Bo-Christer Björk, [in his sharp if studiously neutral account of high journal costs](, based on Michael Porter's [five forces framework](, concludes on an upbeat:

> A promising new strategy is the signing of transformative license deals between national library consortia and individual publishers. […]. If such deals become commonplace, this approach would enable publishers to gradually transform their journals to full OA at around the same income level as before. For libraries, it would secure a more predictable transition period. Also, the need to invest time and money in the green alternative of institutional repositories would decrease. And lastly, authors could continue publishing in exactly the same journals as before.

The critical flaw in Björk's reasoning comes in the last sentence. Most of the world's scholars could not, in fact, publish in exactly the same journals as before. Only from the perspective of Björk's Finland and other rich nations does read-and-publish look like "open" access. It's closed-authorship for the rest of us.