On 1 July 2026, version 2026.1 of the Australian Research Council’s Open Access Policy came into force. It applies to all ARC grant schemes that opened for application on or after that date — if a scheme opened before 1 July 2026, the previous policy still governs its outputs, even if the scheme closes or the grant is awarded later. This guide sets out exactly what changed, what the new requirements mean in practice for researchers and research offices, and which schemes and output types are actually in scope.
Last verified: 16 August 2026, directly against arc.gov.au and current university library guidance summarising the ARC’s own policy text. Where a detail could not be confirmed against a primary ARC source at the time of writing, it is flagged below rather than stated as settled.
What changed on 1 July 2026
The core change in version 2026.1 is the removal of the embargo option for the two most common ARC output types. Under the prior policy, journal articles and peer-reviewed conference papers could be embargoed for up to 12 months after publication before the full text had to be made openly accessible. Under 2026.1, journal articles and peer-reviewed conference papers arising from in-scope ARC funding must be made openly accessible immediately upon publication — there is no embargo window for these two output types.
Alongside the immediate-OA requirement, 2026.1 introduces a universal Digital Object Identifier (DOI) requirement across all research output types funded by an in-scope ARC grant, including creative works, and differentiates the open-access timeframe by output type rather than applying one blanket rule.
Before vs after: the ARC Open Access Policy compared
The table below summarises the practical difference between the policy that applied to ARC schemes opening before 1 July 2026, and version 2026.1, which applies to schemes opening on or after that date.
| Requirement | Previous ARC Open Access Policy | Version 2026.1 (from 1 July 2026) |
|---|---|---|
| Journal articles & peer-reviewed conference papers | Open access required within 12 months of publication (embargo permitted) | Open access required immediately on publication — no embargo |
| Monographs, edited volumes, book chapters, research reports | Not separately specified; generally treated under the same 12-month expectation | Open access required within 12 months of publication (embargo still permitted for these formats) |
| Creative works & other outputs | Not explicitly addressed | Open access strongly encouraged where possible, but not mandated |
| Metadata deposit | Deposited in an institutional repository within 3 months of publication, including ARC Project ID and a persistent link to the output | Same 3-month metadata deposit expectation carried forward |
| DOI requirement | Not uniformly mandated across all output types | A DOI is mandatory for every research output, including creative works |
| Scope trigger | Applied to outputs from grants funded under guidelines released since 1 January 2013 | Applies to ARC grant schemes that open for application on or after 1 July 2026 (the RMS application-opening date is the trigger, not the award or start date) |
Note the scope trigger is the date a scheme opens for application in the ARC’s Research Management System (RMS), not the date a grant is awarded, when the project starts, or when a given output is published. A Discovery Projects round that opened in 2025 remains governed by the previous policy for its entire life, even if papers from that grant are published in 2027.
The immediate open-access requirement: what “immediate” means in practice
For journal articles and peer-reviewed conference papers, “immediate” means the output must be openly accessible from the date of formal publication — there is no grace period and no permitted embargo, in contrast to the 12-month window the prior policy allowed. In practice, most institutions meet this by ensuring the Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM) is deposited in an open institutional repository and set to open access on the day of publication, rather than relying on the publisher’s own open-access route unless the journal is fully gold or diamond open access. Researchers publishing in a subscription (non-OA) journal need to check, before submission, that the journal’s self-archiving terms actually permit zero-embargo AAM deposit — not every publisher agreement currently supports this, and reconciling ARC’s zero-embargo requirement with a publisher agreement that still specifies a 6- or 12-month embargo is one of the most common compliance frictions research offices are reporting since the policy took effect.
AAM vs Version of Record: what has to be deposited, and where
The policy does not require researchers to make the publisher’s Version of Record (VoR) open (which would typically require paying an article processing charge for a gold/hybrid OA route). It is satisfied by depositing the Author Accepted Manuscript — the peer-reviewed, post-review manuscript in the form the author submits after addressing reviewer comments, before the publisher’s typesetting and formatting are applied — provided that AAM is openly accessible with no embargo from the date of publication. If a researcher’s article is published gold or diamond open access, or the AAM route isn’t available, the Version of Record itself can serve as the openly accessible copy instead. For a full breakdown of how these formats differ from a preprint and from each other, see Preprint vs. Postprint vs. Version of Record.
