Opening Up The Tools For Doing Science: The Case Of The Global Open Science Hardware Movement

Open science hardware (OSH) is a term frequently used to refer to artifacts, but also to a practice, a discipline and a collective of people worldwide pushing for open access to the design of tools to produce scientific knowledge. The Global Open Science Hardware (GOSH) movement gathers actors from academia, education, the private sector and civil society advocating for OSH to be ubiquitous by 2025. This paper examines the GOSH movement’s emergence and main features through the lens of transitions theory and the grassroots innovation movements framework. GOSH is here described embedded in the context of the wider open hardware movement and analyzed in terms of framings that inform it, spaces opened up for action and strategies developed to open them. It is expected that this approach provides insights on niche development in the particular case of transitions towards more plural and democratic sociotechnical systems.

Download Full-text

EuroRxiv: a European open science repository

10.31226/osf.io/ey459 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Khaled Moustafa

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Scientific Knowledge ◽

Open Science ◽

Free Access ◽

Publicly Funded ◽

European Languages ◽

Open Access Journals ◽

Technical Issues ◽

Set Up ◽

Science Movement

Open and free access to scientific knowledge keeps scientists up to date with the latest achievements in their respective fields and to help set up appropriate solutions to health, environmental and technical issues. One of the efficient settings toward this purpose is the use of preprint servers- open repositories that allow authors to post their manuscripts ahead of formal peer review/publishing in traditional journals. The recognition of preprints as an essential part of science landscape are on the rise worldwide.In 2018, a European funder coalition, called Coalition S, has been formed and issued an open access plan, called Plan S, that requires authors of studies funded by the Coalition to publish their manuscripts- starting from January 2021- in open access journals or repositories that meet the guidelines of the Plan S. Many publishers and researchers welcomed the Plan S as a step forward to promote openness and free access to publicly funded research. To further enhance the open and free science movement, I'd propose a European preprint server called "European arXiv" (https://eurorxiv.eu) as a multidisciplinary and multilingual repository that will accept manuscripts (preprints and postprints) in the various European languages and beyond. The project is an individual initiative, but interested people are welcome to join.

Download Full-text

Opening up the Library

LIBER Quarterly ◽

10.18352/lq.10360 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 31 (1) ◽

pp. 1-16

Author(s):

Joanna Ball ◽

Graham Stone ◽

Sarah Thompson

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Cultural Change ◽

Open Science ◽

Collection Development ◽

Open Content ◽

Opening Up ◽

Instrumental Role

Momentum is building in the transition to open access for monographs, with a number of funders developing policies and mandates in recent years. The article argues that while libraries play an instrumental role in driving a transition to open science within their institutions this is not reflected in libraries’ approaches to collection development, which are still predicated on purchased content. Libraries are keen to demonstrate that their purchased content is relevant to users, often promoting ‘expensive’ purchased collections over open content. Rather than relegating open to a less-visible second place, the article calls for libraries to acquire and promote open content alongside, and where appropriate with higher priority, than paid-for content. In order to facilitate a transition to open access for monographs, cultural change and leadership is required within libraries to reimagine themselves around open content as the norm, with policies, practices and structures that communicate, enable and promote this shift. The article calls for a collaborative international approach.

Download Full-text

Os quatro grandes desafios ao modelo de Ciência Aberta: (des)acreditação, informalidade, comodificação e predação

Texto Livre Linguagem e Tecnologia ◽

10.17851/1983-3652.12.2.202-213 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 12 (2) ◽

pp. 202-213

Author(s):

Tiago Lima Quintanilha

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Scientific Knowledge ◽

Academic Culture ◽

Open Science ◽

The Will ◽

Commodification Of Knowledge ◽

In The Beginning ◽

Access Model ◽

New Millennium

RESUMO:O modelo de Ciência Aberta, erguido da vontade de democratizar a produção e acesso ao conhecimento científico, surgiu no início do novo milênio como forma de combater o obsoletismo e fechamento da cultura acadêmica tradicional. Mais de uma década depois, cedendo não só às suas fraquezas idiossincráticas, como também à indústria parasitária e do lucro, o modelo de Ciência Aberta passou a enfrentar quatro grandes desafios que são simultaneamente um problema de (des)acreditação do conhecimento produzido, de informalidade das estruturas de avaliação e validação, de comodificação do conhecimento, e de predação do modelo de acesso aberto. Neste texto tentamos perceber aquilo que está na base desses desafios. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: ciência aberta; desafios; (des)acreditação; informalidade; comodificação; predação. ABSTRACT: The Open Science model arose in the beginning of the new millennium from the will to democratize the production and access to scientific knowledge, as a means to fight the obsolete/closed character of traditional academic culture. After more than a decade, conceding not only to its own idiosyncratic weaknesses, but also to a profit-seeking industry, the open science model now simultaneously faces four major challenges: the (dis)accreditation of the scientific knowledge produced, the informality of its validation structures, the commodification of knowledge, and the predation of the open access model. In this essay, we try to understand the basis of these challenges. KEYWORDS: open science, challenges; (dis)accreditation, informality, commodification; predation.

