Collaborative Practices for Science and Technology (BR0125)

Brief description of the commitment

Promote transparent, responsible, collaborative, and reproducible scientific practices to accelerate the development of science and technology and increase its social impact.

Problem Definition

1. What problem does the commitment aim to solve?

Open Science is a movement that proposes structural changes in the way scientific knowledge is produced, organized, shared and reused. It is a new way of doing science, more collaborative, transparent, sustainable, where research data, laboratory notebooks and other research processes are freely available, on terms that allow the reuse, redistribution and reproduction of the research, its data and underlying methods”10 11.The OECD defines open science as “efforts by researchers, governments, research funding agencies or the scientific community itself to make the primary results of publicly funded research - publications and research data - accessible to the public in digital form, with no or minimal restrictions, as a means to accelerate research; these efforts aim to increase transparency and collaboration and promote innovation”. What is being advocated is that scientific knowledge should be open and shared among the scientific community of different countries and for society as a whole, under the discourse that this openness favors rapid progress in research at the frontier of knowledge and, consequently, there is a greater return of benefits for society. The most current example of the need for rapid progress refers to COVID-19 and the researchers’ partnership to solve a global problem. It is important to note, however, that the adoption of an open science policy is not without its challenges. The OECD itself recognizes the need to address issues relating to the protection of privacy and national security, the misuse of information, technical standards that allow for the interoperability of databases and the reuse of information, intellectual property, incentives for researchers to open up their databases, funding for data storage infrastructures, training of human resources, as well as issues relating to the cross-border flow of sensitive information. If on the one hand, there is pressure from international organizations (OECD and UNESCO) to promote Open Science, there are reasons that justify certain restrictions or at least a more careful analysis of the advantages and disadvantages for each country. It is worth pointing out that knowledge enables the creation of new business models based on technological innovation, thus feeding back into the knowledge generation system. It is therefore necessary to think about a model that strikes a balance between opening up science and promoting the country’s technological autonomy, because it is no exaggeration to say that countries with a greater technological infrastructure and a greater capacity for analysis and processing will have greater potential to benefit from open science and, through the availability of open data, may be able to identify something with potential economic application. The contemporary view of Open Science does not see it as an end in itself but, as a means of accelerating the advancement of science for the benefit of society as a whole. As such, open science strategies and policies are a means of supporting better quality and more transparent science, more collaborative, interdisciplinary, and reproducible scientific practice, and more effective engagement between science and society that can lead to more immediate and pervasive social and economic impacts. However, there are global and local challenges to overcome, for example: 1) Open Science is installed in a disciplinary, segmented, and idiosyncratic way, which can be observed by the distinct visions constructed by a wide range of scientific domains; 2) the scope of Open Science today is not restricted only to access to publications or research data - the most visible face of its assumptions - but incorporates a great diversity of aspects and stages of the processes of generating scientific knowledge and research products materialized by codes, mathematical models, algorithms, instruments, laboratory workflows, methodologies, equipment/ hardware, and other digital artifacts, each with different scales of openness and with peculiarities that must be observed; 3) Open Science can only be fully realized if it is supported by techno-social infrastructures that resonate with the cyber-infrastructures of modern science, such as high-performance and grid computing, disciplinary repositories, cloud storage systems, etc. 4) Open Science, due to its complexity, breadth, and cost, requires dialogue with various social segments, such as research institutions, government, funders, legislators, and even the business sector, after all, Open Science practices contribute to Open Innovation and the development of a business model. This segmented and disjointed scenario, together with international pressure to engage in Open Science, has fostered scattered institutional initiatives to deal with the issue of open publications, open research data, citizen science, and other aspects of the subject. The fact is that Brazil lacks a national guideline that includes a vision of Open Science that is balanced with the country’s technological development issues. In the universe of data-driven science, some challenges regarding data sharing need to be answered, such as: What are the limits and rules for reusing scientific data? What is the embargo period for research data that culminated in technological development? Can data sharing only take place with Brazilian researchers (national sovereignty), or can it take place with foreign researchers? If the researcher receives funding from international agencies, and they demand that data be shared in return for the support, what is Brazil’s political orientation in this case? In the field of scientific publications, the imminent challenge is to adhere to Plan S12. It is important to note that many international scientific journals are not yet published in the ‘golden route’. And one of the items in Plan S proposes that these journals migrate to the exclusive ‘golden route’ model by December 31, 2024. In practice, this means that, as of 2025, journal titles will no longer charge the reader (subscription to journal titles) but may start charging the authors Author Processing Charges (APC). What will the financial impact be for Brazilian researchers to publish in high-impact journals? What investment will be needed for Brazilian authors to publish in these journals? Another counterpoint related to scientific publications is that the evaluation of national postgraduate programs privileges publication in high-impact international journals, to the detriment of national journals made available in open access. In other words, at the same time as 97% of Brazilian journal titles are available in open access, CAPES’ evaluation of postgraduate programs gives higher marks to programs that have had a journal article published in a high- impact journal, which is accessed by subscription or by paying an APC. This mosaic of interests implies a need for comprehensive policies that consider the legitimate interests of the various stakeholders, which can be materialized by a National Open Science Guideline that prioritizes the country’s strategic interests; at the same time, there is a need to develop a set of regulations and rules to manage the use of shareable research products.

