Jessica Farch, Sharnin Hill and Verity Pascarl

How, and to what extent, are alternative publishing models being used in the Australian publishing industry, and what are the key impediments to them being more widely adopted?

Keywords: Affirm Press, Australian publishing industry, Brain Jar Press, carbon emissions (CO2e), carbon footprint, financial barriers, Ingram Content Group, legislation, low emission distribution pathways, materiality, print on demand (PoD), pulping, sale or return (SoR), subscription model, Upswell Publishing

Introduction

The print and publishing industry is a major contributor to emissions and waste. Alternative publishing models have risen in response, but the exact extent of their utilisation is under-reported. Among these models are print on demand (PoD) and subscription. Both are proven to be more environmentally sustainable than traditional models of printing and publishing, such as offset printing and sale or return (SoR).

The publishing industry is closely tied to the pulp and paper sector, which is the world’s fourth-largest energy-consuming industry. It is also one of the largest global consumers of fossil fuels, emitters of greenhouse gases, and polluters. Additional environmental impacts associated with publishing include deforestation, high water consumption, transport emissions, and the generation of waste such as paper clippings and fibres, ink residue and wastewater.

Traditional publishing model: sale or return (SoR)

Traditional publishing models follow a ‘print first, sell later’ system, in which publishers order large print runs based on projected demand, and then attempt to sell as many copies as possible. This allows booksellers to return unsold stock for a full refund within a designated timeframe.

The SoR approach relies on offset printing technology—often outsourced overseas—whereby the cost per unit decreases as the quality increases. This dependence on economies of scale incentivises over-ordering, resulting in a surplus of stock that must be stored, transported and, in some cases, destroyed. The pulp from destroyed books often cannot be recycled into post-consumer waste.

Alternative publishing model: print on demand (PoD)

In use since the 1990s, PoD has been characterised as a fundamental restructuring of the traditional publishing model, and has been implemented across the academic, independent, and trade sectors. Unlike the traditional model, PoD adheres to a ‘sell first, print later’ framework, in which the book is printed only after the sale occurs. Books are printed digitally using an electronic file that is sent from the publisher to the printer. Subsequently, the books may be transported directly to the consumer or pickup point, eliminating the need for intermediaries and distributors.

PoD is used in a variety of ways across the publishing industry—from publishers who rely on it exclusively for all titles, to those who employ it selectively for backlist and out-of-print books, market replenishment, and the production of advance reader copies, proofs, marketing materials, and catalogues. Further benefits include:

Despite the benefits associated with PoD, several barriers continue to limit its broader adoption in the publishing industry. One primary challenge is cost: PoD is more expensive per unit, resulting in smaller profit margins. As a result, it may be less suitable for high-demand publications. Limited visibility and market acceptance also pose difficulties.

A second concern is the perceived quality of PoD books, which is often viewed as inferior to that of offset printing. This perception relates especially to colour and graphics resolution, material durability, production errors due to rapid turnaround times, and fewer available options for trim size, paper stock, and layout. However, there is some disagreement on this point, with certain sources finding PoD quality to be ‘at least as good’ as that of offset printing.

A final barrier is that PoD complicates the logistics of returns by eliminating warehousing infrastructure, which may hinder its suitability for bookstore sales.

Alternative publishing model: subscription

Another alternative model that disrupts traditional frameworks is the subscription model. The subscription model involves ‘selling a product or service for a recurring price’ at certain intervals, such as every month or year. This has a long history in the publishing industry, from authors raising advance funding in the seventeenth century, to the modern US-based Book of the Month Club. Today, subscription models are used to sell digital works such as e-books and audiobooks, as well as physical products like book boxes. In this case, customers ‘become loyal to the brand and its curation and are happy to be given what the publisher and their creators choose’.

Like PoD, subscription models help reduce over-production and returns by allowing publishers to print exact quantities in advance. They also provide a steady revenue stream and help establish a more direct relationship with customers.

Case studies

Our research primarily focused on smaller publishers, who we found were more likely to adopt alternative publishing models. We conducted interviews with Brain Jar Press, Upswell Publishing and Affirm Press. We also spoke with printer and distributor IngramSpark Australia, and undertook a tour of the Ingram Lightning Source facilities in Dandenong South. Using The Small Press Network, we created a list of 69 small publishers and invited them to participate in a survey: we received 19 responses.

