printThe Implications of Open Science Development:
Risks of Increasing Inequality in Global Scientific Communication
Karikh R.D.
PhD Student, Research Assistant of International Laboratory for Social Integration Research, HSE University, Moscow, Russia rkarikh@hse.ru
The article/review was prepared within the framework of the Basic Research Program at HSE University.
Karikh R.D. The Implications of Open Science Development: Risks of Increasing Inequality in Global Scientific Communication. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2024. No 10. P. 93-103
The concept of open science, which is primarily a fight for free access to scientific knowledge, continues to gain support in the world. One of the goals of the concept is to solve the problems of developing countries and reduce inequality. This essay questions the feasibility of this goal. Presenting science as a world- system, the author describes its current structure in the format of academic colonialism, where the countries of the global North, located in the center of the world- system, dominate the countries of the global South, located closer to the periphery. The consequence of this model is epistemic injustice, which can be corrected in the context of open science. However, modern neoliberal trends in the form of platform capitalism do not allow us to cope with this problem within the framework of the concept in its current form, but only increase the risks of growing. The essay proposes possible solutions for the implementation of open science in Russia in an inclusive form based on the concept of bibliodiversity.
Галявиева М. С. Научные библиотеки в условиях открытого доступа // Ученые записки Института социальных и гуманитарных знаний. 2016. № 1 (14). C. 134–140. [Galjavieva M. S. (2016) Scientific libraries in conditions of open access. Uchenye zapiski Instituta sotsialnykh i gumanitarnykh znanii. [Academic Notes of the Institute of Social and Humanitarian Knowledge] No. 14: 134–140. (In Russ.)]
Засурский И. И., Трищенко Н. Д. Инфраструктура открытой науки в России и мире // Научные и технические библиотеки. 2019. № 4. С. 84–100. [Zasurskiy I. I., Trishchenko N. D. (2019) The open science infrastructure in Russia and the world. Nauchnie i tehnicheskie biblioteki [Scientific and Technical Libraries]. No. 4: 84–100. (In Russ.)]
Зубофф Ш. Эпоха надзорного капитализма. Битва за человеческое будущее на новых рубежах власти. М.: Ин-т Гайдара, 2022. [Zuboff Sh. (2022) The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. Moscow: In-t Gaidara.]
Карих Р. Д. Анализ дискуссии на тему открытой науки в российском научном поле // Социология науки и технологий. 2023. № 2 (14). С. 173–193. [Karikh R. D. (2023) Analysis of the discussion on open science in the Russian scientific field. Sotsiologiia nauki i tekhnologii [Sociology of Science and Technology]. No. 4: 52–71. (In Russ.)]
Карих Р. Д. Трансформация роли библиотек в условиях открытой науки // Вестник СПбГУ. Социология. 2024. № 1 (17). С. 100–115. [Karikh R. D. (2024) Transformation of the role of libraries in the Open Science. Vestnik SPbGU. Sociologiya [Bulletin of St. Petersburg State University. Sociology]. No. 1: 100–115. (In Russ.)]
Клеева Л. П., Максимов С. В. «Открытая» наука: критический анализ нового проекта ЮНЕСКО // Российское конкурентное право и экономика. 2021. № 1 (25). С. 22–29. [Kleeva L. P., Maksimov S. V. (2021) Open Science: a Critique of a New UNESCO Project. Rossiiskoe konkurentnoe parvo i ekonomika [Russian competition law and economy]. No. 1: 22–29. (In Russ.)]
Мертон Р. Эффект Матфея в науке, II: накопление преимуществ и символизм интеллектуальной собственности // THESIS. 1993. № 3. С. 256–276. [Merton R. (1993) The Matthew Effect in Science, II: Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property. THESIS. No. 79: 256–276. (In Russ.)]
Москалева О. В., Акоев М. А. Геополитика и публикационная стратегия. Есть ли связь? // Научный редактор и издатель. 2024. № 9 (1). [Moskaleva O. V., Akoev M. A. (2024) Geopolitics and publication strategy. Is there a dependance? Nauchniy redactor i izdatel [Science Editor and Publisher]. No. 9 (1). (In Russ.)]
Срничек Н. Капитализм платформ. М.: ВШЭ, 2019. [Srnicek N. (2019) Platform Capitalism. Moscow: VSHE. (In Russ.)]
Шугуров М. В. Оценка санкций в отношении российской науки зарубежными исследователями: многообразие подходов // Управление наукой и наукометрия. 2023. Т. 18. № 4. С. 578–612. [Shugurov M. V. (2023) Assessment of Sanctions against Russian Science by Foreign Researchers: Diversity of Approaches. Upravlenie naukoi i naukometriya [Science Governance and Scientometrics]. No. 18: 578–612. (In Russ.)]
Шугуров М. В., Печатнова Ю. В. Право на науку в контексте деформации международного правопорядка в условиях санкций // Общественные науки и современность. 2023. № 6. C. 1–19. [Shugurov M. V., Pechatnova Y. V. (2023) The right to science in the context of the deformation of the international law-order under sanctions. Obshestvennye nauki i sovremennost [Social Sciences and Contemporary World]. No. 6: 1–19. (In Russ.)]
Alperin J. P. (2014) Open Access Indicators: Assessing Growth and Use of Open Access Resources from Developing Regions: The Case of Latin America. In: Open Access and Scholarly Communications Indicators in Latin America. Ed. by J. P. Alperin, D. Babini, G. Fischman. Buenos Aires: CLACSO: 15–78.
van Bellen S., Alperin J. P., Larivière V. (2024) The oligopoly of academic publishers persists in exclusive database. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2406.17893.