2. What are the causes of the problem?

Among the obstacles that hinder the management and promotion of transparency, participation and collaboration in research and scientific production are the following: • Lack of dialog between different government sectors; • Lack of an integrated government vision of the role of science and technology in Brazil’s future; • Lack of articulation between strategic bodies and alignment on actions that should be taken; • Lack of dialogue between the community and public and private organizations about the situation and what can and needs to be done in relation to transparency, participation, and collaboration in research and scientific production; • Excessive bureaucratization; • Evaluation focused exclusively on scientific impact; • Society’s lack of knowledge about the importance of science; • Researchers’ lack of information about the benefits of collaborative science; • Lack of knowledge of data management mechanisms to ensure beneficial openness; • Researchers’ fear of the term “open”; • Unfamiliarity with new ways of communicating science; • Lack of a strategic science and technology policy for the country’s development; • Lack of a strategic science and technology policy for the country’s technological autonomy; • Government policy rather than state policy; • Lack of social commitment by researchers to Brazilian science; • A restrictive Open Science concept idealized/unrealized without the participation of the scientific community; • Lack of training and certification mechanisms for adopting Open Science; • Senior management’s lack of knowledge about what needs to be done in strategic bodies; • Lack of human resources trained to work on the issue; • Emphasis on training information professionals, not prioritizing the knowledge of researchers; • Insufficient funding for comprehensive scientific communication; • Emphasis on building generic infrastructure models.

Commitment Description

1. What has been done so far to solve the problem?

The 4th Open Government Plan established Commitment 3 - Establishing scientific data governance mechanisms to advance Open Science in Brazil. The Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (Embrapa), IBICT, CAPES, MCTI, CNPq, the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), the Open Knowledge Foundation, and the Brazilian Network for Education and Research (RNP) all took part in this effort. Nine milestones were established for the construction of scientific data governance mechanisms, namely: • Milestone 1 - Setting up an inter-institutional network for Open Science; • Milestone 2 - Carrying out a national and international diagnosis of Open Science; • Milestone 3 - Defining guidelines and principles for institutional policies to support Open Science; • Milestone 4 - Promoting actions to raise awareness, participation, and training in Open Science; • Milestone 5 - Coordination with funding agencies to implement actions to support Open Science; • Milestone 6 - Liaising with scientific publishers to implement actions in support of Open Science; • Milestone 7 - Implementation of a pilot federated infrastructure for research data repositories; • Milestone 8 - Proposing interoperability standards for research data repositories; and • Milestone 9 - Proposing a set of indicators for measuring maturity in Open Science. In the 5th Open Government Plan, the topic of open science was prioritized by the government, giving rise to Commitment 8 - “Transparency in Science: new evaluation mechanisms for the advancement of Open Science”, the aim of which was to build a proposal for an evaluation model to foster Open Science. The Commitment was considered by the Comptroller General of the Union (CGU) to be “one of the highlights of the 5th National Action Plan, both in terms of the successful results and the synergy of the actors throughout the implementation process”. Eleven milestones were set for Commitment 8, namely: • Milestone 1 - Survey of national and international criteria for evaluating researchers and research institutions, with a focus on open science practices; • Milestone 2 - Proposing criteria for Qualifying Data Repositories and Publication Repositories; • Milestone 3 - Proposing guidelines for granting funding and developing research projects; • Milestone 4 - Proposing alternative metrics for measuring the impact of scientific research; • Milestone 5 - Proposal of Indicators for Citizen Science; • Milestone 6 - Proposal for the qualification of scientific journals and alternative criteria in the dimensions of open science to enrich the Qualis stratification; • Milestone 7 - Survey of perceptions and promotion of awareness of the products of the commitment; • Milestone 8 - Proposing indicators for evaluation that take Open Science into account; • Milestone 9 - Implementation of an observatory for the progress of Open Science practices in Brazil; • Milestone 10 - Comparative study of the expected vs. observed impact on the production of postgraduate programs; • Milestone 11 - Propose criteria for qualifying technical, technological, and artistic products that favor Open Science.

