Involvement of China and its close partners in the international open access movement: Quantitative analysis and benchmarking approach

A quantitative assessment of China and its close partners’ involvement in the Open Access movement was conducted using a specially developed index ranging from zero to one. The index is based on three groups of indicators with different weights: Open Access repositories and journals (highest weight), Open Access policies (average weight), and signatories to Open Access initiatives (lowest weight). China's closest partners include 10 ASEAN countries, Russia, and 5 post-Soviet Central Asian countries. The results identify three groups of countries. Indonesia leads with a significant gap ahead of Russia and China, whose index values range between 0.3 and 0.5. The third group of 14 countries trails far behind with index values between 0.0 and 0.08. A correlation-regression analysis was performed to rank the countries according to the index under study, which revealed the stability of this ranking in its upper layer. An explanation for this phenomenon can be found in the Matthew effect and Cumulative Advantage Distribution. Regular index calculations combined with benchmarking methodology are suggested to link target index values to Open Access best practices. The conclusion will propose measures to increase the participation of less developed countries in ASEAN and Central Asia in the OA movement.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Information Development
Published
2025-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669251389935
Primary Topic
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Involvement of China and its close partners in the international open access movement: Quantitative analysis and benchmarking approach

В. М. Московкин, Yali Du
Information Development
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
article

Involvement of China and its close partners in the international open access movement: Quantitative analysis and benchmarking approach

В. М. Московкин, Yali Du
article en

Abstract

A quantitative assessment of China and its close partners’ involvement in the Open Access movement was conducted using a specially developed index ranging from zero to one. The index is based on three groups of indicators with different weights: Open Access repositories and journals (highest weight), Open Access policies (average weight), and signatories to Open Access initiatives (lowest weight). China's closest partners include 10 ASEAN countries, Russia, and 5 post-Soviet Central Asian countries. The results identify three groups of countries. Indonesia leads with a significant gap ahead of Russia and China, whose index values range between 0.3 and 0.5. The third group of 14 countries trails far behind with index values between 0.0 and 0.08. A correlation-regression analysis was performed to rank the countries according to the index under study, which revealed the stability of this ranking in its upper layer. An explanation for this phenomenon can be found in the Matthew effect and Cumulative Advantage Distribution. Regular index calculations combined with benchmarking methodology are suggested to link target index values to Open Access best practices. The conclusion will propose measures to increase the participation of less developed countries in ASEAN and Central Asia in the OA movement.

Information Development
Dezhou University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
scientometrics and bibliometrics research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.