Open Science. Dr. Dr.Phil. Rene VON SCHOMBERG Team Leader-Open science policy coordination and development

Transcription

1 Dr. Dr.Phil. Rene VON SCHOMBERG Team Leader-Open science policy coordination and development European Commission DG Research & Innovation A.6-Data, Open Access and Foresight Open Science

2 Open Science: a new approach to the research process Based on cooperative work and new ways of diffusing and sharing knowledge using digital technologies and new collaborative tools A systemic change to the way science is organised and research is carried out It affects virtually all components of doing science and research, from conceptual work to publishing, from empirical research to dataanalysis. Shifting focus from "publishing as fast as possible" to "sharing knowledge as early as possible" 2014 Public consultation on Science 2.0: Science in Transition Notes: tiam ultricies nisi vel augue. Curabitur ullamcorper ultricies nisi. Nam eget dui. Etiam rhoncus. Maecenas tempus, tellus eget condimentum rhoncus, sem quam semper libero, Open Science

3 Open Science opening up the research process Analysis Collaborative bibliographies Source : Open Science

4 An emerging ecosystem of services and standards It's real! Scistarter.com Citizens science Dataintensive Open code Open workflows Preprint Analysis Open data Open annotation Data gathering Conceptualisation Runmycode.org Publication Open access Review Impact Story Alternative Reputation systems Openannotation.org Scientific blogs Collaborative bibliographies 4

5 What are the key drivers of 'Science 2.0'? Availability of digital technologies and their increased capacities 7 22% 2% Researchers looking for new ways of disseminating their output 47% 43% 7% 2% Researchers looking for new ways of collaboration 43% 43% 3% 9% 3% Increase of the global scientific population 30% 4 4% 17% 3% Growing criticism of current peer-review system 34% 42% 14% 4% Public demand for better and more effective science 3 39% 2% 1 7% Public funding supporting 'Science 2.0' 32% 41% 15% Growing public scrutiny of science and research 28% 44% 3% 19% Public demand for faster solutions to Societal Challenges 2 45% 3% 20% Scientific publishers engaging in 'Science 2.0' 22% 40% 22% 9% Citizens acting as scientists 11% 33% 34% 1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% I totally agree I partially agree I don t know I partially disagree I totally disagree

6 What are the barriers for 'Science 2.0' at the level of individual scientist? Concerns about quality assurance 53% 35% 3% 8% 2% Lack of credit-giving to 'Science 2.0' 50% 38% 4% 7% 1% Lack of integration in the existing infrastructures 4 39% 5% 9% 1% Limited awareness of benefits of 'Science 2.0 for researchers 43% 41% 4% 9% 2% Lack of financial support 47% 35% 10% 3% Uncertain benefits for researchers 35% 4 5% 10% 4% Legal constraints (e.g. copyright law) 43% 38% 9% 5% Lack of research skills fit for 'Science 2.0' 43% 37% 4% 13% 3% Lack of incentives for junior scientists to engage with 'Science 2.0' 44% 32% 13% 5% Concerns about ethical and privacy issues 2 44% 17% 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% I totally agree I partially agree I don t know I partially disagree I totally disagree

7 What are the implications of 'Science 2.0 for society, the economy and the research system? Background Science more reliable (e.g. re-use of data) 4 37% 4% 10% 2% Science more efficient 42% 41% 3% 11% 3% Faster and wider innovation 42% 40% 10% 3% Data-intensive science as a key economic driver 41% 38% 13% 3% Greater scientific integrity 37% 41% 13% 3% Reconnect science and society 33% 43% 15% 4% Science more responsive to societal challenges 29% 47% 14% 4% Research more responsive to society through crowd-funding 21% 39% 9% 22% 9% Crowd-funding an important research funding source 18% 40% 8% 2 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% I totally agree I partially agree I don t know I partially disagree I totally disagree

8 12 On what issues within 'Science 2.0' do you see a need for policy intervention? Mean ranking position Rank : the lowest need (1) to the highest need (11) Mean Mean - std Mean + std 0

9 Five lines of potential policy actions Fostering and creating incentives for Open Science Removing barriers to Open Science Mainstreaming and further promoting Open Access policies Developing research infrastructures for Open Science Embedding Open Science in society as a socio-economic driver Notes: tiam ultricies nisi vel augue. Curabitur ullamcorper ultricies nisi. Nam eget dui. Etiam rhoncus. Maecenas tempus, tellus eget condimentum rhoncus, sem quam semper libero, Open Science