Repository requirements
Metadata for every in-scope output must be deposited in an institutional repository as soon as possible and no later than three months from the publication date, carrying the ARC Project ID and a persistent link to the output. This deposit-metadata timeframe is unchanged from the previous policy; what changed is how quickly the underlying content itself must become openly accessible. Most Australian universities meet this through their existing institutional repository infrastructure (see What Is an Institutional Repository? and, for the self-archiving mechanics researchers actually follow, Self-Archiving Research Papers for Green Open Access) rather than needing new systems, since this is the same green open access deposit pathway ARC and other funders have relied on for over a decade.
The DOI mandate
Version 2026.1 requires a Digital Object Identifier for every research output funded by an in-scope ARC grant, including creative works — a broader requirement than the prior policy, which did not uniformly mandate a DOI across all output types. In practice, this is rarely a new burden for journal articles and conference papers, since most publishers already assign a DOI at publication; it is more consequential for output types — monographs, reports, some creative works — where a DOI historically wasn’t automatic and now has to be actively obtained, typically through the depositing institution’s repository or a service such as Crossref or DataCite.
Which ARC schemes and output types are in scope
The policy applies to research outputs arising from ARC-funded projects across the ARC’s National Competitive Grants Program schemes — including Discovery Projects, Linkage Projects, and Future Fellowships — whenever that scheme opened for application on or after 1 July 2026. See ARC Grants: Australia’s Research Council Schemes and Application Calendar for the current scheme list and round timing, and ARC National Interest Test for a related Discovery Projects compliance requirement.
In-scope output types are journal articles, peer-reviewed conference papers, monographs, edited volumes, book chapters, and research reports; creative works are covered but only to the “strongly encouraged” standard rather than a hard mandate. Outputs that predate the funded project, or that don’t arise from the ARC-funded work itself, are not brought into scope simply because the researcher also holds an ARC grant.
Compliance and reporting
Compliance is assessed against the final report and other reporting obligations tied to the grant, consistent with how the ARC has administered the open-access requirement since it was first introduced. Where immediate open access to a journal article or conference paper is genuinely not possible — for example, because of a legal or contractual constraint the researcher cannot resolve — the established mechanism has been to require the researcher or administering institution to document and justify the non-compliance in final reporting, rather than a blanket exemption. Research offices should treat this as an active checkpoint on every ARC-funded output published after 1 July 2026, not a box to fill in only if audited.
What happens on non-compliance
The ARC ties open-access compliance to the institution’s and researcher’s standing under the grant agreement and future funding eligibility, the same lever it uses for other reporting and conduct obligations under the National Competitive Grants Program — persistent or unjustified non-compliance is a matter the ARC can take into account in current and future funding decisions. The ARC’s own policy page and FAQ are the authoritative source for the specific administrative consequences in a given case; this guide summarises the general compliance mechanism rather than restating penalty language that should be read directly from arc.gov.au before an institution relies on it for a specific compliance decision.
Don’t conflate this with the NHMRC policy
The ARC and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) are separate Australian Government statutory agencies, and NHMRC operates its own, separately maintained open access policy for NHMRC-funded research. NHMRC’s requirements do not automatically apply to ARC grants, and vice versa — a researcher or research office managing outputs from both an ARC grant and an NHMRC grant needs to check each funder’s current policy independently rather than assuming one satisfies the other. Don’t assume a single OA compliance workflow covers both without checking the current text of each policy.
Frequently asked questions
Does the 2026.1 policy apply to a grant I was already awarded before 1 July 2026?
It depends on when the scheme opened for application, not when the grant was awarded. If the scheme opened for application before 1 July 2026, the previous policy applies to that grant’s outputs for the life of the project, even if the grant was awarded, or outputs are published, after that date.
Can I still use a 12-month embargo on my journal article?
Not if the output arises from a scheme that opened for application on or after 1 July 2026 — journal articles and peer-reviewed conference papers must be openly accessible immediately on publication under 2026.1, with no embargo option. The 12-month allowance still applies to monographs, edited volumes, book chapters and research reports, and to any output governed by the previous policy.
Does depositing the Author Accepted Manuscript satisfy the policy, or do I need the publisher’s Version of Record?
Depositing the AAM with no embargo satisfies the requirement. The Version of Record is only required as the open copy if you don’t have AAM deposit rights or your article is published gold or diamond open access.
Do I need a DOI for a report or creative work that wouldn’t normally get one?
Yes. Version 2026.1 mandates a DOI for every research output arising from an in-scope grant, including creative works, so outputs that previously didn’t automatically receive a DOI now need one obtained through a repository or a DOI-issuing service such as Crossref or DataCite.
Is this the same policy as NHMRC’s open access requirements?
No. ARC and NHMRC are separate agencies with separate open access policies. Compliance with one does not establish compliance with the other.
