The “OA Diamond Journals Study” commissioned by cOAlition S is a robust work in multiple parts: findings, recommendations, references, journals inventory and dataset. It looks at the global landscape of an estimated 29,000 journals that are free for readers and authors. Only about a third of these are indexed in DOAJ and they represent diverse regions (45% in Europe, 25% in Latin America, 16% in Asia, 5% in the US/Canada) and disciplines (60% HSS, 22% science, 17% medicine). We don’t hear enough about them, perhaps because they are less common in the U.S. and Canada, less English-centric, and more often published by small, niche organizations. The majority of the journals exhibit academic rigor and conform to standards that make them compliant with Plan S. However, most depend on volunteers, governments and universities for funding. The recommendations focus on potential efficiency gains, collaborations, and principles-based action plans to secure non-commercial funding. As one who recognizes the barriers that author processing charges (APCs) create, I’m a fan of the Diamond OA and the financial models that support them. This study provides a useful and detailed landscape for understanding and planning for sustainable OA Diamond journals.
