The Announcement and Key Details of the CAS Reform
In late February 2026, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), the world's largest research organization with over 50,000 researchers across nearly 100 institutes, issued internal notifications signaling a major shift in its open access (OA) publication funding policy. Effective March 1, 2026, CAS will prohibit the use of its own funds or other central government research grants—such as those from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) or the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST)—to reimburse Article Processing Charges (APCs) for papers published in more than 30 high-fee international OA journals. This CAS Open Access Publication Fee Reform targets journals with APCs exceeding approximately $5,000 USD, a threshold far above the global average of around $2,000.
The policy stems from CAS's annual 'Early Warning Journal List,' which flags journals based on high APCs and potential research integrity risks. While the full 2026 list remains internal and unpublished as of early March, leaked excerpts circulating on Chinese social media highlight prominent examples like Nature Communications, Science Advances, and Cell Reports. Researchers affiliated with CAS can still submit to these journals using non-central funds or opt for subscription (paywalled) options in hybrid journals, which incur no APCs.
Background: China's OA Journey and Escalating APC Costs
China has been a global leader in embracing open access publishing to accelerate scientific dissemination and elevate its research profile. Since the early 2010s, Chinese institutions have poured resources into OA, with national APC spending tripling from $910 million in 2019 to $2.5 billion by 2023. This surge fueled breakthroughs but also exposed vulnerabilities: high-APC journals from Western publishers like Springer Nature and Elsevier captured a disproportionate share, with profit margins exceeding 30%—Elsevier at 37% over the past decade.
CAS, as China's premier research body, has long reimbursed APCs to incentivize high-impact publications. However, the rapid fee hikes—Nature Communications rose from $6,990 to $7,350 in 2026 alone—prompted scrutiny. In 2025, about 10% of papers in Nature Communications and Science Advances featured CAS authors, and 40% had any Chinese affiliation, per Web of Science data. This made China a key revenue source, but at the expense of domestic journal development.
The government's 2019 plan aims for 400 world-class Chinese journals by 2025, with nearly half already OA and fee-free or low-cost by 2023. The reform aligns with this vision, prioritizing fiscal efficiency amid tightening budgets.
Affected Journals and Their Steep APCs
The policy singles out fully OA journals with APCs over $5,000, sparing lower-fee ones like PLOS One (~$2,000) or Scientific Reports (~$2,500). Here's a table of confirmed high-profile examples:
| Journal | Publisher | APC (USD, 2026) | CAS Papers (2025 %) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nature Communications | Springer Nature | 7,350 | ~10% |
| Science Advances | AAAS | 5,450 | ~10% |
| Cell Reports | Cell Press/Elsevier | 5,790 | N/A |
| Advanced Science | Wiley | 6,730 | N/A |
| Results in Physics | Elsevier | 3,500+ | N/A |
Leaked lists suggest 34 such titles, plus 123 on integrity warnings. For context, hybrid giants like Nature charge $12,690 for OA but allow free paywalled publishing.
How the CAS Warning List Works
CAS's annual Early Warning Journal List, first issued in 2020, uses quantitative metrics (e.g., self-citation rates, retraction data) and expert reviews to categorize journals into high, medium, low risk for APC excess or misconduct. The 2026 edition expanded to flag ~30 high-APC OA titles and 120+ integrity-risk ones, prohibiting central fund reimbursements. While non-binding outside CAS, it influences universities nationwide, as many align with CAS rankings for evaluations.
- High-risk criteria: APC >$5,000, high self-cites, retractions.
- Process: Data from Web of Science, Scopus; peer consultations.
- Past trends: Lists shrank from 65 (2020) to 5 (2025), but 2026 surges due to APC hikes.
Drivers Behind the Reform: Cost Control and National Priorities
The reform addresses ballooning costs amid static grant sizes, with publishers' profits—fueled by unpaid peer review—drawing ire. Experts like Claudia Pagliari note OA's noble start devolved into 'journal proliferation' burdening poorer regions. Information scientist Lin Zhang frames it as balancing OA ideals with fiscal sustainability.
China seeks 'discourse power' in science via domestic journals, echoing Germany's APC caps and NIH deliberations ($2K-$6K limits proposed). Science magazine details the policy's roots.
Impacts on Researchers and CAS Institutes
CAS researchers face hurdles for prestige OA but retain options: non-central funds, paywalled hybrids, or lower-APC venues. Career pressure persists, as high-impact pubs aid promotions, but policy pushes diversification. Social media reactions: 'Overdue—fund domestic journals'; some worry for early-career scholars.
Broader: May reduce China submissions (40% in some journals), prompting quality focus over quantity. Ties to China's research evaluation reform breaking 'publish or perish'.
Craft a strong academic CV highlighting diverse pubs for higher ed jobs.Stakeholder Perspectives: Mixed but Largely Supportive
Chinese netizens applaud curbing 'academic colonialism'. Publishers silent; Springer Nature notes selectivity justifies fees. Gengyan Tang (U Calgary): Part of efficiency push, not OA rejection. Stefanie Haustein predicts read-publish deals over APC cuts.
CAS insiders confirm internal rollout pre-New Year; no official statement yet.
Global Ripple Effects on OA Publishing
Publishers lose big: China ~10-40% papers in affected titles. Mirrors Plan S pushback, accelerating 'diamond OA' (no-fee). Boosts Chinese journals, potentially reshaping rankings.
For international researchers, signals pressure on APC models; explore research positions in China amid rising domestic pubs.
Chemistry World analyzes publisher impacts.
Photo by Drahomír Hugo Posteby-Mach on Unsplash
Alternatives for Researchers: Strategies and Opportunities
- Lower-APC OA: PLOS, MDPI select (under $5K), Chinese journals (many free).
- Hybrids: Nature, Science—paywall free.
- Diamond OA: Community-led, no fees; growing in China.
- Preprints: arXiv, bioRxiv for visibility.
- Negotiate deals: Institutions may shift to transformative agreements.
Check postdoc advice for publication strategies.
Future Outlook: Toward Sustainable OA in China
The reform accelerates China's journal ecosystem, with 178 English OA titles by 2023. Expect emulation by universities, NSFC caps. Globally, pressures publishers to lower fees or innovate. For CAS researchers, a pivot to quality over quantity, enhancing long-term impact.
Explore China academic opportunities, research jobs, and professor ratings. Browse higher ed jobs or career advice for navigating changes. University jobs in China await talented researchers.