Ingram Content Group

Lightning Source deals exclusively in PoD and is a subsidiary of the Ingram Content Group. The company first established themselves in Australia in 2011, boasting ‘over 1.3 million titles from more than 400 worldwide publishers’ at launch. Since then, they have become a key player within the Australian publishing industry, also printing for Amazon. Lightning Source works in tandem with IngramSpark—a platform that caters largely towards independent authors and small presses—whose books are printed through Lightning Source exclusively.

The Lightning Source facilities in Melbourne are made up of a production line of both machines and human workers. In this space they store paper stock and ink, print the books, organise them for shipping, and then distribute them. Despite producing an average of 8,000 to 10,000 books per day, the warehouse space is not crammed full of books. When speaking to Chris Munnery, Senior Key Account Manager at IngramSpark, he said that this is because the turnaround for a book under Lightning Source is around 24–48 hours.

Upswell Publishing

Upswell is an independent press started in 2021 by Terri-ann White, former director and publisher of UWA Publishing. Upswell uses the PoD model and subscription, distributing through Penguin Random House Distribution. In 2024, they published 17 titles, with a focus on narrative non-fiction, fiction, and poetry titles that ‘elude easy categorising’.

White hires freelance typesetters, designers, and editors but primarily runs Upswell as a solo endeavour. Her many years of experience in the publishing industry allow Upswell to be discerning in their choice of publishing model, adopting a hybrid combination of PoD, subscription and small traditional print runs. White’s flexibility within publishing models allows Upswell to utilise the benefits of each—and where needed, avoid the impediments

Print on demand (PoD)

Upswell uses PoD for ‘small run[s] and for topping up’. White noted that Upswell uses PoD mostly for poetry titles, as these tend to sell only up to 500 copies; ‘I get quotes from both, Lightning Source and McPherson’s [Printing Group—a part of the OPUS Group and a major offset printer based in Maryborough], and I make a decision not just about the cost but about the need’ . Typical print runs for Upswell are between 750 and 2,500 books.

Subscription

In addition to PoD, Upswell makes use of a subscription model in which readers can buy a package of all titles published that year. This package also includes letters from authors and supporting materials from White. In 2025, Upswell is set to publish 10 titles, purchased by subscription for $250, which includes a minor discount from buying the titles individually.

Brain Jar Press

Founded in 2017 by Peter M. Ball, Brain Jar Press is a small Brisbane-based publisher which publishes 6–8 books per year. They specialise in fantasy, horror, science fiction, crime, and non-fiction, and predominately publish shorter works such as chapbooks, novellas, and short novels up to 60,000 words. In an interview with Ball, he explained that they began by using Ball’s personal backlist as a ‘testing ground’, and now continue to experiment with alternative publishing models, including PoD and subscription.

Print on demand (PoD)

Brain Jar Press uses a ‘digital first model’, in which the majority of their works are sold as e-books or PoD copies. Ball explains that ‘about 60–65% of our sales are print book[s]', with these being ‘where we make most of our money’. Ball attributes the significant demand for PoD books partially to genre, with science fiction and fantasy being 'very fan-orientated', often with a 'huge collector's audience’.

Brain Jar Press publishes their PoD titles through IngramSpark, which Ball describes as a 'one-stop-shop' that combines printing with world-wide distribution.

Subscription

Brain Jar Press has utilised subscription models for specific series and collections, such as the Never Afters novellas by Kirstyn McDermott and several chapbooks aimed at writers. Partially inspired by the comic book model, Ball describes his approach to subscription as ‘three-tiered’: involving the pre-sold subscription, the sale of the books one-by-one, and then the sale of the collected version. Brain Jar Press also offers bundles which sell a ‘big bunch of books’ at once, often grouped by author or topic. Ball has indicated that Brain Jar Press plans to introduce more subscription options, including a possible ‘whole company subscription’ operating on a yearly basis.

