Jul 2026· Social Epistemology· Vol 40, pp. 511 - 516· 0 citations· 27 references
Abstract
This special issue examines the promises and limitations of Open Science (OS) and the conditions that produce inequity, injustice, and exclusion in research. Going well beyond the free sharing of publications typically referred to as Open Access, OS aspires to take advantage of new communication technologies to enhance access to and use of all the components of research, ranging from data to models, software, techniques, instruments, protocols and review procedures (Boulton and Royal Society 2012). OS advocates argue that the competitive and proprietary regimes and metrics under which research is currently conducted damage the reliability, quality, and social relevance of science. The main reason is that these regimes and metrics erode opportunities for critical scrutiny and collaboration which are the hallmarks of scientific work. They also disincentivise the exchange of insights and methods within and across disciplines (Radder 2010) leading to an inward-looking academic culture more interested in competing for the next high-impact publication than in developing reliable long-term solutions to societal and environmental challenges (Edwards and Roy 2017).
ABSTRACT This paper discusses three forms of structural injustice associated with disparities in the resources available to researchers, and the opportunity researchers have to pursue their scientific goals. These are: (1) resource injustice; (2) focus injustice; and (3) labour injustice. I argue that such structural i...
ABSTRACT Open science advocates aim to address epistemic injustice and global power asymmetries in research infrastructures yet underestimate structural vulnerabilities and risks embedded in data sharing practices. Drawing on an ethnographic study of the GCRF South–South Migration Inequality and Development Hub’s (MIDE...
R. Alcalay, Joachim Vandekerckhove· Social Epistemology· 0 citations
Watchdog science journalism is essential to scrutinise the structural and financial conditions of scientific research. As a crucial part of this system, experts play a pivotal role in shaping knowledge, guiding policy, and influencing societal decisions. Their credibility is embedded in a complex web of relationships t...
Cheyenne Moon Peters, Tobias Kreutzer, Holger Wormer· Media and Communication· 1 citation
Abstract In this text, we examine how neoliberalism and digitalization have transformed science in the post-pandemic context. We argue that a 'neoliberal regime of science' has emerged that transforms researchers into 'self-entrepreneurs,' constantly monitoring individual metrics such as h-index and impact factors, aba...
F. Neves, Priscilla Normando· Sociedade e Estado· 0 citations
International science collaboration countries have expanded considerably in recent years; nevertheless, institutional and organizational barriers and challenges continue to undermine the effectiveness of joint research initiatives. This study examines how such barriers are associated with perceived academic and technol...
Damaris Chieregato Vicentin, G. H. S. M. de Moraes, B. Fischer et al.· IEEE transactions on enginee...· 0 citations
Science routinely appeals to the idea of serving the common good, at least in part to justify public funding. Yet, there is growing recognition that current research structures and incentives impede the fulfilment of this ideal. This paper argues that this shortfall stems from the dominance of liberal conceptions of...
Kelly Hamilton, Kelby Fransisca, Annie Sandrussi et al.· Minerva· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
