Editorial - Embracing Open Science: Marie Curie Alumni Leading the Way in Research Accessibility and Impact

Dear MCAA colleagues/members,

Beneficiaries of the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) during Horizon Europe and Horizon 2020. During these two research funding programmes, the EU and the MSCA have been strongly promoting Open Science and Responsible Research and Innovation. Much of the focus was initially on Open Access publication but this then led to an increased focus on how to make research accessible to all audiences in ways that can lead to increased real-world impact.

This special newsletter issue explores how MSCA Alumni engage with Open Science. In this introductory article, we will cover key elements of open science, practical benefits of adopting open science practices and challenges, as well as policy developments and support, illustrated by examples from authors’ stories.

Understanding Open Science in its many forms

Open Science represents a paradigm shift in how research is conducted, disseminated, and utilized. It emphasizes transparency, collaboration, and accessibility, allowing broader participation and fostering innovation.

Open Source software: allows free access to distribution of software and access to the source code

Open Educational Resources: develop and share learning materials and tools to support knowledge dissemination.

Open collaboration and citizen science encourage the active involvement of the public in the research process in the form of citizen science projects, whether through data collection, analysis, or dissemination.

Open Infrastructure: development of tools, platforms, and networks that support Open Science practices (open repository like arXiv for preprints, data sharing platforms like OSF and FigShare)

of urban mobility, making cities greener and more connected how real-time data sharing for urban mobility improvements. In another article, Kannan Govindaraj gives an account of how impactful communication of science to the general public can be, through his story of writing in the local language newspaper in India.

MCAA is an association whose members have benefitted from EU research funding in the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions. Nevertheless, MCAA members come from almost all countries globally and many choose to work outside the EU after the end of their fellowship. Open Science aims to make the fruits of research accessible to an audience worldwide regardless of the differences of funding between research ecosystems in the Global North and Global South.

An excellent example of how Open Science can produce practical real-world impact is the work of Eugenio Otal, an Assistant Professor at Shinshu University in Japan, to help secure the safety of drinking water in rural Africa by making the design of his low-cost Arduino- based fluoride sensor available as an Open Hardware design. Openness accelerates the uptake of research results globally and leads to real-world societal, economic, health and environmental impacts.

Furthermore, Danielle Marie Agnello shares how she was encouraged to create a global collaboration platform connecting researchers across 19 countries. “What began as an open- access [MSCA] requirement quickly turned into an opportunity to create something valuable”, she emphasizes.

What could stay in the way of adopting Open Science by researchers?

Despite its advantages, Open Science faces several obstacles that researchers must navigate, such as technological and logistical barriers, cultural resistance, funding

In 2021 UNESCO issued a first international
recommendation after conducting a global
consultation

“Central to the Recommendation is a set of pillars holding up a global open science system: open scientific knowledge, open science infrastructures, open engagement of societal actors and open dialogue with other knowledge systems, in combination with science communication.” (from Recommendation on Open Science. UNESCO General Conference, November 2021. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.)

Figure 1 shows these elements, commonly associated with science and research.

Open Access: ensure research outputs are freely available to everyone without subscription barriers.

Open Data: share research data openly, free to access, re-use and modify and in formats that adhere to FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles, enabling others to validate and build upon findings.

Open Methodology: make research workflows, protocols, lab notebooks, and software openly available to enhance reproducibility.

Open Hardware: design and sharing of
physical objects, tools, or devices (e.g., Lab
equipment, 3D printing models)… further
making available for modification and reuse.

Open Evaluation: transparent assessment of research outputs, including grants, proposals, or projects.

Open Peer Review: opening up the peer review of journal articles.

Practical benefits of Open Science

Open Science allows publicly-funded research to maximise its impact and transfer into real-world impact by making the outputs of research open for use and study. Openness reduces barriers to knowledge transfer. Maria Lorena Falco’s contribution radiates enthusiasm about articles available through Open Access. Another contributor, Natalia Mishyna proves how publishing Open Access boosted the visibility of her research, increased citations and connected her expertise with policymakers.

Openness also means that duplication of research can be avoided, so that research funding can be better used for more novel topics. Open Science, as highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic, leads to more rapid scientific progress. This in turn leads to better use of research funding and quicker commercialisation of research.

Openness leads to increased reproducibility of research results. Open access to research data, protocols, code and other details of experimental design, facilitates verification of research results, greater transparency and increased public trust in science. Open science practices prove that research is not purely academic endeavour but a force for public good.

Newsletter contribution by Linda Belkessa highlights how Open Data fuels the future

constraints, ethical and legal concerns, and recognition and career impact.

Less commonly discussed, adoption of Open Science practices can impact researchers’ mental health, adding pressures and vulnerabilities. These challenges are sometimes specific to Early Career Stage (ECR) and established researchers.

…for ECRs:

• Career progression and metrics: traditional academic metrics often overlook contributions like data sharing or preprints, leading to anxiety about career advancement.
• Resource constraints: limited funding for Open Access publishing fees (APC), data duration costs and data management tools can be challenging for most researchers.
• Fear of criticism and credibility concerns: public sharing of data and preprints invites scrutiny, fear of being scooped or not being taken seriously by peers, leading to anxiety and can amplify perfectionist tendencies, causing stress.
• Limited support: advisors or institutions may not prioritize Open Science, and such lack of support and guidance may lead ECRs to manifest feelings of isolation and disconnection.

… for established researchers:

• Stress from cultural resistance: long- standing practices and scepticism can hinder the willingness to adopt Open Science and slow its progress, and adapting to Open Science after years of traditional methods can be frustrating.
• Increased performance pressure: balancing traditional metrics and Open Science contributions can be overwhelming, and balancing new practices with existing responsibilities can lead to burnout.
• Public accountancy and risk of reputation: sharing data openly invites scrutiny, raising concerns about public criticism, and thus fear of criticism of mistakes may deter participation.
• Infrastructural barriers: gaps in resources and support for Open Science workflow.
• Complex collaborations and conflict with colleagues: coordinating openness within multidisciplinary teams can be challenging, often diverging views on Open Science within teams can lead to tension.

..shared challenges:

• Ethical and legal concerns: issues around data privacy, intellectual property, and misinterpretation of openly shared data create uncertainties and frustration.
• Misaligned incentives and career impact: reward systems & evaluation metrics often favor traditional publishing over transparency and contributions to Open Science, creating tensions for researchers
• Imposter syndrome due to lack of training: (i) learning new tools and platforms requires time and training (ii) maintaining data repositories and ensuring FAIR compliance can be resource-intensive. Traditional education systems don't provide exposure to tools and workflows essential for Open Science, and lack of exposure to them can amplify self-doubt.
• Perceived trade-offs: balancing openness with competitive pressures in academia requires additional time disruption work-life balance and can lead to exhaustion/burnout.

Navigating institutional and systemic barriers

Publishing practices

The uptake of Open Science is largely challenged by the inertia of research culture to change through the interests of stakeholders to preserve the previous system. Journal publishing has been an extremely lucrative system and the leading publishing houses and journals have been forced to transition to an alternative business model by moving from journal subscriptions to a model based on article processing charges. This is complicated by different subsidies for libraries and researchers in different countries in Europe and globally. The adoption of Open Access publishing is still not completed but has already led to a fundamental change to the academic publishing business and increased access to scientific knowledge.