2. What solution are you proposing?

The effort differs in that it is more focused on the political dimension of Open Science as part of the country’s Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy. In this sense, the frameworks of the Commitment were designed to promote debate on the subject with the scientific community through the National Science, Technology, and Innovation Conferences and other forums run by specific organizations, such as the Brazilian Society for the Advancement of Science. Through this broad debate, the aim is to promote transparency and collaboration in science as one of the pillars of the National Science, Technology, and Innovation Strategy (ENCTI). At the same time, the identification of strategic and critical areas, themes, and technologies for the country’s technological autonomy allows for the development of equitable guidelines for Open Science, thus enabling the development of the country’s open science policy in line with the ENCTI, as well as the development of an integrated action plan for the operationalization of transparent, responsible, collaborative, and reproducible scientific practices. This set of initiatives will allow the issue to be established equitably on the country’s science and technology agenda, reducing legal uncertainty for researchers, funding agencies, and research institutions. The Commitment also proposes relevant actions to produce studies that will allow science and technology policy to be better directed, such as the implementation of tools for monitoring Open Science practices, the preparation of a proposal on how to incorporate open practices into the criteria for evaluating researchers and institutions, based on the 5th National Action Plan, and the carrying out of studies on Open Science support infrastructures. In this context, a study will also be produced on existing budget actions that could support open science, proposing the creation of budget plans. Actions to raise awareness, train, and disseminate information among S&T policy stakeholders were also planned. Examples include: a) raising awareness among science and technology managers about good scientific practices that are accountable, transparent, collaborative, and reproducible; b) raising awareness and valuing Brazilian journals when it comes to adhering to Open Science practices; c) holding rounds of discussions on Open Science at meetings of agency area representatives; the development and dissemination of open educational resources and, finally, the creation of incentive mechanisms for open science practices.

3. What results do we want to achieve by implementing this commitment?

The main results expected from the commitment are: • National Open Science Policy, drawn up with national strategic interests in mind; • National guidelines for the governance and management of publicly funded research data; • Integrated action plan that is a guideline for the stakeholders involved in the issue; • Identification of strategic and critical areas, themes, and technologies for the country’s technological autonomy; • Proposal on how to incorporate transparency, participation, and collaboration practices into the criteria for evaluating researchers and institutions; • Identification of existing budget actions that could support open science; • Researchers trained to deal with transparent, participatory, and collaborative practices; and • Infrastructures for data management, storage, processing and analysis.

Commitment Analysis

1. How will the commitment promote transparency? Science needs to be accessible to a broad spectrum of society and not just to researchers and specialists. This makes it necessary for transparency to cut across almost all frameworks. Therefore, the frameworks involved should establish guidelines so that digital technologies combined with curation methodologies based on the FAIR Principles allow scientists, on the one hand, to open up the research process, making it more transparent to their peers and, on the other, to prepare, translate and adapt the products of their research so that interested non-specialists can learn about what lies behind the black box of science.

2. How commitment will help promote accountability? A large part of the responsibility for Open Science lies with public bodies, and they also hold the relevant data on ongoing processes and the results of those that have been completed. Therefore, the milestones involved should define strategies and advances that make it possible to realign existing monitoring systems so that they are capable of integrating and analyzing data and making it available through accessible and understandable interfaces to the various social segments interested, preferably through interactive web systems.

3. How will the commitment improve citizen participation in defining, implementing, and monitoring solutions? Commitment 3 focuses on the debate on actions between the agents. It is hoped that this broad debate will benefit society13 in terms of access to open, findable, and interoperable information. Thus fostering citizen science, providing new forms of connection and dialogue with a collaborative culture, and promoting the reproducibility of science and open innovation.

Commitment Planning (Milestone | Expected Results | Expected Completion Date)

Milestone 1 - Inclusion of the collaboration, transparency, and reproducibility of science in the National Science and Technology Strategy (ENCTI), through national conferences (CNCTI) | Collaboration, transparency and reproducibility of science included in ENCTI agenda | August/2024

Milestone 2 - Holding a debate on the issue of commitment in the scientific community to help draw up national guidelines for open science. | Debate held | December/2024

Milestone 3 - Identifying strategic and critical areas, themes, and technologies for the country's technological autonomy | Strategic and critical areas, themes, and technologies for the country's technological autonomy identified | December /2024

Milestone 4 - Drawing up a proposal on how to incorporate open practices into the evaluation criteria for researchers and institutions, based on the 5th National Action Plan | Proposal drawn up | February /2025

Milestone 5 - Identify existing budget actions that could support open science, proposing the creation of budget plans | Actions identified | March/2025

Milestone 6 - Implement tools to monitor open science practices | Monitoring tools implemented | February /2026

Milestone 7 - Drawing up the country's Open Science policy in line with the National Science and Technology Strategy (ENCTI) | Country's open science policy drawn up | December /2026

Milestone 8 - Drawing up an integrated action plan to operationalize transparent, responsible, collaborative, and reproducible scientific practices | Action plan drawn up | December /2026

Milestone 9 - Development of awareness-raising actions for relevant agents related to the commitment. Raising awareness among science and technology managers about good, responsible, transparent, collaborative, and reproducible scientific practices. Carrying out actions to raise awareness and value Brazilian journals in adhering to open science practices. Holding rounds of discussions on open science at meetings of agency area representatives. | Awareness- raising actions developed | March/2027

Milestone 10 - Carry out studies on infrastructures to support open science | Study carried out | June /2027

Milestone 11 - Identify the presence of Open Science in existing initiatives to retain and support Brazilian researchers in the country and to repatriate researchers | Initiatives identified | June /2027

Milestone 12 - Development and dissemination of open educational resources on transparent, collaborative, and reproducible research practices | Educational resources developed and disseminated | June /2027

Milestone 13 - Creating incentive mechanisms for open science practices (prizes, hackathons) | Incentive mechanisms created | June /2027