Suchergebnisse

Keynote at the Open Scholarship Week 2021 The Transition to Open Science It has been realized since the turn of the century that major imperfections (flaws, 'perverse incentives' as some would say) have developed in the governance of science and academia. These imperfections till this time are major factors that interfere with the promise of the contribution of science to society. They relate directly to the current incentive and rewards system that has become dominant over time, which is very internally oriented and steers for impact within science more than for societal impact. Researchers find themselves pursuing work that gives the most academic credit and is better for career advancement. Every year millions of papers are being published in a still growing number of journals behind paywalls. It is now widely acknowledged that we have a serious pervasive reproducibility and accessibility crisis. In May 2016, the EU Competitiveness Council adopted conclusions on 'The transition towards an Open Science system' where it acknowledges that "Open Science has the potential to increase the quality, impact and benefits of science and to accelerate advancement of knowledge by making it more reliable, more efficient and accurate, better understandable by society and responsive to societal challenges, and has the potential to enable growth and innovation through reuse of scientific results by all stakeholders at all levels of society, and ultimately contribute to growth and competitiveness of Europe". Open Science encompasses Open Access, Open Research Agenda, Data and Methods, Open Source, Open Educational Resources, Open Evaluation, and Citizen Science. The implementation of Open Science touches upon the social roles and responsibilities of publicly funded research and the organization of the science system. Academic leadership is crucial, but national strategies for the implementation of Open Science are essential including Open Science champions and role models. This is an important change in our thinking about science in society. Open Science is a new Social Contract for Science in the 21st century that will change the daily practice of our research and will affect all of us in the science community and academia. Therefore, the EU and many major funders in the public and private sector rely on Open Science to get more impact from investments in science. It is now widely understood that this requires a change in scholarly publishing and the incentive & reward system that can only be brought about when Academic Leadership and the researchers work together. About the presenter: Frank Miedema is Vice Rector for Research at Utrecht University and chair of the Utrecht University Open Science Program. He studied biochemistry at the University of Groningen, specialising in Immunology, with a minor in the Philosophy of Science. He obtained a PhD from the University of Amsterdam at the Central Laboratory of the Blood Transfusion Service (CLB), now Sanquin. From 1983, he was a project leader there in the immunovirology of HIV/AIDS, as part of the Amsterdam Cohort Studies. In 1996, he was appointed full professor at the AMC/University of Amsterdam and became Director of Sanquin Research in 1998. In 2004, he became head of the Immunology Department at the University Medical Center Utrecht. From January 2009 to March 2019 he was dean and vice chairman of the Executive Board of the University Medical Center Utrecht. He is one of the initiators in 2013 of Science in Transition who believe that the academic incentive and reward system is in need of fundamental reform. Next to Science for Science (articles in 'high-impact' journals), the impact on society must be valued more and societal stakeholders should be involved more integrally in the production of knowledge.

The General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), meeting in Paris, from 9 to 24 November 2021, at its 41st session,. Taking into account, in the adoption and application of this Recommendation, the vast diversity of the laws, regulations and customs which, in different countries, determine the pattern and organization of science, technology and innovation: 1 Adopts the present Recommendation on Open Science on this twenty-third day of November 2021; 2 Recommends that Member States apply the provisions of this Recommendation by taking appropriate steps, including whatever legislative or other measures may be required, in conformity with the constitutional practice and governing structures of each State, to give effect within their jurisdictions to the principles of this Recommendation; 3 Also recommends that Member States bring this Recommendation to the attention of the authorities and bodies responsible for science, technology and innovation, and consult relevant actors concerned with open science; 4 Further recommends that Member States collaborate in bilateral, regional, multilateral and global initiatives for the advancement of open science; 5 Recommends that Member States report to it, at such dates and in such manner as shall be determined, on the action taken in pursuance of this Recommendation.

Richard Akerman's presentation for Structural Genomics Consortium (SGC) meeting "Open Lab Notebooks: An Extreme Open Science Initiative" http://www.thesgc.org/open-lab-notebooks-2018 January 19, 2018 in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Meeting supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Wellcome Trust. Twitter hashtag was #SGCOpenNotebooks Also on Slideshare https://www.slideshare.net/scilib/open-science-in-the-government-of-canada WebEx (audio plus slides) of presentation available at https://youtu.be/vxoxKVUWsUY?t=2h35m11s (my presentation starts at 2h35m11s). Due to technical difficulties the first three slides aren't displayed.

