Content deleted Content added
Line 33:
===Principles for open science infrastructures===
In 2015 ''Principles for Open Scholarly Infrastructure'' have laid out an influential prescriptive definition of open science infrastructures. Subsequent definitions and terminologies of open science infratructures have been largely elaborated on this basis.<ref>{{harvnb|Ross-Hellauer et al.|2020|p=13}}</ref><ref
The ''Principles'' attempt to hybridize the framework of infrastructure studies with the analysis of the [[commons]] initiated by [[Elinor Ostrom]]. The principles develop a series of recommendations in three critical areas to the success of open infrastructures:
Line 97:
=== Toward open science infrastructures (2015-…) ===
The consolidation and expansion of commercial scientific infrastructure had entailed renewed calls to secure "community-controlled infrastructure".<ref>{{harvnb|Joseph|2018|p=1}}</ref> The acquisition of the open repositories [[Digital Commons]] and [[SSRN]] by Elsevier has highlighted the lack of reliability of critical scientific infrastructure for open science.<ref>{{harvnb|Boston|2021}}</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Joseph|2018}}</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Brembs et al.|2021}}</ref> The SPARC report on European Infrastructures underlines that "a number of important infrastructures at risk and as a consequence, the products and services that comprise open infrastructure are increasingly being tempted by buyout offers from large commercial enterprises. This threat affects both not-for-profit open infrastructure as well as closed, and is evidenced by the buyout in recent years of commonly relied on tools and platforms such as SSRN, bepress, Mendeley, and Github."<ref
In contrast with the consolidation of privately-owned infrastructure, the open science movement "has tended to overlook the importance of social structures and systemic constraints in the design of new forms of knowledge infrastructures."<ref>{{harvnb|Okune et al.|2018|p=13}}</ref>. It remained mostly focused to the content of scientific research, with little integration of technical tools and few large community initiatives. "common pool of resources is not governed or managed by the current scholarly commons initiative. There is no dedicated hard infrastructure and though there may be a nascent community, there is no formal membership."<ref>{{harvnb|Bosman et al.|2018|p=19}}</ref>
| |||