Let’s start by clearing up a persistent misunderstanding. Open science is, of course, much more than just providing open access to publications. UNESCO defines open science as a broad concept that aims to make scientific knowledge openly accessible and reusable. It is about sharing data, code, software and hardware. It also entails opening up the scientific process itself, by involving the public (citizen science) or through open methods such as open peer review. Ultimately open science aims to make science a more participatory and collaborative endeavour, for the benefit of science and society.
To transition to open science, a cultural shift is imperative. In his well-known blog, Executive Director of the Centre for Open Science (COS) Brian Nosek argues that this change cannot rely solely on the motivation of individual researchers. It requires a comprehensive approach from making open science possible by ensuring the infrastructure is in place to providing the right incentives. If we want open to become the new normal, it is essential that researchers get rewarded for putting open science into practice.
Of course, existing academic reward structures often work against open science practices. For a long time, researchers have been evaluated on the basis of the number of publications in high-impact journals (which often did not offer open access options). In such a system, it’s unlikely researchers will feel encouraged to share their data and software, let alone involve societal stakeholders: all time-consuming and costly activities that detract from writing that extra paper that secures tenure or promotion. A clear misalignment has existed between what is good for science and society (openness, sharing, collaboration) and what is good for an individual researcher’s career. All this is now changing, with reforming research assessment programmes in the Netherlands and at international level.
But how can we recognise and reward researchers who actively engage in open science? In a report for the National Programme on Open Science, it was argued that a reform of research assessment was needed on at least three levels:
There is another – often overlooked – reason why the open science and reforming research assessment movements are closely interlinked. The move to open science requires the support of a growing number of data stewards, research software engineers, lab technicians and research managers. Modern science is team science, with researchers working closely with highly skilled support staff, often former PhDs themselves. The future success of research institutions will depend, to a large extent, on their ability to not only attract the brightest researchers, but to also attract and retain a well-trained professional support staff. A category of employees that, by virtue of their skills, is also in high demand outside of academia.
Hans de Jonge is director of Open Science NL. He has worked at NWO since 2018, where he was programme leader and responsible for various aspects of NWO Open Science policy.
