As publishing goes open access, does ONOS still deliver value for public money?

As publishing rapidly shifts toward complete Open Access—with major platforms like the ACM Digital Library becoming fully OA from January 1, 2026—the relevance of ONOS and its ₹2,200 crore allocation in the 2026–27 Budget warrants a critical reassessment.

Research excellence depends not only on capable researchers and strong infrastructure, but also on timely access to high-quality international literature. In India, uneven access to such resources has often limited the global visibility and integration of otherwise high-quality research.

To bridge this gap, the Government of India, in consultation with academic and scientific leadership, launched the One Nation, One Subscription (ONOS) scheme on January 1, 2025, with an outlay of ₹6,000 crore for the first three calendar years (2025–27). The scheme provides nationwide access to global research across science, technology, medicine, social sciences, and the humanities, covering over 6,000 publicly funded higher education and R&D institutions.

Previously, institutions subscribed individually based on their financial capacity and research priorities, leading to uneven access and duplication of expenditures. Through centralised national negotiations, ONOS aims to secure better pricing, rationalise public spending, and reduce disparities between well-funded and resource-constrained institutions. In the Union Budget 2026–27, the scheme has been allocated ₹2,200 crore; however, its effective implementation and meaningful utilisation—and whether the objectives of ONOS are being fulfilled with this substantial outlay of taxpayers’ money—remain critical questions.

The shift from subscription to open access

Historically, most institutions subscribed to a limited number of print journals, while premier institutions and major central libraries maintained more comprehensive collections. Access to research was often slow and uneven; scholars depended on physical library visits, postal reprints, or inter-library exchanges to obtain relevant literature. With the advent of digitisation, access became faster and more efficient, and electronic journals gradually replaced print editions. However, escalating subscription prices combined with shrinking institutional budgets rendered the traditional “publish free, pay to read” model increasingly unsustainable—especially for mid-tier and resource-constrained institutions.

In response, scholarly publishing began transitioning toward Open Access (OA) models, in which the financial burden shifts from readers to publication funding. Under this “pay to publish, read for free” framework, research outputs become immediately accessible worldwide, enhancing visibility and potential impact. This marked a significant departure from purely subscription-based systems and ushered in the era of transformative publishing.

Under transformative arrangements, many traditional subscription journals adopted hybrid models, in which an increasing number of articles are made open access upon payment of publication charges, while others remain behind paywalls. Thus, a single journal began operating in dual modes—combining restricted access with open-access content—before, in some cases, transitioning to full OA.

Open Access operates primarily through two main models. In Gold OA, publication costs are covered through Article Processing Charges (APCs) paid by authors, their institutions, or funding agencies. In Diamond OA, neither authors nor readers are charged; instead, publication expenses are supported by academic institutions, scholarly societies, government grants, or philanthropic funding. Many European academic consortia journals follow the Diamond model while maintaining rigorous peer-review standards, and most journals published by Indian scientific institutions and academies operate in a similar manner.

Green OA serves as a complementary pathway, allowing authors to archive versions of their work in institutional or subject repositories. Together, these models have reshaped access, cost distribution, and the sustainability framework of global scholarly publishing.

Collectively, these models have redefined access, cost distribution, and sustainability in global scholarly publishing.

Expanding open access landscape

The rapid expansion of OA has significantly democratised knowledge and broadened global research participation. Yet, this growth has also generated structural and ethical concerns, including the proliferation of journals, rising dependence on Article Processing Charges (APCs), quality control issues, and the spread of predatory publishing. Safeguarding credibility, sustainability, and equity in scholarly communication has therefore become a critical priority.

Transformative publishing agreements are accelerating the transition toward full OA. A growing number of journals are now entirely OA, hybrid journals are increasing their OA content, and most new titles from major publishers are launched as fully OA. Commercial publishers such as Elsevier, Springer, Taylor & Francis, Wiley, and World Scientific have converted many journals to Gold or transformative models, driving substantial revenue growth through APCs. However, the combination of high publication volumes and strong financial incentives has intensified concerns about maintaining rigorous quality standards, as the rapid proliferation of OA journals risks diluting peer-review standards, lowering quality, and reducing academic scrutiny.

