A recent article published by The Scientist draws attention to a growing challenge in academia: the rapidly increasing costs of publishing scientific research. In particular, article processing charges (APCs) associated with open-access publishing can amount to several thousand euros per paper, placing substantial pressure on research budgets worldwide.
While open access aims to make scientific knowledge freely available to society, the financial burden has largely shifted from readers to authors. As a result, funds that were originally intended for data collection, fieldwork, laboratory analyses, or personnel are increasingly used to cover publication fees. This development raises concerns about equity, especially for early-career researchers and scientists working in applied or interdisciplinary fields with limited funding.
Prof. Dr. Robert Arlinghaus, head of the IFishMan research group at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and editor for several international scientific journals, contributed expert insights to the discussion. He emphasizes that rising publication costs have consequences that go far beyond administrative hurdles. According to Arlinghaus, APCs increasingly compete directly with core research activities, forcing researchers to make difficult trade-offs between publishing their work and conducting new research. Early-career scientists are particularly affected, as they often depend on publications in high-visibility journals for career progression while having limited access to funding.
Arlinghaus also points out that the current publishing system can unintentionally reinforce prestige-driven dynamics in science. Career advancement may become increasingly linked to the ability to pay for publications rather than to the robustness, transparency, or societal relevance of the research itself. From his editorial perspective, this raises fundamental questions about how well current publishing models align with the long-term goals of science.
The debate highlighted in The Scientist reflects broader discussions within the research community about how to balance open access, scientific quality, and economic sustainability — and whether alternative publishing models are needed to ensure fair and inclusive knowledge production.
Read the full article here.