10 Open Science: key issues The European Open Science Cloud Advancing Open Access and Data Policies Alternative systems to evaluate the quality and impact of research Text and Data Mining Towards better, more efficient and more Open Science Fostering Research Integrity Making science more inclusive: Citizen Science Notes: tiam ultricies nisi vel augue. Curabitur ullamcorper ultricies nisi. Nam eget dui. Etiam rhoncus. Maecenas tempus, tellus eget condimentum rhoncus, sem quam semper libero, Open Science

11 Open Science: From Open Access to Open Scholarly Communication Discovery Analysis Writing Publication Outreach Assessment Elsevier Public or private initiatives at every level of the research process offering specific services to researchers Springer Nature Digital Science Google Wikimedia Layer of "commons" New initiatives allowing the scholarly process to be carried out differently Source: Open Science

12 Towards better science Good, efficient and Open Science research governance changes declaring competing interests replication & reproducibility meaningful assessment effective quality checks credit where it is due no fraud, plagiarism GOOD technical changes & standards connected tools & platforms no publ. size restrictions null result publishing speed of publication EFFICIENT (web)standards, IDs semantic discovery Re-useability versioning Source: OPEN open peer review open (lab)notes plain language open drafting open access CC-0/BY economic & copyright changes Open Science

13 Open Science Policy Platform and European Open Science Agenda May 2016 Competitiveness Council: "NOTES the establishment of the Open Science Policy Platform by the Commission, which aims at supporting the further development of the European Open Science policy and promoting the uptake by stakeholders of best practices, including issues such as adapting reward and evaluation systems, alternative models for open access publishing and management of research data (including archiving), altmetrics, guiding principles for optimal reuse of research data, development and use of standards, and other aspects of open science such as fostering research integrity and developing citizen science"; Commissioner Moedas will inform the Council biannually on advances of the Platform (which consist of 25 Key stakeholders-european Branch Organisations)

14 Open Science Policy Platform ERA & framework conditions for actors: European Charter for researchers Code of conduct for Research Integrity Charter for Access to Research Infra DSM & framework conditions for data: Copyright - TDM Data Protection Free Flow of Data European Commission Open Science Policy Platform Wide input from stakeholders: ad-hoc meetings and workshops e-platform with wider community reports and independent experts ü EG on open science cloud ü EG on altmetrics ü EG on alt. business models for OA publishing ü EG on FAIR open data European Open Science Agenda: OA publishing models FAIR open data Science Cloud Alt metrics Rewards & careers Education & skills Citizen Science Research integrity advice opinions context

15 Next-generation altmetrics: responsible metrics and evaluation for open science EU Expert Group Altmetrics

16 Development of recommendations Hearings Call for Evidence 6 Experts

17 Recommendations 5 headline findings 12 targeted recommendations organised under four of the headings of the European Open Science Agenda: Foster open science Remove barriers to open science Develop research infrastructures for open science Embed open science in society

18 Headline findings No perfect metrics: neither alternative, nor traditional Responsible use of metrics is key Open science requires open metrics

19 Selected recommendations Recommendations Short Term Goals Long Term Goal Ground an open science system in a mix of expert judgement, quantitative, and qualitative measures Provide guidelines for responsible metrics in support of open science Fostering open science

20 Selected recommendations Recommendations Short Term Goals Long Term Goal Ground an open science system in a mix of expert judgement, quantitative, and qualitative measures Make better use of existing metrics for open science Provide guidelines for responsible metrics in support of open science Assess suitability of indicators, encourage development of new indicators Fostering open science

21 Selected recommendations Recommendations Short Term Goals Long Term Goal Open, transparent and linked data infrastructure for metrics in open science Use open metrics and reward adoption of open science principles and practices Removing barriers to open science

22 Selected recommendations Recommendations Short Term Goals Long Term Goal Open, transparent and linked data infrastructure for metrics in open science Measure what matters Use open metrics and reward adoption of open science principles and practices Highlight how inappropriate use of indicators can impede open science Removing barriers to open science

23 Initial endorsement by OSPP-I Mix of expert judgement, quantitative and qualitative measures. Transparency and accuracy are crucial Make better use of existing metrics for open science open, transparent data infrastructure Measure what matters

24 Initial endorsement by OSPP-II clear guidelines for the responsible use of metrics development of new indicators and use suitable existing ones for open science. adoption and implementation of open science principles and practices should be rewarded highlight how the inappropriate use of indicators (whether conventional or altmetrics or next generation metrics) can impede progress towards open science

25 To conclude with some problems -Does Good Metrics for Science 'equals' good metrics for Open Science? -Impacts of research is becoming more important, but what is a good impact? -metrics can never directly measure 'impact' and 'excellence'(regardless how their definition)- Are metrics not more useful for what they are not created for?) Hence (RvS): indicators for engagement with Open Science (not focus on individual "productivity" of researchers)