Paper: Intersections between Free Software and Open Scholarship

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

There's some more talk about free software in the open access circles 
recently. This paper attempts to recap a few aspects (in almost 100 pages).

It's CC-BY-4.0 and this URL opens without JavaScript:
https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/2kxq8/download

Federico

--------  Messaggio inoltrato --------
Oggetto: [SCHOLCOMM] New paper: A tale of two 'opens': intersections 
between Free and Open Source Software and Open Scholarship
Data: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 13:50:30 +0800
Mittente: Jon Tennant (via scholcomm Mailing List)

Dear all,

Apologies in advance for any cross-posting. We are delighted today to 
announce the publication of a new paper, entitled "A tale of two 
'opens': intersections between Free and Open Source Software and Open 
Scholarship".

It is currently available as a preprint on SocArXiv, and open for 
additional comments/annotations: https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/2kxq8/

It's a bit of a monster, so best not to be tackled without an 
appropriate caffeine level.

Abstract: There is no clear-cut boundary between Free and Open Source 
Software and Open Scholarship, and the histories, practices, and 
fundamental principles between the two remain complex. In this study, we 
critically appraise the intersections and differences between the two 
movements. Based on our thematic comparison here, we conclude several 
key things. First, there is substantial scope for new communities of 
practice to form within scholarly communities that place sharing and 
collaboration/open participation at their focus. Second, Both the 
principles and practices of FOSS can be more deeply ingrained within 
scholarship, asserting a balance between pragmatism and social ideology. 
Third, at the present, Open Scholarship risks being subverted and 
compromised by commercial players. Fourth, the shift and acceleration 
towards a system of Open Scholarship will be greatly enhanced by a 
concurrent shift in recognising a broader range of practices and outputs 
beyond traditional peer review and research articles. In order to 
achieve this, we propose the formulation of a new type of institutional 
mandate. We believe that there is substantial need for research funders 
to invest in sustainable open scholarly infrastructure, and the 
communities that support them, to avoid the capture and enclosure of key 
research services that would prevent optimal researcher behaviours. Such 
a shift could ultimately lead to a healthier scientific culture, and a 
system where competition is replaced by collaboration, resources 
(including time and people) are shared and acknowledged more 
efficiently, and the research becomes inherently more rigorous, 
verified, and reproducible.

Also, of potential interest, is that we wrote this paper in a way that 
inspired the concept of a "MOOP", more details here: 
https://osf.io/preprints/metaarxiv/et8ak

Special thanks to the brilliant co-authors: Ritwik Agarwal, Ksenija 
Baždarić, David Brassard, Tom Crick, Daniel Dunleavy, Thomas Evans, 
Nicholas Gardner, Monica Gonzalez-Marquez, Daniel Graziotin, Bastian 
Greshake Tzovaras, Daniel Gunnarsson, Johanna Havemann, Mohammad 
Hosseini, Daniel Katz, Marcel Knöchelmann, Leo Lahti, Christopher Madan, 
Paolo Manghi, Alberto Marocchino, Paola Masuzzo, Peter Murray-Rust, 
Sanjay Narayanaswamy, Gustav Nilsonne, Josmel Pacheco-Mendoza, Bart 
Penders, Olivier Pourret, Michael Rera, John Samuel, Tobias Steiner, 
Jadranka Stojanovski, Alejandro Uribe-Tirado, Rutger Vos, Simon 
Worthington, and Tal Yarkoni.

Best,

Jon