The rent's too high: Self-archive for fair online publication costs

TL;DR

The paper advocates for widespread self-archiving of peer-reviewed articles as a cost-effective and accessible alternative to traditional paywalled publishing, aiming to democratize scientific knowledge dissemination.

Contribution

It highlights the potential of self-archiving to replace costly paywalls and calls for increased awareness and adoption of this practice in academic publishing.

Findings

Self-archiving can significantly reduce publication costs.

Major publishers profit from open-access charges, not just subscriptions.

Awareness and willingness are key to adopting self-archiving practices.

Abstract

The main contributors of scientific knowledge, researchers, generally aim to disseminate their findings far and wide. And yet, publishing companies have largely kept these findings behind a paywall. With digital publication technology markedly reducing cost, this enduring wall seems disproportionate and unjustified; moreover, it has sparked a topical exchange concerning how to modernize academic publishing. This discussion, however, seems to focus on how to compensate major publishers for providing open access through a "pay to publish" model, in turn transferring financial burdens from libraries to authors and their funders. Large publishing companies, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, PLoS, and Frontiers, continue to earn exorbitant revenues each year, hundreds of millions of dollars of which now come from processing charges for open-access articles. A less expensive and equally accessible alternative exists: widespread self-archiving of peer-reviewed articles. All we need is awareness of this alternative and the will to employ it