The problem with making all academic research free
There has been an earthquake in my corner of academia that will affect who teaches in prestigious universities and what ideas circulate among educated people around the world. And it all happened because a concept rooted in good intentions — that academic research should be “open access,” free for everyone to read — has started to go too far.
The premise of open-access publishing is simple and attractive. It can cost libraries thousands of dollars a year to subscribe to academic journals, which sometimes means only academics affiliated with wealthy colleges and universities may access that research. But under open-access publishing, nearly anyone with an internet connection can find and read those articles for free. Authors win, because they find more readers. Academics around the world benefit, because they can access the latest scholarship. And the world wins, because scientific and intellectual progress is facilitated by the free exchange of ideas.
By now this model has taken hold in the natural sciences, especially in biology and biomedicine; during the pandemic many publishers removed paywalls from articles about vaccines and treatments. The Biden administration requires federally funded scholarly publications to be made freely available without any delay.
However, there is no such thing as a free academic article. even with digital distribution, the expenses of running a journal are considerable. These costs include hosting the websites where people submit, peer-review, and edit articles; copyediting; advertising; preserving journal archives; and maintaining continuity as editors come and go.
As a result, unless journals have a source of revenue other than subscription fees, any move toward open access raises the question of who will cover the costs of publication.
One answer is that the money will come from authors themselves or their academic institutions or other backers. This works well enough in the natural sciences, because those researchers are often funded by grants, and some of that money can be set aside to cover a journal’s fees for publishing scientific articles. The Bill and melinda Gates Foundation demands that all research funded by the foundation, including the underlying data, be published open access.
According to a paper published in Quantitative Science Studies, however, only a small fraction of scholars in the humanities publish their articles on an open-access basis. unlike biologists and biomedical engineers, humanities scholars such as philosophers and historians do not get grants that can cover the publishing costs.
This means that if open access is to take hold in those fields as well — as many publishers and academics are advocating — the costs will have to be covered by some foundation or other sponsor, by the scholars’ institutions, or even by the scholars themselves. And all these models have serious downsides.
I’m a political philosopher. The earthquake in my field that I mentioned earlier shook one of our most prominent journals: the Journal of political philosophy.
Publishing an article in this journal has long made the difference between whether a candidate gets hired, tenured, or promoted at an elite institution of higher education. The high quality has stemmed in large part from the rigorous approach of the founding editor, Robert Goodin.
At the end of 2023, the publisher, Wiley, terminated its contract with Goodin. The reasons were not immediately clear, and over 1,000 academics, including me, signed a petition stating that we would not serve on the editorial board or write or review for the journal until Wiley reinstates Goodin. I recently attended a panel at an American philosophical Association conference where philosophers voiced their anger and puzzlement about the situation.
One source of the problem appears to be that Wiley now charges the authors of an article or their institutions $3,840 to get published open access in the journal.
The Journal of political philosophy is actually hybrid open access, which means it waives the article processing charges for authors who permit their work to appear behind a subscription-only paywall. Nonetheless, Goodin and Anna Stilz, a princeton professor and Journal of political philosophy editorial board member, point out that publishers like Wiley now have a strong incentive to favor open-access articles.
In the old model, in which university libraries subscribed to journals, editors were mainly incentivized to publish first-rate material that would increase subscriptions. In the open-access model, however, now that authors or their universities must cover the costs of processing articles, publishers of humanities journals seem to be incentivized to boost revenue by accepting as many articles as possible. According to Goodin, open access has “been the death knell of quality academic publishing.” The reason that Goodin lost his job, Goodin and Stilz imply, is that Wiley pressured Goodin to accept more articles to increase Wiley’s profits, and he said no. (Wiley representatives say that lines of communication had collapsed with Goodin.)
Early this year, Goodin cofounded a new journal titled simply political philosophy. The journal will be published by the Open Library of Humanities, which is subsidized by libraries and institutions around the world. But this version of openaccess publishing does not have the financial stability of the old subscription model. Scholars affiliated with the Open Library of Humanities have pointed out that the project has substantial overhead costs, and it relied on a grant from the Andrew W. mellon Foundation that has already ended. The Open Library of Humanities is an experiment, and I hope that it works, but as of now it publishes only 30 journals, compared with the 1,600 journals that Wiley publishes.
The fact remains that no one has satisfactorily explained how open access could work in the humanities and social sciences.
In his 2023 book “Athena unbound: Why and How Scholarly knowledge Should Be Free for All,” uCLA history professor peter Baldwin attempts an answer. He points to Latin America, where some national governments cover all expenses of academic publishing. But this proposal ignores the fact that the governments of the united States and other nations probably do not want to pay for humanities and social sciences journals.
Baldwin also floats the idea of preprint depositories where academics could share documents on the cloud before they have undergone the (somewhat expensive) process of peer review. But this means that academics would lose the benefits that come from getting double-blind feedback from one’s peers. This idea would reduce the costs of publishing a journal article, but it would turn much academic writing into fancy blogging.
