Chandra WatiResearcher · advisor · accounting professionalWork with me

International Open Access Week 2026 · 19-25 October

The cost of knowledge

When knowledge is locked, everyone pays. This page gives the evidence behind the poster and practical steps towards equitable open access.

Take practical action View the peer-reviewed evidence
The solutionEquitable open access

Featured explainer

Open Access Explained!

Nick Shockey and Jonathan Eisen introduce open-access publishing and explain why research should be available to read and reuse.

Animation by PHD Comics. Produced with the Right to Research Coalition, SPARC and the National Association of Graduate-Professional Students.

Watch on YouTube

01 / Why it costs

Four pressures behind the lock

The 2026 theme asks who pays when knowledge is controlled as a private commodity.

Money

Subscriptions + publishing fees

Closed subscriptions restrict reading, while article processing charges can shift the cost to authors and institutions.

Labour

Researcher time + unpaid academic labour

Research publishing depends on work by authors, reviewers and editors. Much of that contribution is unpaid.

Equity

Access + consent + data sovereignty

Fair participation includes the ability to read and publish, informed consent, and Indigenous control over Indigenous data.

Planet

Data centres: power + water

Digital knowledge systems use energy, infrastructure and water. Their environmental costs belong in open-research decisions.

The solution

Equitable open access

Free to readFair to publishLicensed to share

02 / Take action

Open the next door

These steps turn open access into decisions a JCU researcher can make.
01

Make the accepted manuscript open

When the published version is not openly accessible, deposit the accepted author manuscript in ResearchOnline@JCU in line with JCU policy.

ResearchOnline@JCU
02

Check the publishing pathway early

Before submitting, compare repository deposit, open publishing and JCU Read and Publish options, including licence and fee conditions.

JCU researcher resources
03

Choose rights that permit sharing

Use a clear open licence when rights and participant consent permit. Check copyright terms before signing a publishing agreement.

Open-access principles
04

Respect consent and data governance

Make research data as open as possible and as restricted as necessary. Follow consent conditions and Indigenous Data Governance.

JCU research-data guidance

03 / Peer-reviewed evidence

Research behind the poster

Eleven journal articles support the poster's four cost categories and its case for open access. Each note states the limited claim for which the paper is being used.
Money

Subscription prices and the transfer of publishing costs to authors

  1. Bergstrom, T. C., Courant, P. N., McAfee, R. P., & Williams, M. A. (2014). Evaluating big deal journal bundles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(26), 9425-9430.

    Supports: Uses university contracts to examine the prices institutions pay for large commercial journal bundles.

    DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1403006111

  2. Solomon, D. J., & Björk, B.-C. (2012). A study of open access journals using article processing charges. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(8), 1485-1495.

    Supports: Examines article processing charges across 1,370 journals and identifies substantial variation by discipline and publisher type.

    DOI: 10.1002/asi.22673

  3. Khoo, S. Y.-S. (2019). Article processing charge hyperinflation and price insensitivity: An open access sequel to the serials crisis. LIBER Quarterly, 29(1), 1-18.

    Supports: Analyses APC changes and author responses, linking author-pays publishing to continuing affordability concerns.

    DOI: 10.18352/lq.10280
Labour

Researcher time contributed to scholarly publishing and peer review

  1. Kovanis, M., Porcher, R., Ravaud, P., & Trinquart, L. (2016). The global burden of journal peer review in the biomedical literature: Strong imbalance in the collective enterprise. PLOS ONE, 11(11), e0166387.

    Supports: Quantifies the scale and unequal distribution of peer-review work in biomedical publishing.

    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166387

  2. Aczel, B., Szaszi, B., & Holcombe, A. O. (2021). A billion-dollar donation: Estimating the cost of researchers' time spent on peer review. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 6, 14.

    Supports: Estimates reviewers' time and its salary-based monetary value, making otherwise hidden academic labour visible.

    DOI: 10.1186/s41073-021-00118-2
Equity

Who can publish, who can participate, and who controls research data

  1. Siler, K., Haustein, S., Smith, E., Larivière, V., & Alperin, J. P. (2018). Authorial and institutional stratification in open access publishing: The case of global health research. PeerJ, 6, e4269.

    Supports: Finds institutional differences in access models and APC-funded publishing, with greater publishing options for better-resourced institutions.

    DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4269

  2. Carroll, S. R., Garba, I., Figueroa-Rodríguez, O. L., Holbrook, J., Lovett, R., Materechera, S., Parsons, M., Raseroka, K., Rodriguez-Lonebear, D., Rowe, R., Sara, R., Walker, J. D., Anderson, J., & Hudson, M. (2020). The CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance. Data Science Journal, 19, 43.

    Supports: Sets out Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility and Ethics as safeguards for Indigenous data and knowledge.

    DOI: 10.5334/dsj-2020-043
Planet

The energy and water requirements of digital knowledge infrastructure

  1. Masanet, E., Shehabi, A., Lei, N., Smith, S., & Koomey, J. (2020). Recalibrating global data center energy-use estimates. Science, 367(6481), 984-986.

    Supports: Provides an evidence-based estimate of global data-centre electricity use and explains the importance of efficiency trends.

    DOI: 10.1126/science.aba3758

  2. Mytton, D. (2021). Data centre water consumption. npj Clean Water, 4, 11.

    Supports: Examines water use in data-centre operations and the limitations of current measurement and disclosure.

    DOI: 10.1038/s41545-021-00101-w
Why openness matters

What the evidence does, and does not, establish about open access

  1. Piwowar, H., Priem, J., Larivière, V., Alperin, J. P., Matthias, L., Norlander, B., Farley, A., West, J., & Haustein, S. (2018). The state of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. PeerJ, 6, e4375.

    Supports: Uses large bibliographic samples to estimate open-access availability and reports an association between open access and citation impact.

    DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4375

  2. Langham-Putrow, A., Bakker, C., & Riegelman, A. (2021). Is the open access citation advantage real? A systematic review of the citation of open access and subscription-based articles. PLOS ONE, 16(6), e0253129.

    Supports: Reviews 134 studies and finds mixed, heterogeneous evidence, providing an important caution against treating citation advantage as universal or causal.

    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253129

04 / Policy and primary sources

Official guidance

These institutional sources confirm the campaign theme, policy context and recommended actions.
International Open Access Week 2026Official theme, dates and examples of financial, human, equity and environmental costs.
JCU Open Scholarship PolicyJCU requirements and definitions for open access, including repository deposit.
Budapest Open Access InitiativeFoundational explanation of free access and lawful reuse of research literature.
UNESCO Recommendation on Open ScienceInternational principles for accessible, equitable and collaborative open science.
Poster and research profileChandra Wati

PhD Candidate, Management and Commerce · James Cook University, Cairns

Explore my research