Hundreds of Diamond Open-Access Journals Have Switched to Paid Publishing Models
Many journals are ending free publishing and reading in favor of paid models.
Credit: hamzaturkkol/iStock via Getty
Hundreds of academic journals that once offered Diamond Open Access (OA)—free publishing for authors and free reading for readers—have switched to paid publishing models, according to a new analysis.
The study, published as a preprint earlier this year1, identified 440 journals that used the Diamond OA model before moving to another publishing model between 2009 and 2026.
Of those journals, 369 switched to Gold OA, in which authors pay an Article Processing Charge (APC). Another 52 moved to Hybrid OA, combining subscription-based publishing with free access to some individual articles for an additional fee. The remaining 19 journals became fully paywalled.
The APCs introduced by the journals ranged from $8 to $5,300. Costs varied mainly by publisher type: what the authors call “professional publishers” generally introduced higher charges, while research and academic publishers typically set lower fees.
The findings suggest that journals have increasingly moved away from Diamond OA in recent years. At least one journal left the model every year from 2009 onward, a change the researchers call a “diamond fracture.” The trend appears to be accelerating, with most of the identified transitions occurring after 2020 and 2025 recording the highest number in the dataset.
Why are some journals abandoning a model that is free for both authors and readers?
Why Are Diamond Open-Access Journals Switching Models?
Diamond OA has been used in academic publishing for decades, but its popularity grew in the late 2010s. One reason was frustration with the high APCs charged by some journals, which can place particular financial pressure on researchers in low-income regions.
A 2021 analysis estimated that around 29,000 active Diamond OA journals existed worldwide at the time.2
Because no single database records every Diamond OA journal worldwide, information scientist Lisa Matthias of Humboldt University Berlin and her colleagues combined several datasets to identify journals that had changed publishing models.
The researchers caution that their study does not provide an exhaustive list of all Diamond OA journals that left the model during the study period. They also could not calculate the proportion of journals that remained Diamond OA or determine why individual journals changed their models.
Nevertheless, the results offer clues about the increase in Diamond OA departures.
For example, 88% of the journals that switched models remained with the same publisher. This suggests that the trend cannot be explained simply by journals being sold or acquired by other publishers.
The journals that moved away from Diamond OA were “disproportionately older, more established, larger titles, not younger, struggling journals,” Matthias says. More than half—57%—had operated for at least nine years before changing models.
“It doesn’t look like a survival story,” Matthias says. “These journals and their reputations seem worth converting to a different model commercially.”
Commercial publishers accounted for 78% of the identified Diamond OA transitions. However, journals in the dataset did not significantly increase their circulation after changing models, despite the increase that might be expected from a profit-driven approach, the authors wrote.
Sarai Córdoba, a former information scientist at the University of Costa Rica in San José, suspects that some journals changed models not because Diamond OA is economically unsustainable, but because a more commercial approach may offer greater prestige.
The Future of Diamond Open Access
The researchers found relatively few Diamond OA journals in Latin America among the journals that changed models, despite the model’s strong presence in the region. “To me, that suggests that the diamond model works and can be protected,” Matthias says.
The authors note that support from Latin American organizations, including the OA publishing platforms Redalyc and SciELO, as well as local universities, may help prevent existing Diamond OA journals from collapsing. However, it remains unclear whether these organizations will be able to support new Diamond OA journals in the future.
Diamond OA journals are a “source of pride” for researchers and the public in Latin America, Córdoba says. That may also help explain why the region has experienced fewer Diamond OA departures.
Source: www.nature.com