Author : Jutta Haider
Increasingly open access emerges as an issue that researchers, universities, and various infrastructure providers, such as libraries and academic publishers, have to relate to. Commonly policies requiring open access are framed as expanding access to information and hence as being part of a democratization of society and knowledge production processes.
However, there are also other aspects that are part of the way in which open access is commonly imagined in the various policy documents, declarations, and institutional demands that often go unnoticed.
This essay wants to foreground some of these issues by asking the overarching question: “What is the problem that open access is seen to solve represented to be?” The paper will discuss how demands to open up access to research align also with an administrative enclosure and managerial processes of control and evaluation.
It will show that while demands for free and open access to research publications – created or compiled in research processes funded by public money – are seen as contributing to the knowledge base for advancing society for a common good and in that sense framed as part of a liberating discourse, these demands are also expression of a shift of control of the science community to invisible research infrastructures and to an apparatus of administration as well as subscribing to an ideal of entrepreneurialism as well as continuing a problematic and much criticized understanding of Western science as universal.
URL : http://lup.lub.lu.se/record/070c067e-5675-455e-a4b2-81f82b6c75a7
Authors : María Soledad Ramírez-Montoya, Francisco-José García-Peñalvo
Open science, as a common good, opens possibilities for the development of nations, through innovations and collaborative constructions, which help to democratize knowledge. Advances in this area are still emerging, and the open science, cocreation of knowledge and open innovation triangle, is presented as an opportunity to generate an original contribution from research to open educational theory and practices.
The study analyzed the articles that addressed this triangle, in order to identify the contexts and challenges that arise in open innovation and the cocreation of knowledge to promote open science.
The method was a systematic literature review (SLR) of 168 articles published in open access format, from January 2014 to May 2017 in the Web of Science and Scopus databases.
In the validation process, the York University criteria were used: inclusion and exclusion, relevance of the pertinent studies, evaluation of the quality / validity of included studies and description of data / basic studies.
The findings showed that the mostwidely publicized contexts were in the United States and Brazil, in the business and academic sectors (closely followed by the social sector), and the challenges were open to innovation, opening and research.
The research concludes that the context and practices of collaboration are substantial elements for innovation and open science.
URL : Co-creation and open innovation: Systematic literature review
Alternative location : http://eprints.rclis.org/32168/
Open Access Publishing as a Para-Academic Proposition: OA as Labour Relation :
“In this commentary, I ask what is meant by the phrase Open Access (OA)? If OA publishing has emancipatory potential for the publics that are thought to benefit from the practice, why is there so much business as usual? Para-academic practices are about affirming scholarship as a symptom and creating a common good, creating a public knowledge that is a knowledgable public. It is because OA shares this concern for publics that para-academic practices include OA publishing. By debating the merits of, experimenting with, and invigorating our understanding of OA I believe para-academic practices become more apparently necessary because ultimately OA, like Academia, is haunted by the figure of the public as an already-formed thing.”
URL : http://triplec.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/529