Download Full-text

Openness in geoscience - a quantitative assessment

10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-20766 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Jeroen Bosman

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Research Priorities ◽

Research Process ◽

Open Science ◽

Science Practices ◽

Current State ◽

Publication Data ◽

Science Application ◽

Data Requirements ◽

Opening Up

<p>There is growing consensus that making our research process and outputs more open is necessary to increase transparency, efficiency, reproducibility and relevance of research. With that we should be better able to contribute to answering important questions and overcoming grand challenges. Despite considerable attention for open science, including citizen science, there is no overall baseline showing the current state of openness in our field. This presentation shows results from research that quantitatively charts the adoption of open practices across the geosciences, mostly globally and across the full research workflow. They range from setting research priorities, collaboration with global south researchers and researchers in other disciplines, sharing code and data, sharing posters online, sharing early versions of papers as preprints, publishing open access, opening up peer review, using open licenses when sharing, to engaging with potential stakeholders of research outcomes and reaching out to the wider public. The assessment uses scientometric data, publication data, data from sharing platforms and journals, altmetrics data, and mining of abstracts and other outputs, aiming to address the breadth of open science practices. The resulting images show that open science application is not marginal anymore, but at the same time certainly not mainstream. It also shows that limited sharing, limited use of open licenses and limited use of permanent IDs makes this type of assessment very hard. Insights derived from the study are relevant inputs in science policy discussions on data requirements, open access, researcher training and involvement of societal partners.</p>

Download Full-text

Ciência Aberta: correntes interpretativas e tipos de ação │ Open Science: interpretive trends and types of action

Liinc em Revista ◽

10.18617/liinc.v10i2.749 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Sarita Albagli ◽

Anne Clinio ◽

Sabryna Raychtock

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Citizen Science ◽

Open Science ◽

Open Education ◽

Open Hardware ◽

Open Notebook Science

RESUMO Este artigo apresenta uma sistematização das abordagens e correntes interpretativas sobre ciência aberta, bem como uma categorização e exemplos de iniciativas que ajudam a ilustrar e a clarificar tais abordagens. Para tanto, foram identificadas e sistematizadas definições, posições em debate e exemplos de iniciativas em cada uma das vertentes apresentadas. Palavras-chave: Ciência Aberta; Acesso Aberto; Educação Aberta; Ciência Cidadã; Cadernos Científicos Abertos; Hardware Aberto.ABSTRACT This article presents a systematization of the approaches and interpretive trends on open science, as well as a categorization and examples of initiatives that help illustrate and clarify such approaches. For this purpose, we identified and systematized definitions, positions under discussion and examples of initiatives in each of the aspects presented.Keywords: Open Science; Open Access; Open Education; Citizen Science; Open Notebook Science; Open Hardware.

Download Full-text

Massive Open Access Publications

10.31219/osf.io/4wcvr ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Matheus Pereira Lobo

Keyword(s):

Open Access ◽

Substantial Reduction ◽

Open Science ◽

Science Culture ◽

Open Access Journals ◽

Article Processing Charges

A huge collaborative open science model is proposed. Many authors collaborating in a paper leads to a substantial reduction for the Article Processing Charges (APCs) in the Open Access Journals. This can significantly stimulate research within a healthier citizen and open science culture.

Download Full-text

Japan Meets the Sharing Economy: Contending Frames

Social Science Japan Journal ◽

10.1093/ssjj/jyaa041 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Thomas G ALTURA ◽

Yuki HASHIMOTO ◽

Sanford M JACOBY ◽

Kaoru KANAI ◽

Kazuro SAGUCHI

Keyword(s):

Political Economy ◽

Civil Society ◽

Private Sector ◽

Social Problems ◽

Prime Minister ◽

Sharing Economy ◽

The World ◽

Framing Processes ◽

Regulatory Institutions

Abstract The ‘sharing economy’ epitomized by Airbnb and Uber has challenged business, labor, and regulatory institutions throughout the world. The arrival of Airbnb and Uber in Japan provided an opportunity for Prime Minister Abe’s administration to demonstrate its commitment to deregulation. Both platform companies garnered support from powerful governmental and industry actors who framed the sharing economy as a solution to various economic and social problems. However, they met resistance from actors elsewhere in government, the private sector, and civil society, who constructed competing frames. Unlike studies that compare national responses to the sharing economy, we contrast the different experiences and fates of Airbnb and Uber within a single country. Doing so highlights actors, framing processes, and within-country heterogeneity. The study reveals the limits of overly institutionalized understandings of Japanese political economy. It also contributes to current debates concerning Prime Minister Abe’s efforts at implementing deregulation during the 2010s.

Download Full-text