It is also widely argued that specific segments of the OA ecosystem enable revenue generation at scale, with some authors prioritising publication volume over research quality, thereby further straining the integrity of scholarly communication.

Alongside commercial publishers, many of the world’s most reputable journals are published by professional societies and academic bodies, including ACM, IEEE, and leading associations in Physics, Mathematics, Chemistry, Mechanical Engineering, Aeronautical Engineering, etc. These organizations generally operate on a not-for-profit basis and produce journals, conference proceedings, and related publications that contribute significant disciplinary value. Many of them are also progressively adopting OA models.

A crucial distinction, however, lies in their funding approach. Several society journals follow Diamond OA (without APCs), while others combine Diamond and Gold OA models. Notably, ACM—one of the publishers under ONOS—has transitioned the ACM Digital Library to full OA from January 1, 2026, substantially lowering access barriers to what was once a high-cost resource. Similarly, numerous European society journals and many Indian academic publications operate under Diamond OA frameworks.

This evolving landscape raises important policy questions for large-scale subscription frameworks such as ONOS. As an increasing number of high-quality society journals transition to Diamond or full OA models, the economic rationale for centralised subscription expenditure warrants periodic reassessment. The shift toward OA—particularly in disciplines where leading publishers have already removed paywalls—demands careful evaluation of cost-effectiveness, coverage priorities, and long-term sustainability to ensure that public funds are deployed optimally.

The rise of conference proceedings

In fast-evolving fields such as computing, AI, ML, and several other streams, knowledge cycles are short, and journal publication timelines often delay the dissemination of cutting-edge results. Consequently, many of the latest advances appear first outside traditional journals.

In Computer Science, premier A* conferences have become leading venues for high-impact research due to faster review cycles and competitive selection processes. Presentations before expert audiences also enable rapid feedback, and a significant share of influential work is therefore published in conference proceedings rather than journals.

However, conference quality varies widely. While established series such as Springer’s earlier Lecture Notes in Computer Science maintained strong standards, the proliferation and commercialisation of conference publications have raised concerns about rigour. Most standalone proceedings are not directly covered under ONOS, though some top-tier content is accessible through the IEEE and ACM Digital Library segments included in the scheme.

Given that many proceedings are published as expensive e-books or monographs, careful evaluation and selective inclusion are essential to ensure academic value and prudent use of public funds under ONOS.

Has ONOS reached marginal and rural institutions?

A central objective of ONOS is to democratise access for institutions in marginal, rural, and resource-constrained regions.

However, despite repeated communications from the Union Education Minister and senior officials to State governments, nearly 40% of eligible State-funded institutions had not registered at the time of launch. In several major States—including Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka, Kerala, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and West Bengal—over one-third of institutions initially remained outside the ONOS framework. Even by September 2025, hundreds of institutions in some States were yet to complete registration.

Registration is only an initial milestone. True success depends on effective access and meaningful academic use. The decisive measure is whether faculty and students actively incorporate these resources into teaching and research. Without sustained engagement, reliable digital infrastructure, and institutional support, the promise of democratised access may remain largely symbolic. Ultimately, ONOS will be judged by demonstrable academic outcomes—not by registration figures or the scale of public expenditure alone.

Open questions?

The central question remains whether ONOS is genuinely fulfilling its stated objective of democratising and strengthening research access, or whether routine expenditure itself risks being projected as success. Has the scheme measurably enhanced research participation in marginal and rural institutions? Has it reduced disparities in scholarly access? Are utilisation levels commensurate with the substantial public investment?

With thousands of crores of taxpayers’ money committed, periodic transparency, independent audits of usage, and outcome-based evaluation become imperative. Without demonstrable academic impact—particularly among resource-constrained institutions—there is a real risk that ONOS could drift into a high-cost subscription mechanism with limited marginal gains. The challenge, therefore, is not merely sustaining the expenditure but ensuring that it translates into measurable research advancement and equitable knowledge access nationwide.

(Rajeev Kumar is a former Professor of Computer Science at IIT Kharagpur, IIT Kanpur, BITS Pilani, and JNU, and a former scientist at DRDO and DST)

(Sign up for THEdge, The Hindu’s weekly education newsletter.)