摘要：Open access seems to have no way back and this, in turn, has generatedinnumerable tensions between three actors in the system: publishers,researchers and institutional governance. Firstly, the publishing housesthat have monopolized scientific publishing in the world, such as Elsevier,Springer-Nature, Wiley-Blackwell, Taylor and Francis or Sage, have seentheir business of selling content threatened. The questioning by the costsof access to the contents of these publishing houses that have acquiredhundreds of journals and have merged publishing houses, which accordingto Villatoro (2017) are close to 22 billion euros and a profit of 40%apparently higher than that of companies like Apple, Google or Amazonand; only a publisher like Elsevier invoiced, for the year 2016, more than2600 million euros with profits of one billion euros. This budget is morethan all the investment in scientific research in Latin American countries;this has led universities and science and technology systems in somecountries to raise statements such as DORA and LEIDEN, which haveallowed them to reach reviews of this externality of the economic dynamicsof science and even in some countries have created legislation that are demanding changes in science communication policies, especially onaccess to knowledge to break the paradox that is generated “investing inscience and not being able to access it”, which has led to reflections of theconsequences of the concentration of the largest amount of scientificknowledge in the world in a few publishing companies; These fivecompanies own more than 50% of the world’s scientific production.
