An Analysis of Income Models for Open Access in Korean Scholarly Journals

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the tendency of open access income models in gratis open access journals and fee-based online journals in Korea. This study found that there was no clear difference between two groups and fee-based online journals had several of the same characteristics of open access journals. That is, the societies published fee-based journals have requested APC to authors and additional page charges for the articles with research funding. Also, in case of fee-based online journals, the journals received subsidies from external funding agencies were more than free OA journals. These findings show that fee-based online journals in Korea have a lot of capability to transition to open access journals.

Scholarly communication and open access: Perspectives from Korea

“…APCs are a charge for publication and are paid by the author, their research funder, or research institution. As shown in Table , 84.4% of the KCI OA journals in 2010 had an APC (Joung, ), and 90.6% of the journals had membership fees of between £5 and £40. Annual membership fees are payable to academic societies and support the activities and management of those societies, including their publishing activities.…”

“…APCs vary significantly, from a minimum of £0.88 to a maximum of £44 (Joung, ). This diversity is also evident with DOAJ, for which the APC range was between $8 and $3,900 (Solomon & Björk, ).…”

“…This diversity is also evident with DOAJ, for which the APC range was between $8 and $3,900 (Solomon & Björk, ). In further analysis, which compares APCs for OA and TA journals, Joung () shows that while APCs are paid in both of these categories, fees for OA articles are generally higher than those for TA articles. For some articles, an ‘APC for funded article’ was added to the basic APC; this was typically between £30 and £117.…”

A Critical Review of Open Access Movement in Korea

“…However, these ways cannot help the situations of Korea because there is no clear copyright law between authors and publishers (Woo, 2009). Thus, Hong (2008) asserts some methods, as follows: (1) make the law about the paper submission; (2) define main agent of copyright; (3) reorganize titles of copyrights; (4) make the laws clear about digital duplication and transmission; (5) offer complete understandable sentences about transfer; (6) prepare the agreement of copyright transfer and stabilize the submission; (7) definitive contents and clues about copyright belongs to active OA and OA archive; (8) make compulsory author signatures.…”