Roadmap scheme, open access system, action plans, multi-department working group key to promoting open science

It is necessary for China to continue to pursue and develop open science (OS) in order to promote science and technology innovation, Chinese researchers Yang Wei, Liu Xiwen, Huang Jinxia, Chen Xuefei, and Chang Ruofei noted in a paper released by a think tank journal focused on strategic and decision-making research that is supervised and sponsored by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) known as the Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences (BCAS, in Chinese) in 2023.

Emphasizing the open and transparent exchange of ideas so as to promote scientific collaboration and information sharing for the benefit of science and the general public, OS makes scientific research, data, and multilingual knowledge readily available, accessible, and reusable for everyone from professionals to ordinary citizens.

Open access (OA) systems, construction of open data (OD) infrastructure, and global open and inclusive multi-subject governance frameworks accelerate the development of OS, which has become an important tool, strategy, and method of achieving  sustainable development, science and technology innovation, and efficient scientific research.

As the BCAS paper observes, OS has a positive impact on scientific research. It is changing research paradigms and improving the innovation efficiency of the entire scientific system, while the transparent OS research process encourages researchers to conduct research in a responsible manner. As an inherent “trust system” for academic exchange, OS makes scientific research more equitable and inclusive; facilitates cross-field, cross-institutional, and cross-border cooperation and knowledge sharing; and enables any subject to play a variety of competent roles in the process of scientific research.

At present, Science and technology powers and some emerging countries continue to enhance their strategic deployment of OS and explore open innovation development paths and models.

The first international standard setting instrument on OS, the UNESCO Recommendation on OS requests that member nations “promote a shared understanding of OS and set out diverse paths to achieving it; develop an enabling policy environment for OS; invest in infrastructure and activities that contribute to OS; invest in training, education, digital literacy and capacity-building to support OS; foster a culture of OS and align incentives to support it; promote innovative approaches for OS at all stages of the scientific process; and encourage international and multi-stakeholder cooperation in the context of OS to reduce gaps in technology and knowledge.”

A study analyzing 149 OS-related case studies corresponding with undertakings  conducted by China’s scientific community from 2002 to October 2022 in order to determine the status of OS development and practices in the country revealed that those pertaining to OA comprised 35% of the total, those pertaining to OS governance comprised 45% of the total, and those pertaining to OD comprised 20% of the total, indicating that there are relatively few OD actions in the nation.

Although China has been engaging in all of these pursuits, its actions have been uneven in the seven areas that the UNESCO Recommendation on OS requests of member nations. A small number of action cases related to the cultivation of OS culture and promotion of innovation methods exist, for example; The nation has a long blank period with regard to the exploration of diversified paths, creation of favorable policy environments, coordination of incentive measures, and investment of human resources and capacity building.

Optimism for OS actions has been growing in China, however; but many challenges continue to exist. The country’s engagement in global OS is currently insufficient, there is a lack of consensus on objectives, and an isolated island of OS practices endures. Unified actions, therefore, need to be taken at the national level.

There are some aspects pertaining to open access development in China such as eligibility criteria for participants, methods of gradually bridging price gaps, and ways of stabilizing the development of science and technology journals published in the country, also need to be determined. “China does not mandate OA for scientific research results” and has not clarified who bears costs associated with OA – its science and technology journals have “a wait-and-see attitude” with regard to OA publishing, preprints, and data warehousing construction.

The report published by BCAS also notes that infrastructure that supports intelligent data research in China is insufficient and that this makes it “challenging to establish a global platform” for collaborative scientific and technological innovation.

Although China has created approximately 5,000 to 6,000 scientific databases of varying scales and levels of quality, inconsistent syntax, structure, and semantics in various scientific data descriptions; insufficient interconnection of data centers, repositories, and platforms and insufficient data infrastructure and incentive systems; and inadequate OS governance capacity have posed great challenges with regard to the promotion of data reuse, fosterage of research innovation, and facilitation of open innovation in society.

The researchers that wrote the BCAS study propose the following suggestions in order to address the above challenges and promote in-depth OS practices in China. First, a consensus on China’s OS objectives should be reached as soon as possible in order to advance them, and a roadmap should be created in order to clarify and outline immediate, short-term (2025), medium-term (2030), medium-to-long-term (2035), and long-term (2050) goals corresponding with the survival, security, social requirements, esteem, and self-actualization of China’s scientific and technological innovation, respectively, based on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

Second, China needs to promote OS with OA systems and issue national OA policies. For example, academic publications, OD, open-source software, source code, open hardware, and open platforms generated by science and technology innovation and funded by the government should be accessible to the public. It is important to construct national knowledge warehousing and OD centers, formulate open publication and data management methods, and increase R&D funding.

Third, China should formulate OS action plans, and participants should perform their respective duties. For example, libraries and scientific research funding institutions should cooperate to pay the subscription fees of literature and collect appropriate article processing charges (APC); domain data platforms and enterprise data centers should build national OD centers; and science and technology management departments and funding agencies should design evaluation indicators and incentive systems for researchers.

Fourth, a multi-department joint working group tasked with coordinating and promoting overarching duties should be established in order to help the world understand China’s OS initiatives, ensure the implementation and coordination of national OS policies and actions, and manage OS operation funds.

These measures will be advantageous for China’s OS development.