IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v186y2024ics030142152400003x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The economic logic of open science in fusion energy research: A policy perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Carayannis, Elias G.
  • Vincenzi, Marco
  • Draper, John

Abstract

This policy perspective explains the economic logic of open science in fusion energy research (FER) via application of the Mertonian norms of communalism, universalism, disinterestedness, originality, and skepticism. FER is transitioning between science and technology and so provides a fitting example of the productive balance between the community of scientists, who generally favor full disclosure of their results, and that of technologists, who typically favor secrecy or exclusive possession, as the New Economics of Science (NES) explains. For scientists, the publicly funded International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project is an example of the benefits of open science because all its intellectual property is equally shared by its members. For technologists, the next Demonstration (DEMO) phase, is being characterized by an influx of private funding and by a shift from open science to proprietary technologies, which can negatively impact future research due to exclusive possession. The evidence provides support to continuing with a systematic approach to international environmental technology policy that favors managed co-opetition via open science because this can provide greater economic and social utility to both communities of scientists and of technologists.

Suggested Citation

  • Carayannis, Elias G. & Vincenzi, Marco & Draper, John, 2024. "The economic logic of open science in fusion energy research: A policy perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:186:y:2024:i:c:s030142152400003x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2024.113983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142152400003X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2024.113983?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:186:y:2024:i:c:s030142152400003x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.