Berger M. (2021) Bibliodiversity at the Centre: Decolonizing Open Access. Development and Change. No. 2: 383–404.
Canagarajah A. S. (2002) A Geopolitics of Academic Writing. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Chan L., Gray E. (2014) Centering the Knowledge Peripheries through Open Access: Implications for Future Research and Discourse on Knowledge for Development. In: Open development: networked innovations in international development. Ed. by M. L. Smith, K.M.A. Reilly. Ottawa: MIT Press: 197–222.
Charlier J.-E., Croché S., Ndoye A. K. (2009) Les universités africaines francophones face au LMD. Les effets du processus de Bologne sur l’enseignement supérieur au-delà des frontières de l’Europe. Louvain- La- Neuve: Editions Academia.
Chisenga J. (2006) The development and use of digital libraries, institutional digital repositories and open access archives for research and national development in Africa: opportunities and challenges. In: WSIS Follow-up Conference on Access to Information and Knowledge for Development. Addis Ababa: United Nations Conference Centre.
Crasnow S. (2024) Feminist Perspectives on Science. In: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. by E. N. Zalta, U. Nodelman. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
Debat H., Babini D. (2020) Plan S in Latin America: A Precautionary Note. Scholarly and Research Communication. No. 1: 11 (1).
Edwards P. N., Jackson S. J. et al. (2013) Knowledge Infrastructures: Intellectual Frameworks and Research Challenges. Ann Arbor: Deep Blue.
Espeland W., Sauder M. (2007) Rankings and Reactivity: How Public Measures Recreate Social Worlds. American Journal of Sociology. No. 113: 1–40.
Espeland W., Stevens M. (2008) A Sociology of Quantification. European Journal of Sociology. No. 49: 401–436.
Faciolince M., Green D. (2021) One Door Opens: Another Door Shuts? Development and Change. No. 52: 373–382.
Fourcade M., Johns F. (2020) Loops, Ladders and Links: The Recursivity of Social and Machine Learning. Theory and Society. No. 49: 803–832.
Fraser N. (2019) The Old Is Dying and the New Cannot Be Born: From Progressive Neoliberalism to Trump and Beyond. London: Verso.
Hadad S., Aharony N. (2024) Librarians and Academic Libraries’ Role in Promoting Open Access: What Needs to Change? College & Research Libraries. No. 85: 464–478.
Hountondji P. J. (2001) Le savoir mondialisé: déséquilibres et enjeux actuels. La mondialisation vue d’Afrique, Université de Nantes/Maison des Sciences de l’Homme Guépin. Academic Year.
Intemann K. (2011) Diversity and Dissent in Science: Does Democracy Always Serve Feminist Aims? Feminist Epistemology and Philisophy of Science. Ed. by Grasswick H. E. Dordrecht: Springer: 111–132.
Kamerlin S. C.L., Allen D. J. et al. (2021) Journal Open Access and Plan S: Solving Problems or Shifting Burdens? Development and Change. No. 52: 627–650.
Keim W. (2010) Pour un modèle centre- périphérie dans les sciences sociales. Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances. No. 4: 570–598.
Knöchelmann M. (2021) The Democratisation Myth: Open Access and the Solidification of Epistemic Injustices. Science & Technology Studies. No. 34: 65–89.
Larivière V., Haustein S., Mongeon P. (2015) The oligopoly of academic publishers in the digital era. PloS one. No. 10.
Lund B., Wang T. et al. (2023) ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence‐written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. No. 74: 570–581.
Mignolo W. D. (1993) Colonial and postcolonial discourse: cultural critique or academic colonialism? Latin American Research Review. No. 28: 120–134.
Mills D. (2024) One index, two publishers and the global research economy. Oxford Review of Education. P. 1–16.
Mirowski P. (2018) The future(s) of open science. Social Studies of Science. No. 48: 171–203.
Moore S. A. (2021) Open Access, Plan S and ‘Radically Liberatory’ Forms of Academic Freedom. Development and Change. No. 52: 1513–1525.
Piron F., Diouf A. B. et al. (2017) Le libre accès vu d’Afrique francophone subsaharienne. Revue française des sciences de l’information et de la communication. No. 11.
Piron F., Mboa Nkoudou T. H. et al. (2016) Vers des universités africaines et haïtiennes au service du développement local durable: contribution de la science ouverte juste. In: Justice cognitive, libre accès et savoirs locaux. Pour une science ouverte juste, au service du développement local durable. Québec: Éditions science et bien commun.
Polanco X. (1990) Naissance et développement de la science- monde: production et reproduction des communautés scientifiques en Europe et en Amérique latine. La Découverte.
Pooley J. (2022) Surveillance publishing. Journal of Electronic Publishing. No. 25: 39–49.
Posada A., Chen G. (2018) Inequality in Knowledge Production: The Integration of Academic Infrastructure by Big Publishers. ELPUB. DOI: 10.4000/proceedings.elpub.2018.30.
Sengupta P. (2021) Open access publication: Academic colonialism or knowledge philanthropy? Geoforum. No. 118: 203–206.
Singh P. J. (2017) Developing Countries in the emerging global digital order – A critical geopolitical challenge to which the Global South must respond. Background paper prepared for Developing Countries in the Emerging Global Digital Order. Geneva. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3876183.
Vesper I. (2018) Peer Reviewers Unmasked: Largest Global Survey Reveals Trends. Nature News. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-018-06602-y.
Wallerstein I. (1996) Restructuration capitaliste et le système- monde. Agone. No. 16: 207–233.