出。到了 20
世纪 90 年代，越来越明显，不可能再承受这个模式。此外，在电子形式的传播普及后，图书馆
发现只能取得出版物在有限时间内的部份权利，换句话说，大额的付出只取得有限的回报。最
后的批评指，商业传播途径已经脱离预期服务的专业读者群，不能适时地最大程度地传播学术
出版物。
‘Green‘ and ‘golden‘ publication economics• ••••
出版经济学的“玉律”和“金科”
Open Access was in essence a reaction to these developments. However, the two roads to Open Access
focus on quite different aspects. The ‘green road’, in which journal articles already published elsewhere
are made publicly available via private or institutional repositories, seeks above all to ensure the
maximum distribution of academic publications and thus to compensate a secondary effect of
traditional publication economics(32). It does not, however, change the way in which publication
economics functions, although it does possibly undermine it in that the sale of rights to use the articles,
an important source of income, may be lost without another replacing it. The financing system
represented by the traditional model would thus at least partly be put at risk. For this reason, many
doubt that the ‘green road’ can be a sustainable dissemination model in the long term.
开放获取本质上是对这些发展的回应。然而，开放获取的两条道路却完全不同。“玉律”指已经
在别处发表的期刊论文，经由个人或机构典藏库公开，确保学术出版物的最大散布，以弥补传
统出版经济学的次生效应（注 32）。它没有改变出版经济的功能，尽管可能削弱了一个重要的
收入来源，在没有替代模式的情况下，可能不再能贩卖论文使用权。传统模式下的财务系统，
即使不是全部也有部份将发生危机。出于这个原因，很多人怀疑，“玉律”会是一个可持续的传
播模式吗？
注 32: 斯蒂万·哈纳德写了很多论文, 探讨此议题, 如: Harnad, Stevan & Brody, Tim, ‘Comparing the
Impact of Open Access (OA) vs. Non-OA Articles in the Same Journals’ = [比较同一期刊开放获取
与非开放获取论的影响力], in: D-Lib Magazine 10. 6 (2004). http://www.dlib.org/dlib/june04/harnad/
06harnad.html.
The ‘golden road’ is a different case: in implementing electronic journals in the Open Access model, a
method must be found to finance the procedural costs. This necessitates alternative approaches in
publication economics to replace the traditional method of finance through the sale of rights of use.
One frequently chosen method is to recover the costs from the author or institution responsible for the
article instead of from the end-user. In this ‘author pays’ model, ‘per page’ or ‘per article’ charges are
supposed to cover the procedural costs including the peer review process. Thus, for example, the Public
Library of Science (PLoS) currently charges article fees ranging between USD 1 250 (PLoS ONE) and
USD 2 500 (PLoS Biology). BioMed Central charges USD 1 700 per article. Atmospheric Chemistry
and Physics (ACP) charges between USD 23 and USD 68 per page depending on the work required by
individual manuscripts.
“金科”是另一种情况：将开放获取模式应用于电子期刊，必须找到支付处理费用的资金。必须
改用替代的出版经济学方法，取代传统的、通过出售使用权筹措资金的方法。较常见的替代方
案是，向论文的作者或所属机构收费，而不向最终用户收费。在此“作者付费”模式下，以“每
页”或“每篇”为计价单位，其收入应足以支付包括同行评审在内的出版行政费用。例如，科学公
共图书馆（PLoS）收费标准每篇从 1,250 美元（PLoS ONE，综合类）至 2,500 美元（PLoS

3. Biology，生物学）不等；生物医学中心（BioMed Central）每篇收费 1,700 美元；《大气化学与
物理学》（ACP）视文稿的情况，每页收费 23 至 68 美元之间。
It is often unclear, however, to what extent the income generated in this way would really cover the
cost of publication, or, to put it differently, to what extent publication would depend on grants or other
subsidies, as are for example given by BioMed through endowments(33). It may be possible to justify
such a public subsidy in the long term with the argument that the publication of results is one of the
core functions of academic institutions(34).
不过，现在还不清楚，这种收入方式是否能支付出版的成本，或者换句话说，出版可以依赖奖
助或其它补助到什么程度，就象生物医学中心（BioMed）靠着捐赠存活（注 33）。或许可以证
明，这种公共补助有可能是长期的，因为出版研究成果是学术机构的核心功能之一（注 34）。
注 33: 即使在学术与专业学会出版协会于 2005 年资助的研究报告里，'The Facts about Open
Access' = [开放获取的事实] (http://www.alpsp.org/ForceDownload.asp?id=70 ), 对此问题做出最详
尽的调查，但还是没有明确的答案；在此报告第 43 及 44 页的两个财务报表里，出现相当不一
致的结果。
注 34: 约翰·威林斯基(John Willinsky)在他的论著中提出明确的论点，'Scholarly Associations and
the Economic Viability of Open Access Publishing' = [学会与开放获取出版的经济可行性], in:
Journal of Digital information 4. 2 (2004). http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/article/view/jodi-117/103.
The ‘author pays’ financing approach is also becoming increasingly appealing for commercial
academic publishers. Thus, for example, Springer is pursuing a declared Open Access policy through
its ‘Open Choice’ concept, albeit with the high fee of USD 3 000 per article.
“作者付费”财务方式也逐渐在商业学术出版社流行，例如施普林格以“开放选择”为名，推出开
放获取政策，每篇文章收费高达 3,000 美元。
Academic publication: commodity or service?•••••
学术出版：商业或服务？
Financial considerations in Open Access should not be limited to the funding models described above,
if only in relation to the publication culture in the humanities. The latter is characterised to a large
extent by the monograph, which is a different publication format. It is obvious that funding models here
have to start from hitherto largely unknown and little-discussed parameters. From the outset, the
determining factors will be not so much the relatively modest procedural and production costs as the
possible added value for scholarship as a result of free availability on the Internet.
从人文学科的出版文化来看，开放获取的财务考虑，不应局限于上述的资助模式。人文学科的
作品以专著居多，与论文相比，是完全不同的出版形式。显然，其资助模式必须由目前为止基
本上不清楚、也甚少讨论的参数开始。从一开始，就不能以置于因特网的自由获取为基础，作
为相对温和的程序和学术附加价值的决定因素。
Even in areas currently dominated by the journal format, however, the genuine potential of electronic
publication methods will increasingly be exploited. Therefore, results cannot be offered as statically
tailored publication products anymore, because they contain dynamic, interactive or multimedia
components, for example. If such publication methods are to be implemented on a sustainable basis,
new business models are needed.
然而，在目前由期刊主宰的领域里，电子出版方式的潜力即将爆发出来。它的呈现方式超越静
态的出版产品，还包括动态的、互动的或多媒体等组件。当持续应用这些出版方式后，就有必
要采用新的商业模式。

