Transparency to Sustain Open Science Infrastructure

Background

(i)

The research relies on open infrastructures that are recent (< 30 years). The financing of these infrastructures is not stabilized and is a crucial issue.

The actors of the research ecosystem must invent ways to support it.

“Governments, funders and relevant institutions are encouraged to: Commit to providing the funding required to operationalize open science”

“by increasing funding for open science infrastructures and services”

UNESCO, 2022, Funding open science

Specificity of the open infrastructures

Related events

• Investments in open (ARL report, 2022)
• Scoping the Open Science Infrastructure Landscape in Europe (2020)
• Invest in open infrastructure (2018)
• David W. Lewis 2.5 commitment (2017)
• Global Sustainability Coalition for Open Science Services (2017)
• Michael Roy 1% for Open (2017)
• Knowledge Exchange repport Putting down roots Securing the future of open access policies (2016)

Key stakeholder

• Open Infrastructures : initiatives/organisations/services which contribute to open science (content & metadatas) on the web (DataCite, PKP, OpenCitation …) [1]

• Research Institutions : institutions where the research takes place

[1] A rational on the perimeter and the naming will be necessary :

• “Open scholarly infrastructure” ( POSI )
• “Open infrastructure” ( SCOSS , IOI )
• “Open research infrastructures”
• “Open science infrastructures” (SparcEurope, UNESCO)

How funds are currently displayed ?

(ii)

Focus on the level involved with institutions & Open infrastructures

Limits

(iii)

• Funds are poorly valued, sometimes actors simply forget

• The visibility of funds depends on the websites of the actors

• Crucial data is missing : time, amount and PIDs (persistent identifiers)

The funds are displayed by HTML and logos information.

TSOI goal is to represent them with open and structured data (ROR, wikidata) in a dedicated and interoperable tool

“The way we fund and resource open projects we rely on is insufficient”

Invest In Open

Funding for open infrastructures is not visible globally

• lack of transparency
• lack of coordination
• the big picture isn’t possible

Towards a solution

(iv)

We aim to valorize the funding.

The more we value these funding the more common they will become.

How to valorize ?

• In making publicly available the funding made from Research institution to open infrastructures

• We mimic: if they do it we should do it

TSOI, an added value for funding

Add value on funding, so that others will want to fund

draft : we are in a transition

• from acquiring to funding
• buy ≠ fund
• we have been used to hiding the price of acquisitions (hiden subscription contrats )
• TSOI will promote funding for the Open Infra.

Comparison

(v)

OpenAPC : open the cost of APCs

("authors" ⟷ publishers)

TSOI : open the funding of the open infrastructures

(institutions ⟷ open infrastructures)

ESAC , Enquete Couperin 2020 …

A la lumière des efforts effectués pour ouvrir les coûts impliqués par le système éditorial traditionnel, on devine l’importance, les enjeux, liés à l’ouverture des financements effectués pour les infrastructures ouverte.

TSOI as a service

(vi)

For research institutions

• TSOI adds value to your institution by making all your funds openly available: “no more manual updates on your website”

• Compare, understand where your peers are investing

For open infrastructures

• Forget tables, logos and name changes: “focus on your service, we showcase your funders”

• Improve transparency (POSI)

• Compare, understand other economic models

For the community & society

• An answer to the famous question “who pays ?” (OA is free myth)
• Explore the diversity of economic models
• Explore the tendancy of funding

extra

• Open Governmentship
• The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure