This module looks at Openness. It covers: Open Access Open Educational Resources Open Licensing Open Source Open Content Open Courseware Open Assessment Open Science Open Data Open Teaching Open Business Model Open Policy
This paper provides empirical evidence of the relation between trade openness, capital openness and government expenditures in a cross-sectional time-series context. It is shown that capital openness is significantly and negatively related to government expenditures in line with the conventional wisdom that capital mobility may undermine the ability of governments to maintain larger public sectors. More importantly, the compensation hypothesis originally proposed by Rodrik (1998) and traceable back to Cameron (1978) is not in general supported by the data. Adapted from the source document.
Openness vis-i-vis the world and an improved incentive system at home are the key requirements for a lasting re-acceleration of economic growth in Europe, the U.S. and indeed most parts of the world. More specifically, the policy-oriented message to be propounded in this paper is essentially twofold: (i) Europe could already learn much from the U.S. to improve its incentive system and to make its internal markets more open, (ii) Openness vis-a-vis the world economy is a task to be pushed onto the policy agenda in the U.S. as well as in Europe and Japan. Such international openness involves more competition among governments and central banks, a competition that can support our hopes for limited government and sound money in future decades.
Openness, applied in scholarly and research practices, has garnered increasing interest in recent years. With the broadening reach of Open Access as an alternative scholarly publishing model, there is anticipation that open scholarship practices will produce desirable outcomes for research and access to knowledge. The purpose of this article is twofold: firstly to highlight that Open Access is more than just the removal of paywalls, and that it is part of a wider set of open practices that can potentially yield a more collaborative and equitable global landscape of knowledge production. Secondly, to present the IDS Bulletin as a case study for an Open Access publication that has evolved to adapt to a changing scholarly publishing landscape. By critiquing prevalent discourse on openness alongside this case study, we hope that this article contributes to conversations on issues at the intersection of open scholarship, collaborative research and equitable access to knowledge.
WHO COULD OBJECT to 'open innovation'? The term, which has migrated from software development to become a staple of business-management strategy, seems to conjure the most desirable aspects of contemporary American capitalism: freedom, creativity, democratic accessibility, the possibility of new frontiers. The 'openness' paradigm promises to combine new production systems, made possible by the technologies of Web 2.0 and the shrunken space of globalization, with novel forms of business organization and value extraction; it offers a powerful weapon in inter-firm competition and a new regime of labour. The paradigm has been promoted by a torrent of books and articles from us business schools over the past decade. In 2003 a Google search for 'open innovation' brought up 200 results, according to Henry Chesbrough, one of the gurus of the field and Director of the Centre for Open Innovation at Berkeley's Hass Business School. By 2013, the figure was 672,000,000. Adapted from the source document.