Beyond One Nation One Subscription: The Quest for Knowledge Sovereignty in India
How global shifts in scholarly publishing are redefining access, ownership and control over scientific knowledge
4 mins read
"In the knowledge economy, control over research dissemination is as important as control over research production."
Scientific research is often viewed as a public good. However, the system through which research is published, accessed and evaluated is largely controlled by a small group of international commercial publishers. As countries increasingly view knowledge as a strategic asset, many are rethinking their dependence on this publishing ecosystem and pursuing what is now called knowledge sovereignty.
Understanding the Global Scholarly Publishing Landscape
The global scholarly publishing system is the network through which scientific knowledge is reviewed, published, accessed and evaluated.
How the System Works
Step 1: Researchers conduct research
Step 2: Research paper submitted to a journal
Step 3: Peer review by experts
Step 4: Journal publishes the paper
Step 5: Universities and institutions pay to access it
Major Stakeholders
| Stakeholder | Role |
|---|---|
| Researchers | Produce knowledge |
| Universities | Fund research |
| Publishers | Publish journals |
| Governments | Finance research ecosystem |
| Readers | Consume research outputs |
Why is the Current Model Being Questioned?
A paradox exists in the system.
Public funds → Research conducted
Researchers write papers
Publishers publish papers
Universities pay again to access them
In many cases:
- Research is publicly funded.
- Peer review is performed free of cost by academics.
- Publishers charge subscription fees.
- Authors may also pay publication charges.
Examples of Leading Publishers
• Elsevier
• Springer Nature
• Wiley
• Taylor & Francis
• Sage
Prestigious journals such as Nature, Science and Cell dominate global academic visibility and influence.
Key Concepts in Scholarly Publishing
Subscription Model
Institutions pay annual fees to access journals.
Article Processing Charges (APCs)
Authors pay publishers to make articles openly accessible.
Example:
Nature Communications
Science Advances
Cell Reports
APCs often exceed $5,000 per paper.
Open Access
Research becomes freely available to all readers.
Green Open Access
Authors archive copies of papers in public repositories.
Diamond Open Access
Authors pay nothing.
Readers pay nothing.
Public institutions bear costs.
Global Shift Towards Knowledge Sovereignty
Several countries now seek to reduce dependence on commercial publishers.
China: Building Indigenous Publishing Capacity
China views publishing infrastructure as a strategic asset.
Key initiatives include:
- Reducing emphasis on journal impact factors.
- Supporting domestic journals.
- Linking research evaluation to quality and national priorities.
- Creating over 400 globally competitive Chinese journals.
Strategic Move
The Chinese Academy of Sciences stopped paying APCs for several expensive foreign journals.
"China seeks not only to produce knowledge but also to control the platforms that distribute it."
United States: Questioning Publishing Economics
The U.S. Congress has begun examining:
- Subscription costs.
- APC expenditures.
- Publisher profit margins.
- Public return on research investments.
The debate increasingly treats publishing as a fiscal and transparency issue.
Australia: Mandatory Open Access
Australia's ARC Open Access Policy (2026) requires:
• Immediate open access
• No embargo periods
• Institutional responsibility for compliance
The objective is to ensure that publicly funded research remains publicly accessible.
Europe: Creating Public Publishing Infrastructure
Europe has adopted perhaps the most ambitious approach.
Open Research Europe
| Feature | Details |
|---|---|
| Ownership | Public |
| Funding | European Commission |
| Technical Support | CERN |
| Publication Cost | Free |
The platform seeks to reduce reliance on commercial publishers altogether.
Europe is simultaneously scaling Diamond Open Access, where neither authors nor readers pay.
India's Approach: One Nation One Subscription (ONOS)
India launched ONOS in 2025.
Key Features
| Component | Details |
|---|---|
| Budget | ₹6,000 crore |
| Duration | 2025–2027 |
| Journals Covered | 13,000+ |
| Institutions Covered | ~6,300 |
For many researchers, especially in tier-2 and tier-3 institutions, ONOS has dramatically improved access.
What ONOS Solves — and What It Does Not
Achievements
- Expanded access to scientific literature.
- Reduced institutional inequalities.
- Treated knowledge access as a public good.
Remaining Challenges
• Dependence on foreign publishers continues.
• Publishing infrastructure remains external.
• APC expenditure continues.
• Pricing transparency is limited.
• No clear post-2027 roadmap.
With over half of global research already freely accessible, critics argue that India must move beyond merely purchasing access.
"ONOS solves the reading problem but not the publishing problem."
Towards Knowledge Sovereignty
A long-term strategy could include:
- Green open-access mandates for publicly funded research.
- Rights-retention policies for researchers.
- Investment in Indian journals.
- Publicly owned publishing platforms.
- Transparent APC expenditure.
- International collaboration on community-governed publishing infrastructure.
Way Forward
- Build sovereign scholarly publishing infrastructure.
- Strengthen Indian journals and editorial ecosystems.
- Encourage open access for publicly funded research.