Richard Akerman's presentation for Structural Genomics Consortium (SGC) meeting "Open Lab Notebooks: An Extreme Open Science Initiative" http://www.thesgc.org/open-lab-notebooks-2018 January 19, 2018 in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Meeting supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Wellcome Trust. Twitter hashtag was #SGCOpenNotebooks Also on Slideshare https://www.slideshare.net/scilib/open-science-in-the-government-of-canada WebEx (audio plus slides) of presentation available at https://youtu.be/vxoxKVUWsUY?t=2h35m11s (my presentation starts at 2h35m11s). Due to technical difficulties the first three slides aren't displayed.

This open access book provides a broad context for the understanding of current problems of science and of the different movements aiming to improve the societal impact of science and research. The author offers insights with regard to ideas, old and new, about science, and their historical origins in philosophy and sociology of science, which is of interest to a broad readership. The book shows that scientifically grounded knowledge is required and helpful in understanding intellectual and political positions in various discussions on the grand challenges of our time and how science makes impact on society. The book reveals why interventions that look good or even obvious, are often met with resistance and are hard to realize in practice. Based on a thorough analysis, as well as personal experiences in aids research, university administration and as a science observer, the author provides - while being totally open regarding science's limitations- a realistic narrative about how research is conducted, and how reliable 'objective' knowledge is produced. His idea of science, which draws heavily on American pragmatism, fits in with the global Open Science movement. It is argued that Open Science is a truly and historically unique movement in that it translates the analysis of the problems of science into major institutional actions of system change in order to improve academic culture and the impact of science, engaging all actors in the field of science and academia.

Die drei Paradigmenwechsel der Wissenschaftskommunikation -- Wissenschaft als Massenphänomen -- Digitalisierung der Wissenschaftskommunikation -- Zeitschriftenkrise und Open-Access-Bewegung -- Die Transformation des Publikationssystems -- Open Science und die Zukunft der Wissenschaftskommunikation. .

Presentation for Early Carreer Researchers about Open Science at Potsdam Graduate School Career Talks (University of Potsdam). ; The PARTHENOS project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 654119.

Contextualizing Openness offers a fascinating look at Open Science and the democratization of knowledge in international development and social transformation with a focus on the Global South. This volume presents contri­butions from the 12 projects that form the Open and Collaborative Science in Development Network (OCSDNet) organized around four central themes: Defining Open Sci­ence in Development, Governing Open Science, Negotiat­ing Open Science, and Expanding Open Science for Social Transformation. Chan, L., Okune, A., Hillyer, R., Albornoz, D., & Posada, A. (Eds.). (2019). Contextualizing Openness: Situating Open Science. University of Ottawa Press. https://www.idrc.ca/en/book/contextualizing-openness-situating-open-science

The Open Science movement is promising to revolutionise the way science is conducted with the goal to make it more fair, solid and democratic. This revolution is destined to remain just a wish if it is not supported by changes in culture and practices as well as in enabling technologies. This paper describes the gCube offering to enact Open Sciencefriendly Virtual Research Environments. In particular, the paper describes how a complete solution suitable for realising Open Science practices is achieved by a social networking collaborative environment in conjunction with a shared workspace, an open data analytics platform, and

Open science hardware (OSH) are prototypes of laboratory instruments that use open source hardware to extend the purely epistemic (improving knowledge about nature) and normative (improving society) ideals of science and emphasize the importance of technology. They remind us of Zilsel's 1942 thesis about the artisanal origins of science and instrument making that bridged disciplinary and social barriers in the 16th century. The emphasis on making, tinkering, and design transcends research, reproducibility, and corroboration in science and pushes to the forefront educational, emancipatory, and aesthetic and exploratory uses. I will use two recent projects, OpenDrop electrowetting platform and Open Source Estrogen that make but also reflect OSH's playful, expressive, and performative strategies and define the present practices as "artisanal science." These hybrid and ambiguous practices bridge divides between present disciplines and skills but they also define science as an everyday activity directly connected to the private and public interests of the citizens. To describe this epistemic and normative ambiguity of artisanal science, I employ Hannah Arendt's 1958 critique of homo laborans and homo faber and claim that science artisans (citizen scientists, geeks, makers, and hackers) offer an alternative to professionalization of science as practiced in the university and R&D laboratories. Science artisans design and build instruments to engage in civic "vita activa" over instruments but also leisurely "otium" outside of the work and science labor. OSH in this sense empowers individuals and communities to explore new connections between scientific practices, public actions, and private interests (leisure). The science artisans strive for and explore sovereignty, dignity, and freedom in an age immersed in science and technology controversies by bridging the divides between art, science, engineering, and humanities.

