“The road to Open Science is not a short one. As the chairman of the Executive Board of the European Open Science Cloud, Karel Luyben, is keen to point out, it will take at least 10 or 15 years of travel until we reach a point where Open Science is simply absorbed into ordinary, everyday science.
Within the Netherlands, and for research data in particular, we have made many strides towards that final point. We have knowledge networks such as LCRDM, a suite of archives covered by the Research Data Netherlands umbrella, and the groundbreaking work done by the Dutch Techcentre for Life Sciences.
But there is still much travel to be done; many new landscapes to be traversed. Data sharing is still far from being the norm (see here for a visualisation of these results).
The authors of this blog post have put together six areas that, in their opinion, deserve attention on our Open Science journey….”
“Have questions about Open Data, Open Science and research results exploitation? Join this OpenAIRE and EOSC-hub webinar that will cover Horizon 2020 rules and good practices approaches to addressing these issues in Consortium Agreements and Data Management Plans. It will also specifically cover the issues of concern between Open Science and exploitation (patents, spin offs/ outs, confidentiality), business planning and licensing strategies.
“There are numerous free and community-based academic and cultural resources that are designed and built on open source or open access principles. Undertaken by not-for-profit mission-driven organizations, such services and technologies aim to introduce innovation to various stages of scholarly communication from designing research projects to publishing results. Today, amid growing concerns about their long-term durability and agility, there is renewed interest in sustainability, business models, revenue, and maintenance. In our previous post, we looked back at some of the recommendations that resulted from research on sustainability that Ithaka S+R conducted more than a decade ago and highlighted some recent studies that assess the condition and prospects of academy-driven initiatives offered in the digital scholarship space. In today’s blog, we’ll look into the nascent organizations that are forming to provide a meta-framework to a range of independent but like-minded initiatives by fostering networking, raising awareness, and advocating best practices for an enduring and effective service infrastructure.
Such meta-frameworks aim to foster networking, promote interoperability, advance best practices, and raise awareness about business models among different stakeholders to ensure an enduring and effective service infrastructure. Based on what’s available on their websites, the table below provides examples of such meta-frameworks that were formed to coordinate, align, and promote open services, technologies, and standards….”
” For the last 6-7 years, paying for subscriptions has ceased to be necessary for access. One sign of the changing times is the support that initiatives such as DEAL, Bibsam etc. have: two years without subscriptions to Elsevier and what do you hear out of, e.g., Germany? Crickets! Nothing! Of course, it would be silly to conclude that in these two years nobody in Germany has read any Elsevier articles. The reason for the silence and the continued support for DEAL is that we now can access anything we want without subscriptions….
With the realization that EOSC; Plan S, DEAL, etc. are actually working on different aspects of the same issue, the problem to be solved is no longer that scholars publish in toll-access journals, but that institutions haven’t come up with a more attractive alternative. If individuals are not to blame, than there is no reason to mandate them to do anything differently. Instead, institutions should be mandated to stop funding journals via subscriptions or APCs and instead invest the money into a modern, more cost-effective infrastructure for text, data and code. Obviously, in this specificity, this is nearly impossible to mandate in most countries. However, there is a mandate that comes very close. It has been dubbed “Plan I” (for infrastructure). In brief, it entails a three step procedure:
Build on already available standards and guidelines to establish a certification process for a sustainable scholarly infrastructure
Funders require institutional certification before reviewing grant applications
Institutions use subscription funds to implement infrastructure for certification….”
“Key to EOSC architecture is its sustainability, which will primarily be driven by: 1- a participatory design and governance to accommodate different needs and requirements, 2- shared investments as they are being developed by member states (MS/AC), 3- the ability to adapt to new technologies and foster innovation. It is therefore critical that EOSC architecture avoids at any cost a monolithic and centralized approach, and follow a “System of Systems” approach, where resources are brought together at different levels to deliver data and data services. Emphasis is therefore placed on a business-tobusiness (B2B) sharing (data, services, people) and access, with agreements on: 1- A shared policy compliance framework (i) dictating and applying the rules of how the data elements are published, shared and re-used, and (ii) implementing an interlinked data space where every research result comes with its context (related entities), provenance (full data and science path) and usage….
EOSC will converge national support structures bringing all players together in a collaborative arrangement. No single organization is able to fulfil the Commons approach alone and implementation of Open Science requires specific handling, as most of the barriers are cultural and organizational….
For Open Science to succeed in EOSC, we need to: i) provide services for all stakeholders involved in the research life cycle, ii) ensure data federation for both small and big data to become an integral part of EOSC, iii) embed services in institutional settings, and iv) link to international infrastructures. …”
“Our recently published position paper expresses our views on how to (i) strengthen and reinforce Open Science as the modus operandi in EOSC, and (ii) highlight the important role of open scientific communication as a vehicle to deliver Open Science in a trusted and reliable way.
“The European Open Science Cloud is a great and timely opportunity for coordinating our efforts to unleash Europe’s potential into making good use and adding value to research data. Collaboration and openness should be in the center to make EOSC work. Open Science – and particularly Open Access to scientific content (publications, data, software) – is now becoming all the more relevant, and we are pleased to see our work in OpenAIRE for the past 10 years fill this gap in EOSC. “ Natalia Manola, OpenAIRE Managing Director.
“Open Science is a new research paradigm facing many challenges, mainly the ingrained research habits accompanied by non-incentive institutional and funder reward systems, the lack of embedded tools and services, the connection to non-academic communities.
OSFair2019 is organized as an emblematic initiative of OpenAIRE, co-organized by 3 other EU projects in the area of Open Science: FIT4RRI, EOSC Secretariat and FAIRsFAIR. It is locally curated by the University of Minho.
Open Science Fair will critically showcase the elements required for the transition to Open Science: e-infrastructures and services, policies as guidance for good practices, research flows and new types of activities (disseminate, mine, review, assess, etc.), the roles of the respective actors and their networks….”