- Promote community-owned publishing models.
- Integrate ONOS into a broader knowledge sovereignty strategy.
- Support reforms through the Anusandhan National Research Foundation.
Conclusion
The global scholarly publishing system is undergoing a major transformation. China is building domestic capacity, Europe is creating public infrastructure, Australia is mandating open access, and the United States is questioning publishing economics. India's ONOS initiative has improved access to knowledge, but true knowledge sovereignty requires more than subscriptions. It requires control over the institutions, platforms and policies through which knowledge is created, disseminated and preserved.
Attribution
Original content sources and authors
Syllabus classification
How this article maps to GS papers
Main syllabus
GS3Science & TechnologyAlso covers
Quick Q&A
What is knowledge sovereignty in scholarly publishing and why has it emerged as a significant policy issue for major research-producing nations?
Knowledge sovereignty refers to the ability of a country to control the creation, dissemination, evaluation, and accessibility of knowledge generated through its own research ecosystem. In the context of scholarly publishing, it involves reducing dependence on foreign commercial publishers and strengthening domestic journals, repositories, evaluation mechanisms, and publishing infrastructure. The concept has gained prominence between 2024 and 2026 as major research powers reassessed the economics and strategic implications of academic publishing.
Historically, countries outsourced publishing functions to a small group of international publishers such as Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, and Taylor & Francis. These companies enjoy profit margins comparable to major technology firms. However, concerns regarding escalating subscription costs, article processing charges (APCs), and restricted access have triggered policy shifts.
China is building an integrated publishing ecosystem through the Journal Excellence Action Plan, aiming to establish more than 400 world-class journals. Europe has launched Open Research Europe and expanded diamond open-access infrastructure. Australia has mandated immediate open access for publicly funded research, while the United States has initiated Congressional scrutiny of publishing economics.
For UPSC aspirants, the issue intersects with GS-3 Science and Technology, Economics, Intellectual Property Rights, and governance. Knowledge sovereignty has implications for innovation, self-reliance under Atmanirbhar Bharat, public expenditure efficiency, and strategic autonomy. It also reflects broader debates about whether publicly funded knowledge should remain under commercial control or function as a public good. Therefore, scholarly publishing is increasingly being viewed not merely as an academic issue but as an element of national capacity and technological sovereignty.
Why is the changing global landscape of scholarly publishing important for India and UPSC aspirants studying Science and Technology governance?
The transformation occurring in global scholarly publishing is important because it represents a shift from commercial dependence towards public access, public ownership, and strategic control over knowledge systems. For India, which seeks to become a knowledge economy and innovation hub, these developments carry significant economic, scientific, and geopolitical implications.
Between late 2024 and mid-2026, several countries adopted new approaches. China began strengthening domestic journals and reducing payments to expensive foreign publishers. Europe invested nearly €17 million in Open Research Europe for 2026-2031. Australia's updated ARC Open Access Policy became effective from July 1, 2026, mandating immediate access to publicly funded research. Simultaneously, the United States initiated Congressional discussions on whether taxpayers are receiving adequate value from billions spent on subscriptions and APCs.
India, however, committed ₹6,000 crore under the One Nation One Subscription (ONOS) scheme for 2025-2027. While the scheme democratizes access for approximately 6,300 institutions and provides access to over 13,000 journals, it raises questions regarding long-term sustainability and strategic autonomy.
For UPSC preparation, the issue links with GS-3 topics such as science policy, innovation ecosystems, intellectual property, and public finance. It also relates to GS-2 themes of governance and international cooperation. Current affairs relevance is high because the Anusandhan National Research Foundation and India's self-reliance agenda could influence future reforms.
The debate ultimately concerns whether knowledge generated through public funds should remain under expensive commercial models or be treated as a public good that supports national development and scientific progress.
How have China, the United States, Europe, and Australia adopted different strategies to reform scholarly publishing systems?
Major research-producing nations have adopted distinct but converging strategies aimed at reducing excessive dependence on commercial publishing and improving public access to scientific knowledge.
China has pursued perhaps the most comprehensive approach. Through the second phase of the Journal Excellence Action Plan, it seeks to establish more than 400 globally competitive Chinese-owned journals. Chinese policymakers are reforming research evaluation by emphasizing quality and national priorities rather than journal impact factors. In early 2026, the Chinese Academy of Sciences stopped paying APCs for more than 30 expensive international journals, including Nature Communications and Science Advances.
The United States has adopted a more regulatory approach. Congressional hearings in April 2026 examined paper mills, APC costs, and whether federal funding provides adequate public value. The Office of Management and Budget proposed restrictions on subscription and publication expenses under federal awards.
Europe has emphasized publicly owned infrastructure. Open Research Europe, supported with a budget of nearly €17 million for 2026-2031 and operated by CERN, aims to provide a collective publishing platform for eleven countries. Europe has also expanded the diamond open-access model, where neither readers nor authors bear publication costs.