4. Those designing such models may find the following consideration helpful. Because of its pronounced
concentration on the exploitation model, the traditional publishing industry was dependent on defining
academic publications as a commodity that could be exploited. So far, Open Access has taken over this
logic basically unaltered, providing only for a redesign of the funding methods and cash flows.
However, this ‘commodity character‘ of academic publications will not be dominant for much longer.
Even the strategies of major commercial providers show signs of a rethink away from the commodity-
geared model based on exploitation of rights. They seem to be moving towards a service model, where
users no longer pay for the finished publication as a commodity, but rather for services provided along
the publication process, such as novel aggregation or localisation services.
以下的思考，对于设计这样的模式可能有所帮助。由于集中于开发模式，传统的出版业者将学
术出版物界定为可以开发的商品。到目前为止，开放获取基本上还是采用这种逻辑而未加改
变，只是重新设计了筹资模式及现金流向。然而，这种学术出版物的“商品特性”，不会长期居
于主导地位。即使是大型商业出版社的策略，也开始基于权利开发，重新思考商业模式。他们
似乎朝向服务模式前进，使用者不再以商品的观念为出版物付费，转向支付费用给出版过程所
提供的服务，如创新的聚集或本地化服务。
According to these models, access to the content itself will in principle be free, and the present
boundaries between Open Access and commercial models could thus become increasingly blurred. The
business models underlying such future open electronic publishing will presumably be designed by the
present-day protagonists of Open Access in cooperation with commercial publishers who are currently
regarded as antagonists.
根据这些模式，原则上获取内容本身将是免费的，目前横亘在开放获取和商业模式之间的界限
将日趋模糊。现今的开放获取倡导者将与对立面的商业出版社携手合作，设计出未来的开放电
子出版。
Academic publication and the academic added-value cycle• ••••••••••••
学术出版物与学术增值圈
Service-based Open Access models will not be feasible on a truly sustainable basis until the publication
of scientific and scholarly matter is clearly seen as just one stage in a holistically conceived academic
value-added process(35). This can be understood as a cycle starting with the author and leading back to
the start of the cycle via the referees of the publication, the publication stage itself, the administration
of the publications in libraries, and finally the academic reception and discussion of the contents by
readers (who in turn are once again potential authors!). If we look at this cycle from the point of view
of funding as a whole, the costs of the publication in a narrower sense become comparatively marginal
and can be recovered from the provision of services rendered prior to, subsequent to and in the context
of publication.
服务导向的开放获取模式不太可能具有真正可持续的基础，除非科学与学术出版事宜被清楚地
视为整体学术增值过程的一个阶段（注 35）。这个增值圈始于作者，经由评审者、出版阶段本
身、图书馆的出版物管理、最后是读者对内容的学术认知及讨论（读者再次成为潜在的作
者！），再回到作者。狭义来说，如果我们从资金面审视整个过程， 出版费用处于相对边缘的
地位，可经由出版内容之前、中、后的服务，完全涵盖。
注 35: 可预见的增值圈变化，请参照这篇有趣又具有启发性的文章, Roosendaal, Hans E., Geurts,
Peter A.T.M. & van der Vet, Paul, 'Eine neue Wertschöpfungskette für den Markt der
wissenschaftlichen Information?' = [科学信息市场的新价值链] , in: Bibliothek – Forschung und
Praxis 26. 2 (2002):149–153. http://www.bibliothek-saur.de/2002_2/149-153.pdf.

5. p. 45-49
Open Access: Opportunities and challenges. A handbook [开放获取 : 机会及挑战] / European
Commission/German Commission for UNESCO). -- Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of
the European Communities, 2008. -- 144 pp., 14.8 x 21.0 cm. -- ISBN 978-92-79-06665-8. -- EUR
23459, http://tinyurl.com/3q8wo5