China OA on the rise: What are the drivers behind authors’ OA choice?
Author: Silvia He
China is the world’s biggest producer of research articles. Chinese researchers’ attitudes to open access (OA) will be a key part of the global OA transition. Therefore, conducted continuous surveys on China OA perceptions, to explore evolving attitudes and practice in the Chinese research community, and further dig into key drivers and barriers behind their OA publishing.
In this blog, the third in a series on OA in China, we look into what researchers say is driving their decision to publish OA, and how attitudes to OA are evolving as authors’ experience of OA increases.
China’s OA research on the rise
China is the world’s biggest producer of fully open access (FOA) articles, and its share globally is growing rapidly. In 2023 China produced a quarter of global FOA articles, whereas the USA produced 10%, ranking second. Between 2020 and 2023, the compound annual growth rate (CAGR) was also higher for China (17%) than the USA (3%) and other high producers of FOA articles. This combination of the large number of articles published in China and the annual rate of increase has meant that China has contributed to over 40% of the global increase in the number of FOA articles between 2020 and 2023.
Figure 1: Chinese contribution to global FOA Articles. Chinese authors published 1/4 global FOA articles by 2023 and contributed to more than 40% of FOA article increase in 2020-2023.
(Source: AMT, WoS journals, articles and reviews, full OA APC and sponsored; other countries have been omitted for clarity.)
The 2024 China OA Attitudes survey also reflected the rise in OA publishing in China with authors’ reported experience of publishing models. The 2024 survey found that 69% of authors had experience of OA publishing, either as OA only or both OA and subscription models. This was up from 53% three years earlier. Similarly, when asked about the publishing model for the last paper they published 35% answered Gold OA, up from 28% three years earlier, with an additional 7% choosing non-gold OA models.
Figure 2: Changes of experience with publishing models and publishing model for the last paper
( *The “Non-Gold OA models (Green, Diamond / Platinum, Bronze)” option is added for the 2024 survey – data unavailable for 2021.)
What drives authors to choose OA
Choosing to publish OA is more often associated with positive OA beliefs rather than incidental beliefs or external influence. The beliefs reported most often included the belief that OA publications will be read more widely, receive more citations, and published more quickly, as well as the idea that research should be open to all. Incidental reasons, such as having funds left to pay article processing charge (APC) or OA being the only choice, were chosen less often, as was being influenced by external organizations and people.
Figure 3: Q. ‘For your last paper that was published via the gold open access model, what were the main reasons that you decided to publish your article gold open access? Please select all that apply.’ (n = 946)
The strength of belief in OA was also reflected in a fall between 2021 and 2024 in the proportion of respondents stating Gold OA publication was because of having funds left. 42% indicated having funds left as a reason for publishing their last paper via Gold OA in 2021, compared to just 32% in 2024. At the same time, however, as journals have flipped from a subscription model to fully OA, more authors have stated they have had to publish as OA because their journal of choice only offers OA publishing.
Experience and stories of OA authors
Importantly, people having positive experiences with OA also seems to be contributing to its rise. Those who have published OA papers are more likely to assert that all publications should go OA or acknowledge OA’s more extensive reach. Similarly, the percentage of who agree that OA is the future of publishing increases with past engagement with OA. OA-only authors are also less worried about the quality of OA papers and OA journals potentially being predatory.
Figure 4: Q. ‘To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about OA publishing?’
Real voices from OA authors:
“Literature access is difficult in many research organizations, and even top institutions may struggle to meet the access needs of all researchers affiliated. In many cases, researchers have to seek help from authors or colleagues of another institution. Research resources should be openly accessible, read, cited, and commented by all researchers and non-researchers alike.”
— Congyu Yu, Chengdu University of Technology
Read Congyu’s OA article published on Communications Biology:
“My previous belief was that Gold OA journals were all lower-quality journals, but now I feel that OA is not necessarily related to the quality of the journals.”
— Zhiyu Li, Shandong Academy of Grape
Read Zhiyu’s OA article published on npj Clean Water:
“Open access extends the reach of research findings.”
— Qinghua Guo, Hunan University of Science and Technology
Read Qinghua’s OA article published on Complex & Intelligent Systems:
By enabling researchers to share their research openly, together we can increase its use and re-use, speed up scientific advance. Explore ’s open science hub to learn more about OA fundamentals and benefits.
Related content
Author: Silvia He
Silvia He, Marketing Manager from Shanghai, spearheads content, community and engagement marketing in China. She actively bridges Chinese research communities with the global stage, while constantly sharing with global audience the latest trends in open science and other academic advancements in China.