This article illustrates how social structures and behaviours of scientists in the societal sub-system of open science resemble patterns analysed in The Gift, an essay written by Marcel Mauss nearly 100 years ago. The presented analysis goes beyond existing interpretations of gift-giving in science. The latter has mainly focussed on the exchange of knowledge and citations. I argue that The Gift explains also identity, competition, co-opetition, rituals and punishment. Mauss's Gift is seen as a complementary model to existing economic and sociological approaches regularly used to analyse structures and behaviours in open science. By accentuating such an anthropological approach, I conclude that the Gift provides explanations for the stability and the expansion of the open science community.

Der Open-Science-Diskurs ist nicht leicht nachvollziehbar. Im Kern lassen sich einzelne wenige Schlüsselbegriffe ausmachen, die unter anderem mit dem Ansatz einer "offenen Wissenschaft" in Verbindung stehen: Open Data, Data Sharing und Open Access. Diese Schlüsselbegriffe beschreiben die Absicht, im Wege der Digitalisierung möglichst alle Bestandteile des Forschungsprozesses einer breiten Öffentlichkeit zugänglich und transparent zu machen. Hierdurch soll nicht zuletzt auch eine Überprüfbarkeit sowie Nachnutzbarkeit der Daten und Methoden ermöglicht werden. Zunehmend gesellt sich im Rahmen des Open-Science-Diskurses ein weiterer Schlüsselbegriff hinzu, nämlich der Begriff der Inklusivität. Als Erweiterung der üblichen Zusammenarbeit in engeren Forschergemeinschaften führt die Inklusivität im Wissenschaftskontext zu einer anderen Art von "Öffnung", zu einer bewussten Einbindung von "unüblichen", wissenschaftsexternen Akteuren, insbesondere aus der Bürgerschaft. Dieser gemeinhin als Citizen Science bezeichnete Ansatz sieht in der Partizipation von Ehrenamtlichen oder Laienforschern eine Chance, den Forschungsprozess inhaltlich zu bereichern und den Erkenntnisgewinn zu erhöhen. In der EU-Wissenschaftspolitik gilt Citizen Science mittlerweile als fest etablierte Säule im Rahmen des Open-Science-Konzeptes. Anders als im angloamerikanischen Raum hat sich der Trend zu Citizen Science in Deutschland relativ spät entwickelt. Erst seit wenigen Jahren lassen sich Aktivitäten ausmachen. Im Jahre 2016 veröffentlichte das BMBF eine eigene Richtlinie zur Förderung der Bürgerbeteiligung in Forschungsprojekten. Vermutlich auch dank dieser strategischen Förderung konnten inzwischen zahlreiche Citizen-Science-Projekte initiiert werden. Welche Arten der Bürgerbeteiligung gibt es? Welchen Mehrwert kann Citizen Science für die Wissenschaft haben? Welche Rollen können wissenschaftliche und öffentliche Bibliotheken dabei spielen? Diese und andere Fragen sollen näher beleuchtet werden.

Open Science is the practice of science in such a way that others can collaborate and contribute, where research data, lab notes, and other research processes are freely available, under terms that enable reuse, redistribution, and reproduction of the research and its underlying data and methods. The transition to Open Science is challenging and will need to be facilitated by focused and united efforts of major stakeholders in science, and a more flexible research publishing system, as well as new incentives and rewarding mechanisms. Currently, all steps of the scientific discovery process use inert business models that lead to the following issues among others: The conflict of interests between major science publishers and the research community. Consequently, paywalls and monopoly of publishers block scientific progress. Negative results are published with a low impact factor which leads to losing both the time and resources of researchers pursuing the repetition of findings. Reproducibility crisis. Applying for research funding can be time-consuming and expensive for individual researchers and small groups of scientists. Funders struggle to find the right projects to fund, spending enormous amounts of money in administration and operational expenses. Lack of ways to perform a cross-check of submitted grant proposals leads to duplicate spending of funds. Tracking and measuring the impact of research is based on inefficient and outdated mechanisms. Initiatives like Plan S are calling for Open Access, but with the current state of affairs, the EU and its members are having difficulties in achieving solid results. DEIP proposes Open Research & Innovation Protocol as a foundation for interconnected open science ecosystem. The protocol will democratize and streamline the processes of creation and assessment of research, fair resource distribution, and sharing of research data and results. Underlying blockchain technology provides a digital infrastructure for the protocol and enables transparency, traceability, ...