Abstract
The ethical case for Open Access (OA) (free online access) to research findings is especially salient when it is public health that is being compromised by needless access restrictions. But the ethical imperative for OA is far more general: It applies to all scientific and scholarly research findings published in peer-reviewed journals. And peer-to-peer access is far more important than direct public access. Most research is funded so as to be conducted and published, by researchers, in order to be taken up, used, and built upon in further research and applications, again by researchers (pure and applied, including practitioners), for the benefit of the public that funded it – not in order to generate revenue for the peer-reviewed journal publishing industry (nor even because there is a burning public desire to read much of it). Hence OA needs to be mandated, by researchers' institutions and funders, for all research.
Highlights
Research productivity and progress – and researchers' careers, salary, research funding, reputation, and prizes – all depend on the usage and application of their research findings ("research impact")
This is enshrined in the academic mandate to "publish or perish," and in the reward system of academic research [24]
The reason the academic reward system is set up that way is that that is how research institutions and research funders benefit from the research output they produce and fund: by maximizing its uptake and impact [5]
Summary
3. Brody T, Carr L, Gingras Y, Hajjem C, Swann A: Incentivizing the open access research web: Publication-achiving, data-archiving and scientometrics.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
