IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v8y2020i4p54-d460776.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Responsible Open Science: Moving towards an Ethics of Environmental Sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Gabrielle Samuel

    (Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, King’s College London, London WC2B 4BG, UK
    Both authors are first authors, contributing equally to this work.)

  • Federica Lucivero

    (Ethox Centre, Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK
    Both authors are first authors, contributing equally to this work.)

Abstract

The integration of open science as a key pillar of responsible research and innovation has led it to become a hallmark of responsible research. However, ethical, social and regulatory challenges still remain about the implementation of an internationally- and multi-sector-recognised open science framework. In this Commentary, we discuss one important specific challenge that has received little ethical and sociological attention in the open science literature: the environmental impact of the digital infrastructure that enables open science. We start from the premise that a move towards an environmentally sustainable open science is a shared and valuable goal, and discuss two challenges that we foresee with relation to this. The first relates to questions about how to define what environmentally sustainable open science means and how to change current practices accordingly. The second relates to the infrastructure needed to enact environmentally sustainable open science ethical and social responsibilities through the open science ethics ecosystem. We argue that there are various ethical obstacles regarding how to responsibly balance any environmental impacts against the social value of open science, and how much one should be prioritised over the other. We call for all actors of the open science ethics ecosystem to engage in discussions about how to move towards open data and science initiatives that take into account the environmental impact of data and digital infrastructures. Furthermore, we call for ethics governance frameworks or policy-inscribed standards of practice to assist with this decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabrielle Samuel & Federica Lucivero, 2020. "Responsible Open Science: Moving towards an Ethics of Environmental Sustainability," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-7, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:8:y:2020:i:4:p:54-:d:460776
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/8/4/54/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/8/4/54/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oecd, 2015. "Making Open Science a Reality," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers 25, OECD Publishing.
    2. Nick Bostrom, 2017. "Strategic Implications of Openness in AI Development," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(2), pages 135-148, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. FUSTER MARTI Enric & Elisabetta Marinelli & PLAUD Sabine & QUINQUILLA Arnau & MASSUCCI Francesco, 2020. "Open Data, Open Science & Open Innovation for Smart Specialisation monitoring," JRC Research Reports JRC119687, Joint Research Centre.
    2. Vicente-Saez, Ruben & Martinez-Fuentes, Clara, 2018. "Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 428-436.
    3. de Neufville, Robert & Baum, Seth D., 2021. "Collective action on artificial intelligence: A primer and review," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    4. Joel Klinger & Juan Mateos-Garcia & Konstantinos Stathoulopoulos, 2021. "Deep learning, deep change? Mapping the evolution and geography of a general purpose technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5589-5621, July.
    5. Naudé, Wim & Dimitri, Nicola, 2021. "Public Procurement and Innovation for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence," IZA Discussion Papers 14021, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Christian M. Stracke & Daniel Burgos & Gema Santos-Hermosa & Aras Bozkurt & Ramesh Chander Sharma & Cécile Swiatek Cassafieres & Andreia Inamorato dos Santos & Jon Mason & Ebba Ossiannilsson & Jin Gon, 2022. "Responding to the Initial Challenge of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of International Responses and Impact in School and Higher Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-23, February.
    7. Shibayama, Sotaro & Lawson, Cornelia, 2021. "The use of rewards in the sharing of research resources," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    8. Naomi Fukuzawa, 2017. "Characteristics of papers published in journals: an analysis of open access journals, country of publication, and languages used," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(2), pages 1007-1023, August.
    9. Nathan Alexander Sears, 2020. "Existential Security: Towards a Security Framework for the Survival of Humanity," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(2), pages 255-266, April.
    10. Laura Saraite Sariene & Carmen Caba Pérez & Antonio M López Hernández, 2020. "Expanding the actions of Open Government in higher education sector: From web transparency to Open Science," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, September.
    11. Naudé, Wim & Dimitri, Nicola, 2018. "The Race for an Artificial General Intelligence: Implications for Public Policy," IZA Discussion Papers 11737, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Sung-Uk Park, 2016. "Case Studies in Open Science of South Korea," Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 4106747, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    13. Michael J. Fell, 2019. "The Economic Impacts of Open Science: A Rapid Evidence Assessment," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-30, July.
    14. Omar Díaz & Gabriela Riquelme & Gibrán Rivera, 2021. "Sharing Research Data: An Analysis of the Interest of Social Scientists in the Context of a Mexican University," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-19, October.
    15. Kirillova, Ksenia & Wang, Dan, 2016. "Smartphone (dis)connectedness and vacation recovery," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 157-169.
    16. J. Klinger & J. Mateos-Garcia & K. Stathoulopoulos, 2018. "Deep learning, deep change? Mapping the development of the Artificial Intelligence General Purpose Technology," Papers 1808.06355, arXiv.org.
    17. Meissner Dirk & Narkhova Anastasiia & Plekhanov Dmitry, 2016. "The Meaning of Digitalization for Research Skills: Challenges for Sti Policy," HSE Working papers WP BRP 69/STI/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    18. Teresa Gomez-Diaz & Tomas Recio, 2020. "A policy and legal Open Science framework: a proposal," Working Papers hal-02962399, HAL.
    19. Cinzia Daraio, 2017. "A framework for the Assessment of Research and its impacts," DIAG Technical Reports 2017-04, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".
    20. Núria Bautista-Puig & Daniela De Filippo & Elba Mauleón & Elías Sanz-Casado, 2019. "Scientific Landscape of Citizen Science Publications: Dynamics, Content and Presence in Social Media," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-22, February.

    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:gam:jpubli:v:8:y:2020:i:4:p:54-:d:460776. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.