Australia has implemented one of the most decisive policies. Its ARC Open Access Policy v2026.1 mandates immediate open access for all ARC-funded journal articles and conference papers, while institutions are responsible for compliance.
For UPSC aspirants, these models provide comparative case studies in governance and science policy. They demonstrate different pathways toward balancing accessibility, research quality, fiscal prudence, and technological sovereignty.
What is a critical assessment of India's One Nation One Subscription scheme and its implications for scientific self-reliance?
The One Nation One Subscription (ONOS) scheme, operational since January 2025, represents one of India's most ambitious efforts to democratize access to scientific literature. With a budgetary allocation of ₹6,000 crore over three years and access to over 13,000 journals from 30 publishers, it benefits nearly 6,300 institutions, particularly those in tier-2 and tier-3 regions.
Its major strength lies in reducing inequalities in knowledge access. Researchers who previously lacked institutional subscriptions now have access to international literature, thereby enhancing research quality and educational opportunities.
However, several limitations have attracted criticism. First, ONOS addresses the reading problem but not the publishing problem. India still relies heavily on foreign publishers and allocates around ₹150 crore annually for APC support. Second, more than half of global research output is already openly accessible, implying that a portion of expenditure pays for content available free of cost. Third, concerns exist regarding pricing opacity, future inflation, and the absence of a clear post-2027 roadmap.
Critics argue that dependence on foreign publishers weakens India's aspirations under Atmanirbhar Bharat and limits bargaining power. Every future negotiation may occur from a position of dependence, increasing vulnerability.
Supporters, however, view ONOS as a necessary transitional mechanism rather than a permanent solution. They argue that developing indigenous publishing infrastructure requires time.
For UPSC interviews, a balanced position is essential. ONOS should be regarded as a bridge rather than a destination. Complementary measures such as green open-access mandates, rights retention policies, investment in Indian journals, and transparent APC expenditures are necessary to achieve long-term scientific self-reliance.
What lessons can India learn from international case studies in open-access publishing and publicly owned research infrastructure?
International experiences provide valuable lessons for India regarding the governance of scientific knowledge and research infrastructure.
China offers a case study in strategic sovereignty. Through reforms in evaluation systems and investments in journals, China seeks to retain publishing revenues and enhance domestic prestige. Its decision in 2026 to discontinue APC payments for several costly journals illustrates how policy can influence researcher behavior and strengthen national capabilities.
Australia presents a case study in regulatory clarity. The ARC Open Access Policy, originally introduced in 2013 and strengthened through the v2026.1 update, mandates immediate open access. Institutions, rather than individual researchers, bear compliance responsibility, reducing administrative burdens.
Europe provides perhaps the most innovative example. Open Research Europe, backed by the European Commission and operated by CERN, seeks to create publicly owned publishing infrastructure. Simultaneously, the European Diamond Capacity Hub promotes diamond open access, where publication costs are funded institutionally rather than through author fees.
Latin America and Africa have also pioneered community-governed models emphasizing local ownership and accessibility. These examples demonstrate that sustainable alternatives to commercial publishing are possible.
India can draw several lessons: establish green open-access repositories, strengthen Indian journals, adopt rights-retention policies, enhance transparency in APC expenditures, and collaborate internationally to build community-governed platforms.
For UPSC aspirants, these case studies connect with GS-2 governance, GS-3 Science and Technology, and international relations. They also highlight how institutional design and policy choices shape innovation ecosystems. Comparative analysis strengthens answers in interviews and essay papers by demonstrating awareness of global best practices.
What are the major reasons behind the global movement away from commercial publishing dependence towards open-access ecosystems?
The global shift away from dependence on commercial publishers is driven by economic, technological, ethical, and strategic considerations.
The first reason is rising costs. Subscription fees and article processing charges have increased substantially, creating financial burdens for governments and research institutions. Some high-impact journals charge over 5,000 US dollars per paper, prompting concerns about affordability.
Second, there is growing recognition that publicly funded research should be publicly accessible. Taxpayers finance research, and many policymakers argue that restricting access behind paywalls contradicts the principles of transparency and social welfare.
Third, digital technologies have reduced barriers to dissemination. Online repositories and institutional platforms make it possible to share knowledge without relying exclusively on commercial intermediaries.
Fourth, countries increasingly view knowledge systems through the lens of strategic autonomy. China's efforts to build indigenous journals and Europe's investment in Open Research Europe reflect concerns regarding dependence on foreign publishing monopolies.
Fifth, concerns about profit concentration and lack of transparency have intensified. The United States has begun examining whether publisher margins and confidential pricing structures adequately serve the public interest.
Another important factor is the rise of open science movements and international mandates from organizations such as the Wellcome Trust and the National Institutes of Health.
From a UPSC perspective, these developments relate to GS-3 topics including technology, innovation, economics, and intellectual property rights. They also touch upon governance and ethics in GS-4. The broader trend signifies a transition from knowledge as a market commodity to knowledge as a public good, reflecting changing priorities in the global scientific ecosystem.
Practice questions
1 question for mains preparation