Fixed sale

Furthermore, Brain Jar Press employs a fixed-sale approach, which prevents books from being returned and pulped. As Ball explains, ‘we're not taking it back’. A key principle of Brain Jar Press is that they ‘don’t destroy books’, with Ball claiming that there is ‘never a reason to toss out a book these days’. In the case of misprints, customers receive complimentary copies along with a discount code for a replacement.

Findings

Use of alternative models

Of the 19 small publishers who responded to our survey, 13 reported using PoD, two reported using a subscription model, and an additional seven reported using other alternative models such as cost-sharing and fixed sale. The interviews conducted for this report revealed similar trends: all three organisations utilised PoD, Brain Jar Press and Upswell utilised subscription, and Brain Jar Press employed a fixed sale approach. According to Munnery at the Ingram Content Group, PoD is used across small to large-scale publishers.

Notably, eight respondents who identified using PoD also identified the use of short run digital printing (SRDP). Both SRDP and PoD utilise a digital printing press, and our survey findings indicate an overlap between the two.

Most survey respondents (84%) who reported using PoD, indicated that they adopted it for over 75% of their titles. Some respondents also reported using PoD for proofs, review copies, alternative editions, and sales copies. Of our interview participants, Brain Jar Press currently use PoD for most of their printed titles, Upswell use it for small run titles and to supplement initial print runs, and Affirm Press use it for advance copies and to supplement initial print runs.

All three organisations identified the Ingram Group, either in the form of Lightning Source or IngramSpark, as the company they use for PoD. The widespread use of Ingram is echoed by Munnery, who explains that ‘it’s hard to find someone that doesn’t use [Ingram]’ in some capacity. This is also reflected in survey results, as seen below.

Advantages of alternative models

Economic advantages

When asked what their top reasons for adopting PoD were, the most common answers were to ‘reduce material waste and overproduction’, to ‘lower storage and warehouse costs’, and to ‘maintain backlist availability’.

Some further discussed economic benefits of alternative publishing models include:

Environmental advantages

While most participants did not cite environmental impact as their primary motivation for adopting alternative models, these benefits complement the economic advantages. As discussed with our three interview participants, these models tend to see a reduction in waste and pulp production. This allows for a greater elimination of overstock, smaller warehouse floorplans, localised printing resulting in less reliance on freight, and a greater control over distribution—particularly when using PoD.

Impediments of alternative models

As demonstrated above, the top cited concerns with alternative models are quality, lack of print options and cost.

Cost

Our participants explained that there continues to be a significant difference in the cost per unit between PoD and traditional offset printing. Munnery concedes that you can ‘get your books really cheap’ by bulk ordering offset printing overseas, but there are trade-offs involved.

For Ball, there are limited PoD companies available for a press Brain Jar’s size, and those that are, such as IngramSpark, are ‘on the verge’ of becoming ‘less feasible’. This is predominantly due to fees being added ‘at the backend’, increased costs as a result of ‘supply chain issues’, and the gradual ‘contract[ion]’ of distribution. Ball estimates that it is approximately ‘$2.50 more expensive per copy’ to produce a PoD book in 2025 than it was in 2019.

In addition, Keiran Rogers from Affirm Press said they began to receive more affordable rates with Lightning Source once the publishing company was acquired by Simon & Schuster. Rogers attributed this to the ‘worldwide partnership with Lightning Source’ that Simon & Schuster have as a major publisher, implying that PoD might not be as affordable or accessible for smaller publishers who wield less buying power.

In contrast to Ball, Munnery claims that the cost differential between PoD and offset printing is ‘changing a little bit’, with the ‘gap […] getting smaller and smaller’. Similarly to Rogers, he also notes that the gap widens or lessens depending on the size of the order and the particular publishing house.

Quality and print options

Our research indicates that concerns about the quality and available options of PoD persist amongst some publishers, including uncertainty over paper stock and covers. These concerns appear largely rooted in the original limitations of PoD, with Munnery acknowledging that ‘in the early days of print on demand, the quality might not have been there’. Ingram is also still limited when it comes to certain specialised books—such as cookbooks or coffee table books that require a specific quality of image.

