In late January and early February 2026, a growing list of UK universities announced they would not renew their agreements with Elsevier, walking away from the publisher’s proposed three-year Read-and-Publish terms at the close of Jisc’s sector-wide 2026 negotiation cycle. The University of Sheffield, Lancaster University, and the University of Surrey confirmed their decisions on January 27, 2026, following earlier non-renewals by the universities of Essex, Kent, Sussex, and York. This is a distinct development from the North American round of ‘Big Deal’ cancellations covered separately — see Library ‘Big Deal’ Cancellations in 2026: Alberta, Delaware, and UBC Walk Away — and turns on a different negotiating structure entirely: a single national body bargaining collectively on behalf of the whole UK higher-education sector, rather than individual North American libraries negotiating (or cancelling) on their own.
What Jisc negotiated, and why it matters
Jisc, the UK higher-education sector’s shared digital infrastructure and negotiating body, led roughly nine months of talks on behalf of universities (represented collectively through Universities UK) with the so-called ‘big five’ academic publishers — Elsevier, Wiley, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, and Sage — to replace agreements that expired at the end of 2025. The sector’s stated goal going in was a price reduction of 5 to 15 percent against the roughly £112 million UK institutions collectively spend each year with those five publishers, alongside further progress toward full open access to UK research output. Jisc concluded its national negotiations in December 2025, but individual institutions retained the choice of whether to sign the resulting terms with each publisher — which is what has played out, publisher by publisher and university by university, since January 2026.
Which universities have declined Elsevier’s terms
As of early February 2026, the universities publicly confirmed as not renewing with Elsevier under the new terms are:
- University of Sheffield
- Lancaster University
- University of Surrey
- University of Essex
- University of Kent
- University of Sussex
- University of York
Reporting from Research Professional News indicates the list has continued to grow past this initial group as more institutions confirm their positions, so this should be read as the picture at time of writing rather than a final count. Lancaster and Surrey have both said they are proceeding with agreements covering the other four ‘big five’ publishers — Taylor & Francis, Springer Nature, Wiley, and Sage — while declining Elsevier specifically.
Why universities are walking away
The universities that have gone public with their reasoning point to two related concerns: cost, and the pace of the shift to open access.
Sheffield described its proposed Elsevier arrangement as “financially unsustainable,” citing proposals agreed with its University Executive Board to significantly reduce library spending on resources over the life of the three-year deal, against a backdrop of sector-wide financial pressure on UK university budgets. Essex cited unhappiness with the scale of the proposed price increases and, separately, with what it characterised as Elsevier’s unwillingness to commit to a shift toward a more sustainable open-access publishing model. Neither institution’s public statements disclosed specific proposed price figures for the rejected Elsevier deal itself.
These are the same two pressures — year-over-year price growth outpacing library budgets, and slower-than-hoped progress on open access — that have driven North American libraries to cancel Big Deal bundles with other publishers this year, even though the UK case runs through a coordinated national negotiation rather than one-off institutional decisions.
How this differs from the North American cancellations
It’s worth being precise about what makes this a separate story rather than a UK instance of the same pattern:
- Negotiating structure: Jisc bargains nationally on behalf of the UK sector as a bloc, through Universities UK, with a shared target (5–15% reduction on £112 million in aggregate spend) set before talks begin. The North American cancellations profiled separately involved individual libraries — Alberta, Delaware, and UBC — each negotiating and deciding independently, with no equivalent national umbrella deal on the table.
- What’s being rejected: The UK universities are declining a newly negotiated Elsevier Read-and-Publish agreement before signing on to a new three-year term. The North American cases were mid-agreement cancellations of existing bundled packages with Springer Nature, Wiley, and Sage.
- Publisher in question: This story is specifically about Elsevier; none of the universities named here have been reported declining the other ‘big five’ publishers’ 2026 terms — several, including Lancaster and Surrey, are proceeding with the other four.
What this means for researchers at affected institutions
A non-renewal with Elsevier under a transformative agreement typically has two practical effects for researchers at the institutions involved: continued reading access to ScienceDirect content may lapse or be scaled back to a narrower subscription (rather than the fuller Read-and-Publish package), and institutional funding that previously covered article processing charges for open-access publishing in Elsevier journals may no longer be available through the same route. Affected institutions have generally pointed researchers toward alternative open-access routes — including green open-access self-archiving, publishing venues covered by remaining ‘big five’ deals, and, where applicable, institutional or funder open-access funds — while library access teams work through interlibrary loan and pay-per-view options for content that falls outside continuing subscriptions. For background on how these agreements are structured in the first place, see CASRAI’s guide to Read & Publish (Transformative) Agreements: How They Work for Authors.
The wider pattern
The UK Elsevier walkouts sit alongside a broader, multi-year trend of research institutions and national consortia pushing back on ‘Big Deal’ subscription economics — from Germany’s long-running Projekt DEAL negotiations with Elsevier earlier in the 2020s, to the University of California’s widely cited 2019 break with Elsevier, to the 2026 North American cancellations at Alberta, Delaware, and UBC covered elsewhere on this site. What’s distinct about the current UK round is the collective national bargaining structure Jisc provides: individual universities can decline a nationally negotiated offer while still benefiting from the leverage of having negotiated as a bloc in the first place, and can do so publisher-by-publisher rather than all-or-nothing.
Frequently asked questions
Is this the same story as the 2026 North American Big Deal cancellations?
No. That story covers the University of Alberta, University of Delaware, and University of British Columbia independently cancelling existing bundled subscriptions with Springer Nature, Wiley, and Sage respectively. This story covers UK universities declining to sign a newly negotiated Elsevier agreement that emerged from Jisc’s national 2026 negotiation cycle. See Library ‘Big Deal’ Cancellations in 2026 for the North American cases.
Who is Jisc and what role does it play?
Jisc is the UK higher-education and research sector’s shared digital infrastructure body. It negotiates national licensing agreements with major academic publishers on behalf of UK universities, collectively represented through Universities UK, rather than each institution negotiating separately with each publisher.
Does declining the Elsevier deal mean these universities lose all access to Elsevier journals?
Public statements from the universities involved have not indicated a complete loss of access; institutions typically fall back to narrower subscription terms, interlibrary loan, and pay-per-view arrangements for content outside continuing agreements, while redirecting open-access publishing support to venues covered by remaining agreements.
Could Elsevier and these universities still reach a deal later?
The situation was still developing at time of writing, with additional universities confirming their positions as the 2026 cycle continued; readers should check current reporting from Jisc, Research Professional News, and Times Higher Education for the latest status of any individual institution.