Ultimately, Baldwin’s solution is that authors might “have to participate directly, giving them skin in the game and helping contain costs.” This means academics might ask their employers to pay the article processing charges, ask a journal for the processing fees to be waived, or dig into their own pockets to pay to publish.
And it might mean less gets published overall. The journal Government and Opposition, published by Cambridge university press, is entirely open access and charges $3,450 for an article to be published. I’d have to apply for a discount or a waiver to publish there. Or I could do what political philosophers in Japan and Bosnia and Herzegovina have told me they do: avoid submitting to open-access journals. Their universities will not cover their article processing charges except maybe in the top journals, and even the reduced fees can run into hundreds of dollars that these professors do not have.
In “Athena unbound,” Baldwin notes that Harvard subscribes to 10 times as many periodicals as India’s Institute of Science. One can bemoan this fact, but one may also appreciate that Harvard’s largesse spreads enough subscription revenue around to reputable journals to enable academics to avoid paying to publish in them, no matter whether they teach at regional state schools, nonelite private schools, or institutions of higher education in poor countries. For all its flaws, the old model meant that when rich alumni donated to their alma maters, it increased library budgets and thereby made it possible for scholars of poetry and state politics to run and publish in academic journals.
Until we have more evidence that open-access journals in the humanities and social sciences can thrive in the long run, academics need to appreciate the advantages of the subscription model.
Adulthood without a safety net
Although 18 is an age when many young adults are venturing into independence, few can live entirely without support. Most teenagers need help earning and managing money, finding housing, applying to and paying for college, or job hunting. some fall back on the safety net of returning to a parent’s house. According to the us Census bureau, in 2023, 56.5 percent of those aged 18 to 24 were living at home. that’s some 17.2 million young adults returning to the nest.
But many of society’s most vulnerable youths — those aging out of foster care — have no such supports. While some, like Works, choose to sign themselves back into care, many are left scrambling, sometimes with help from a hodgepodge of nonprofits serving transition-age youths.
Each year, around 650 Massachusetts teenagers age out of care without having any kind of family — biological or foster — to help them, according to DCF. national data from the Annie e. Casey foundation shows that such young people are more likely than others to be incarcerated, to soon become a parent, or to wind up homeless.
This is why Massachusetts desperately needs a better, centralized system for helping young people in state care find stable, loving homes and, when they age out, obtain the type of mentoring, support, and financial assistance that luckier teens get from their parents.
DCF taps federal and state programs to give housing vouchers to young adults aging out of foster care. A spokesperson for DCF says the agency also gives one-time discharge payments averaging $2,500 per person to youths and offers stipends to those remaining in care but living on their own. As of April 2023, young adults still in care were receiving an average of $13,870 a year in support payments, putting a young person without additional financial support squarely at the federal poverty level.
The state agency also contracts with nonprofits to find housing and other help. last year, 78 percent of 18-year-olds in state care signed up for such state-offered classes as life skills training and referrals to organizations that provide housing and employment support. but dCf does not provide other types of intensive hands-on guidance young adults often need to succeed.
Referring to DCF’s legal responsibilities, elisabeth jackson, president and Ceo of bridge over troubled Waters, which works with homeless youths, says, “You have a system that’s built to care and protect. it’s not built to teach and nurture.”
Help that’s hard to find
some young people leaving foster care aren’t aware that DCF and nonprofit benefits and services exist. this was Works’s situation.
He had academic potential. in spite of the instability that plagued his growing-up years and his mental health challenges, he was the valedictorian of boston’s Mckinley Preparatory High school’s class of 2023 and the recipient of multiple scholarships that enabled him to enroll at bunker Hill Community College to study information technology.
But he couldn’t afford the class fees and subscriptions for online coursework. Works experienced what many youths aging out of foster care do: He learned too late that offers financial assistance for education and living expenses that could have helped him. Works says he didn’t know how to access benefits he was eligible for.
“Three to four months after i dropped out,” he says, “DCF wants to talk about how they could have helped me pay for stuff.” Compounding his disappointment and struggle, Works suffered the loss of a nephew he loved like a brother, causing him, he says, to “mentally shut down” and isolate himself.
One bright spot in Works’s life is the nonprofit silver lining Mentoring, which paired him with a dedicated volunteer mentor and which offers programs that pay stipends to complete online life skills courses in such areas as how to clean a house, communicate with a roommate, and compare prices while shopping. An in-person session taught Works how to answer interview questions that had previously stumped him. for example, when asked by prospective employers to “tell me about yourself,” Works says he used to hesitate and talk about middle school. “i just thought, i feel like a regular person,” Works says. “i’ve got a sense of humor. i’m loud.” through the interview training, Works says, “i learned you want to talk about education and employment history.” He’s now working with another nonprofit, breaktime, that provides job training and placement for at-risk young adults.
Works has goals: building credit, earning money, getting therapy. but the odds remain stacked against him.