Despite ongoing hesitancies, Upswell and Brain Jar Press both spoke favourably of the quality of PoD, with White calling it ‘absolutely equivalent’ to the quality of offset and Ball proclaiming it is ‘astronomically good now’. Rogers at Affirm Press theorised that unless the two were directly next to each other, you might never know the difference.

During our tour of the Ingram Content Group facilities, we were able to see the quality and technological advancements of PoD firsthand. From what we observed and the sample books we were given, both the appearance and feel of most of the reels of paper and finished products were nearly indistinguishable from an offset-printed book. Even full pages of images were of high quality, despite concerns that this was not possible. Ingram’s variety of options are much broader than when they first entered the global publishing scene, with multiple types of paper, sizes, hardcovers and special editions available.

Subscription

The impediments to subscription models being more widely adopted include the high degree of organisation, time management, and author input required. These demands can be easily ‘disrupt[ing]’ for small presses who operate with minimal staff and resources.

One survey respondent stated that ‘subscriptions need currency of content’, and when publishing standalone books this is simply not feasible. Upswell seemingly avoids this problem by publishing a small number of titles per year, with all titles connected through their eluding of ‘easy categorisation’. This sort of publishing model requires consumers to be interested in the publisher's internal thesis, and as such may prove a hard publishing model to scale up.

Broader publishing industry

Many of the impediments to the broader adoption of alternative models relate to the wider industry context. Ball describes it as a ‘weird, tough climate to try and sell books’ in, attributing this in part to the fact that ‘we don’t have a reading culture’ in Australia. This lack of a strong reading base is reflected in the limited number of major book fairs, with there being ‘only 12–15 a year that are of a size where it’s worth paying for a […] booth’.

As a result, presses like Brain Jar are denied critical opportunities to ‘find new fans’ and ‘sell boatloads of books’. Even when Brain Jar Press does attend major events, logistical challenges remain, including the cost of printing and shipping. These broader industry constraints make it challenging for smaller presses to maintain alternative models, especially when they heavily depend on reader engagement.

Compounding these pre-existing issues is the instability of the industry. According to Ball, ‘every business model in publishing’, whether traditional or alternative, is ‘very, very fragile’. They are ‘dependent on one or two pieces of technology or one or two vendors operating a particular company’. As a result, Ball claims that ‘the business model I’m in is probably not the business model that we [will] follow in five years, let alone ten, just because the situation is going to change, costs are going to change’. For example, the uncertainty around issues such as US tariffs has greatly affected Ball’s plans for Brain Jar Press in the coming year.

Another deterrent to the adoption of alternative models is that the broader infrastructure of the book industry (printing, distribution, and bookselling) has been designed to support traditional publishing and the sale or return model, making alternative publishing models less viable for publishers who want to partake in the existing publishing ecology.

Conclusion

Our research has shown that alternative publishing models, in particular PoD, are frequently used by smaller publishers for the majority of their titles. Moreover, evidence suggests that larger publishers use PoD to supplement their initial print runs, whilst publishers of all sizes also use PoD to print proofs and review copies.

The main impediments to publishers adopting PoD appear to be the higher cost per unit, the quality, and lack of print options. Notably, there is widespread disagreement regarding the quality of PoD. Publishers who use it minimally or not at all, often perceive it as inferior to offset printing, whereas those who use it more frequently consider the quality comparable and continually improving.

For subscription models, the primary disadvantages were found to be the degree of organisation and time management required.

Recommendations

Adoption of alternative publishing models is limited by misconceptions about digital printing quality. Printing companies like Ingram may alleviate these misconceptions by engaging with publishers and promoting PoD as a qualitatively comparable and sustainable alternative.

Were models such as PoD and subscription to be adopted on a larger scale, a stronger discourse between major publishers and printers could occur. Ideally, this demand would promote advancements in digital printing technology, as it would allow printers to have direct feedback as to where quality concerns lie. It could also promote publishers of all sizes to further utilise alternative models, which could in turn lead to broader infrastructural and supply chain changes.

It is imperative that environmental concerns continue to be at the forefront of publishers’ minds, not just economic sustainability. Our research shows that in alternative publishing models, the two factors are interconnected, and as such can work together to advance the Australian publishing industry towards a future that is both more versatile in its production process and more environmentally sustainable.