Despite my own preferences, my work often ends up behind a paywall 1. In this website I provide easy and free access to everything I have published and everything I expect to publish soon-ish. For each research article, you should be able to find a link to the article as published by the journal (so it's easy to cite my work) and a link to access the article (so you can read my work). The link to access the article will often be a link to a preprint 2 (known as a working paper in economics) or a link to the journal if the paper is published under the open access model 3. Please send me an email if you cannot access any article listed on my website.
The production of knowledge in economics (and beyond) is an open conversation and everything in such production is up to debate. But it's a lot harder to debate when one cannot see the full results, code, or data underlying the conclusion of a research article. My goal is to facilitate that debate, at least around my work.
When possible 4, I include a link to the data and the code used for the data analyses. The link directs you to a repository in my GitHub that contains instructions to replicate the analyses. When I succeed in my quest for transparency, my work can be replicated with one click (provided you have the right software and folder structure). However, this is an ongoing effort that is better reflected in my recent research.
1. A paywall is a method to restrict access to content. Unfortunately, most academic research is behind a paywall. (This documentary provides a quick description of the problem). That said, there are alternative ways to get access to work behind a paywall. One such alternative is the legal service Unpaywall. ↩
2. I use SocArxiv to publish my preprints. This is a service provided by the Center for Open Science and works better than any of the alternatives I have seen. One such alternatives, SSRN (which is owned by Elsevier) is particularly popular in economics. SocArxiv is better than the alternatives in every way and does not restrict access like SSRN does (see a comparison here). ↩
3. In practice, Open Access (OA) in most journals means that the researchers (or more specifically, the funders of the study, usually tax payers) pay a large amount (often between $1000 and $3000) for the article to be "free" to readers. In general, I do not choose to pay for Open Access because I can easily provide access to the content of my research with preprints (as long as they are easily available). That said, some of my research is published under the OA model because the matter was not under my control. I strongly believe that there are better ways to spend $1000 (or more). In any case, I often include a link to the preprint even when the article is published under the Open Access model, this is because I think the usual formatting in journal articles makes papers hard to read (e.g. with tiny fonts). ↩
4. As much as I'd like to have easy replication packages for every article I have published, the truth is that the push for open science is fairly new and open science is still far from being the standard in economics (or any field). I began doing research (as a research assistant) back in 2012 and I did lots of things that are hard to replicate. I might be able to go back and create replication packages for old research, but it's certainly costly and there are no strong incentives. So there is a trade-off between spending my time going back or spending my time moving forward. I'd like to believe that I'm a much better researcher now (2021) and that my time is better spent doing new research than polishing old research. My compromise is that my research going forward will be open science by default, but I'm open to help in the unlikely case people try to replicate my earlier work. ↩