The human rights case can be made for Open Science – this has been made clear by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its General Comment No. 25 on science and economic, social, and cultural rights. In this this much-awaited interpretation of the so-called right to science under Art. 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the Committee made clear that Open Science forms part of the right to science in the digital era. Released during the Covid-19 pandemic, the timing could not have been better, for the pandemic not only illustrated in unprecedented ways the importance of science in today’s world, but also the advantages of open research practices in speeding up scientific discovery. Yet, does this legal development mean that access to scientific data and content can now be enforced before courts via the right to science? A closer look reveals that important hurdles in claiming Open Science via the right to science remain. In this short contribution, our aim is to highlight some selected challenges of implementing and adjudicating open research practices via the right to science.  

Realizing effective scientific collaboration among nations is not an easy task. The trends we identified in the first paper of this series are a snapshot of the landscape of scientific collaboration. Taken together, they shine light on specific areas requiring attention to maximize the benefits of collaboration. While the dynamic nature of research and the complexity of the geo-political landscape makes it challenging to point to any single factor or policy that a country, company, or funder could change to support effective scientific collaboration, some general pathways to supporting international collaboration are clear.

Robert-Jan Smits

The inside story of Plan S, the ground-breaking campaign pledge to end the restrictive paywalls around taxpayer funded scientific research. Vital scientific knowledge freed and instantly available to the many, not just the few. The campaign coalition's architect, Robert-Jan Smits, shares his account of the shocks that Plan S delivered to the publishing world, and of the progress that unfolded.

We need more idealism in science and science policy to find solutions to challenges. If we restrict ourselves to what is tangible, known and established today, there is a risk that possible solutions to ‘wicked’ challenges that contribute to enriched and thriving individuals, societies, and their natural ecosystems could be missed. But if we ask, ‘what if?’, we introduce a capacity for idealism that opens up opportunities for creative critical thinking and imagination.

Over 65% of the European cloud market is in the hands of US companies. There are no significant social media platforms in European hands. Although a global leader in the 1990s, Europe’s share in semiconductor production has fallen to just 10% of the global market. Risk-capital investments are US dominated. These are just a few indications of how the EU is losing its strategic digital autonomy.

Given the unprecedented times and the need to lay foundations for the new, post-COVID world, we are asking prominent policymakers what they most need from scientists, and how they could most effectively assimilate scientific information. This knowledge will enable us to develop insightful and actionable material for Policy Labs, which will lead to further science-based policy reforms.

The EU is revamping its interest to get all member states to increase their Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product(GDP) from the current average of 2.2% to 3%. The rational for this policy is based on the belief that European technology industries will lag behind those in other countries unless more innovation is generated. Investment (GERD) is seen as a limiting factor and should be corrected. But is the premise for this policy as simple as the equation; money + research= Innovation? I argue that research is a necessary but not sufficient ingredient in the mix required to have better economic outcomes.

If one million scientists (approximately 10% of the world’s active science population in public service) committed two hours per week to science engagement with and for society (about 5% of their working time), this would create approximately 100 million hours/year dedicated to achieving science that engages meaningfully with policy and global decision makers. Those hours could catalyse a global butterfly effect that could carry into the future.

The question underpinning data sharing should never be whether data should be made openly accessible. The problem of data access merely distracts from the real issue with data governance, which is who decides how data is used and under which conditions. This is the key question today for both democracy and research. Answering it requires significant collective action.

Making Sure Open Science Stays Open: 10 Years of Advocating Open Science Policy by our Editor in Chief, Jean-Claude Burgelman

We asked 15 leading experts and advocates of the Open Science and Open Access movement to share their views on the significance of the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science adopted in late 2021. Here are their responses and their own recommendations for how to achieve the objectives set by UNESCO.

The internet has made it possible to both collect information from individuals in an unprecedented way and to monetize that information. Information gleaned from web browsing, online purchases, emails, and social media posts comes to mind. This information is valuable because it enables vendors to better target likely purchasers, politicians to contact sympathetic voters, and so forth. The major shift of advertising dollars into web-based ads clearly illustrates the value of this information

The existing data economy undermines the foundations of open societies: meaningful democratic participation, productive collaboration, broad distribution of benefits, and fair competition. Instead, we see power centralized in a handful of players, wasted potential, and rampant economic exploitation. Consider, for example, huge networks like Facebook and Amazon that capture the information of billions of people and place it in the service of a few shareholders’ narrow interests—when the very same technologies could be harnessed to drive shared wealth and responsible progress. What to do?

The COVID-19 pandemic, according to Morgan, has demonstrated that science can successfully contribute to policymaking during a crisis. However, there are several challenges still to face if science is to become a standard part of public policy, “not just when there’s a crisis, but as a culture.” To assure a place for science “at the table, rather than on tap”, Morgan believes that a broad, interdisciplinary approach is required, bringing together individuals with a variety of tools and skillsets.

In 2001, Steve Lawrence published a hugely influential study which showed that OA conference papers in computer science were cited more than twice as often as papers that were not accessible online. But Lawrence’s paper is twenty years old and his study was limited to one kind of paper in a single discipline. Today, we know far more than in 2001. So the Policy Labs team ran a small-scale study to find out what scholars have found out.’

Richard Walker, Frontiers Policy Labs

In this episode Jean-Claude talks to Professor Barend Mons about big-data-driven science. He discusses the importance of data stewardship so that research findings can be shared across different countries and different scientific disciplines. 

James Wilsdon
Research on Research Institute

Prof. James Wilsdon and prof. Jean Claude Burgelman discuss the speed and impact of the scientific response to the COVID-19 virus

Helga Nowotny
Former President of the European Research Council and professor emerita of Science and Technology Studies at ETH Zurich

Prof. Helga Nowotny and Prof. Jean Claude Burgelman analyze and discuss what role do the social sciences play in the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic

Anindita Bhadra
Co-Chair of the Global Young Academy and Associate Dean of International Relations and Outreach, IISER Kolkata

Prof. Anindita Bhadraand and Prof. Jean-Claude Burgelman discuss the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the research community of the Global South.

Dr. Georg Schütte
Secretary General of the Volkswagen Foundation and former State Secretary at the German Federal Ministry of Research and Education

Dr. Georg Schütte and Prof. Jean-Claude Burgelman discuss the role research funding foundations play in preparedness for global societal challenges