Advocates who work for nonprofits that support teens like Works say while services exist, the system for steering kids to them is fragmented and inadequately resourced. to make matters worse, young people leaving state care can be difficult to find and engage, exacerbating the problem of transition-age youths getting overlooked because it’s assumed they can take care of themselves.
“For us to think they can do it by themselves is beyond me,” says jackson of bridge over troubled Waters. “that’s what’s wrong with our system.”
There is evidence that the type of support provided by some nonprofits can improve outcomes. the Home for little Wanderers uses money from state and federal contracts and private philanthropy to operate supportive housing for transition-age youths. it operates a homeless shelter for 16 young adults, around half of whom have aged out of state care. the shelter’s waiting list is around 50 people long.
In addition, at Home for little Wanderers residences in somerville and Roxbury, 23 young adults live rent-free as long as they are working or in school full time. staff offer help getting identification cards, enrolling in school, finding a job, and learning to manage money. joshua grant, senior director of transition-age youth programs at the organization, says 85 percent of enrollees move from these units into permanent housing.
Grant got a call one evening from a young man who was threatening to punch his landlord because the landlord responded disrespectfully when the man asked for help operating his thermostat. grant helped the young man navigate the situation calmly. “the basic idea is if you invest in young people to that extent, their chances increase astronomically,” grant says.
Another organization serving former foster youths is the nonprofit Youth Villages, which has served 2,700 young adults since 2009 with state contracts to provide community-based support. staff are on call 24/7 to help with anything from applying for financial aid to drafting a resume, finding a doctor, or providing gas money. executive director Matt stone says specialists meet with young adults two to three times a week for an average of eight months. “it’s walking side by side with them in every aspect of independent living, teaching them skills they need to make that successful transition into adulthood,” stone says. the program found that 92 percent of participants were living either with a family or independently one year after discharge.
The goal should be a focus on families
Eric James, 27, who works for the boston mayor’s office, was raised by a single mother in Roxbury. After a fire in their house forced them to move, james says, he “had a fuse” and would argue and become angry in school, getting in trouble for being disruptive. He was caught shoplifting and spent time in juvenile detention. His mother, a nurse, struggled financially after being disabled in a car accident, and james says he skipped school and didn’t always have enough to eat. At 13, DCF took custody of james.
James says the goal was always to return to his mother. but DCF, James says, did not help his mother get the financial resources she needed to build a stable home. such assistance might not fall under the agency’s purview, but james and many others think it should. “there’s a lot of focus on kids in foster care, but if the goal is reunification, there needs to be a focus on families,” james says.
Indeed, child welfare advocates say the best outcome is for foster children to be placed in a permanent family — whether through adoption or reunification with their biological family — before they turn 18. in that measure, Massachusetts lags behind other states. According to data compiled by the Child trends website, from fiscal year 2018 to fiscal year 2021, 14 percent of Massachusetts children in state care turned 18 without being adopted or reunified with family — compared with 8 percent of foster children in the united states overall.
When he was 18, james signed himself back into DCF care in order to receive young adult support payments that would help him pay for courses at suffolk university. At the end of his first year of college, though, he owed more to suffolk than he could pay. At 19, he dropped out and moved in with his mother, without realizing that doing so would mean his DCF payments would stop.
DCF policy doesn’t allow it to make the payments to youths living with a biological parent, even a disabled one. james and his mother were evicted and ended up homeless. james stayed with a series of friends, including former suffolk classmates who occasionally sneaked him into dorms, and he slept outside. eventually, he reached out to DCF, which referred him to a boston homeless shelter, where he stayed for several months until his mother secured a new apartment for them in brockton.
A year after james left suffolk, silver lining Mentoring connected him to the Wily network, which helps boston-area students who are navigating college without family support. the nonprofit paid off his suffolk balance and helped him apply to uMass dartmouth. it supported james as he moved into on-campus housing and got settled, and for the next four years as he worked to complete a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice studies.
One can’t help wondering why the state agency that first took custody of james when he was 13 years old couldn’t do more than refer him to a homeless shelter.
What meaningful assistance would look like
Child welfare advocates say administrative bureaucracy within our state government can make it difficult to enroll transition-age youths in services, such as mental health treatment, that agencies in other states provide. in addition, DCF’s process for transitioning youths out of state care requires those young people to opt in to obtain additional DCF services. some states, like California, require youths to opt out of receiving services, a default system that normalizes and even incentivizes remaining in care past 18. Research shows that young people who remain in care until they are 22 — or even just 19 — tend to have better outcomes than those who leave at 18.
What to do? DCF needs better, more streamlined transition policies to help young people navigate the state agencies that can assist them in finding housing, jobs, and money for higher education, and can also steer them to the nonprofits that exist expressly for the benefit of this vulnerable population.
Works says when he needs help, he doesn’t call his DCF worker. He calls silver lining Mentoring. When his food stamps ran out, his volunteer mentor told him where to find a nearby food pantry. “i need support, they talk to me, try to figure out what i need for help,” Works says. the volunteers and staff there, he said, give advice.
More than that, he feels they truly care. they have become like family.