EU Open Science Policy Platform (EUOSPP)

The European Open Science Policy Platform is a high-level advisory group established by the Directorate-General for Research and Innovation of the European Commission. Created in 2016, it is composed of representatives from the main stakeholder groups in open science.

In its final report, which covers the 2016–2020 mandate, a summary is provided of the objectives achieved and the progress made by each stakeholder group with respect to open science. The Practical Commitments for Implementation document presents specific examples of the progress made by each group, as well as the remaining barriers to implementing open science and the next steps forward.

The EU Open Science Policy Platform (EUOSPP) was promoted by the European Commission through the Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (DG RTD), which acted as the driving force and coordinator of the initiative.

The platform was composed of representatives from key organizations in the European open science ecosystem, such as LIBER (Association of European Research Libraries), LERU (League of European Research Universities), Science Europe, EUA (European University Association), OpenAIRE, OASPA, and ECSA (European Citizen Science Association), among others. These entities participated as members of the high-level advisory group responsible for formulating strategic recommendations to advance the implementation of open science in Europe.

The objectives of the OSPP are to contribute to the creation and strengthening of:

• an academic career structure that fosters practices and behaviours enhancing contributions to a shared research knowledge system.
• a research system that is reliable, trustworthy, and transparent, ensuring the integrity of commonly agreed standards within the scientific community.
• a research system that promotes innovation through policies that support the reuse and availability of scientific knowledge; interoperable tools, services, hardware, and software; regulatory frameworks that serve the public interest; a transparent and competitive market; and a shared research system based on reciprocity.
• a research culture that enables diversity and equal opportunities.
• a research system built on evidence-based policies and practices.

With these objectives in mind, the OSPP established five lines of action during its first mandate:

• promote and incentivize open science;
• remove barriers to open science;
• integrate and further promote open access policies for data and publications;
• develop research infrastructures for open science;
• embed open science in society to make science more responsive to social and economic challenges.

These lines of action gave rise to various documents and reports adopted during this period, including the set of general recommendations across eight priority areas:

• rewards and incentives
• research indicators and alternative metrics
• scholarly communication
• European Open Science Cloud (EOSC)
• FAIR data
• research integrity
• education and skills
• citizen science

The OSPP reports outline actions targeted at the following stakeholder groups, all of whom can benefit from the recommendations and good practices proposed:

• research infrastructures
• policy-making organizations
• researchers
• libraries
• funding organizations
• academies and scientific societies
• universities and other research-performing organizations
• publishers
• non-governmental organizations and the general public

A direct outcome of the implementation of some of the action lines proposed in the OSPP reports has been the creation of a registry of pilot projects and responsible metrics implementations, aimed at disseminating and sharing successful activities in the implementation of open science infrastructures and practices. Another key development was the launch of the National Open Science Coordination Council.

The OSPP final report outlines the achievements and level of implementation across the eight priority areas for each stakeholder group studied and analysed. Among these, the most significant progress has been made in relation to FAIR data, research integrity, and scholarly communication.

The report acknowledges its limitations in addressing the challenges of implementing open science practices within small and medium-sized enterprises, industries, and non-governmental organizations.

Furthermore, it identifies several barriers to achieving the proposed objectives, specifically:

• Universities: the need to train researchers in open science practices; the lack of alternative indicators for evaluating academic activity; and the need to better engage citizens through improved transparency and scientific communication.
• Funding organizations: the need to improve and align policies at both European and national levels by funding open science practices, promoting training, creating standards and protocols, and involving the industrial sector through public-private collaboration.
• Libraries: their underutilization as potential collaborators in open science training is highlighted—particularly in areas such as copyright, strategic advisory roles, FAIR data and data management plans, alternative metrics, support for citizen science, inclusivity, and addressing linguistic or financial barriers.
• Policy-making organizations: required changes in incentive and reward policies for researchers, support for alternative business models, explicit investment and support for open science, and alignment of European, national, and institutional policies to enable multinational and multidisciplinary cooperation. There’s also a call for education, training, and support to create a standard open science curriculum.
• Publishers: issues surrounding the sustainability of hybrid or subscription journals within an open science model are raised, including the need to revise the APC (Article Processing Charges) payment model to accommodate lower-income countries and different disciplines, and to promote transformative agreements beyond large publishing houses.
• Digital infrastructures: while repositories for publications and FAIR data are already in place and widely adopted, there is a need to further develop infrastructures that support citizen science and enable the evaluation of research activity using open science indicators.
• Researchers: it is essential for researchers to report the barriers they encounter in adopting open science practices—such as issues with incentives, technical and legal questions, FAIR data and data management, and citizen science practices—to their institutions so that policies can be developed to support and promote open science.
• Academies and scientific societies: the heterogeneity among these societies complicates the harmonization of open science practices, highlighting the need for better coordination.
• Citizen science: there is a recognized need for infrastructures and coordination among different actors in the citizen science space, as well as further studies and assessments to determine resource and training needs.

Guidelines and action lines have been established to improve open science practices across all identified stakeholder groups, focusing on the eight key areas defined in the objectives of this good practice.

• Universities: Notable examples of successful implementation and progress in open science practices include Ghent University in Belgium and national consortia in the Netherlands and Finland, supported by key stakeholders such as EUA and Science Europe.
• Funding organizations: The Dutch Research Council (NWO) and the National Open Science Framework led by Irish funding bodies have declared the use of open science practices in applicant evaluation. The Academy of Finland (AKA) also invites applicants to highlight open science-related merits. Other organizations, such as the FWF (Austria), FORTE (Sweden), UKRI (United Kingdom), and ANR (France), are conducting self-assessment studies to ensure and establish tools and best practices related to open science.
• Libraries: Although some training and support practices for open science exist, their implementation remains limited. Libraries are encouraged to enhance their role in promoting and facilitating open science.
• Policy-making organizations: In addition to the European Commission, which is working to reform reward and incentive systems within the Horizon Europe framework, the Council of National Open Science Coordinators (CoNOSC) is referenced as a mechanism to align open science practices and incentives in countries such as Finland, Ireland, France, and the Netherlands. The RDA, in collaboration with the OSPP, is also developing a platform to register initiatives and pilot projects that incorporate qualitative and quantitative alternative metrics to evaluate and promote open science practices.
• Researchers: Meaningful change for this group requires the adoption of transparent and fair indicators at both national and institutional levels that promote open science practices. Institutions must develop reward structures and career development pathways that recognize and support engagement in open science.
• Academies and scientific societies: Initiatives such as EPS Young Minds, the European Younger Chemists Network, the Global Young Academy, and various national young academies have endorsed the Leiden Manifesto and the DORA declaration. These organizations often encourage early-career researchers to integrate open science activities and related competencies into their CVs.
• Citizen science organizations: The success of open science practices in this area largely depends on the efforts of individual organizations. There is currently no well-defined career or reward structure for researchers involved in citizen science, which presents an ongoing challenge.

• Open Science Policy Platform Final Report: https://op.europa.eu/es/publication-detail/-/publication/d36f8071-99bd-11ea-aac4-01aa75ed71a1
• Open Science Policy Platform Recommendations: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/5b05b687-907e-11e8-8bc1-01aa75ed71a1