More is not better: the developing crisis of scientific publishing - International Science Council

"The business models of commercial [subscription] publishers are based on appropriation of scientific output which is then sold on to readers’ institutions at levels of profitability in excess of 30-40%, (Buranyi, 2017) a financial barrier to readers or authors or both that particularly penalizes those in low- and middle-income countries where public funding for science is limited....

Two processes drive up prices. Firstly, most authors do not pay for publication (which is mostly born by science funders), a “moral hazard” in economics terms which avoids the normal customer control of prices. Secondly, science publishing has evolved from a state, half a century ago, when getting into print was the major obstacle, to a current state when almost any article can find a publisher. The major current challenge is to be read. So-called “high impact journals” offer such access, but at a high price. To rely on such a process when sorting algorithms could readily generate source-agnostic lists of relevant papers and agreed minimum standards could exert quality control reflects a dramatic lack of system governance from the scientific community and a silent acceptance of the actions of commercial publishers...."