e-InfraNet: ‘Open’ as the default modus operandi for research and higher education “...an invention has to make sense in the world in which it is finished, not the world in which it is started” Ray Kurzweil Page 1 of 78 e-InfraNet—246651 Acknowledgements This report has been developed within the project “European Network for co-ordination of policies and programmes on e-infrastructures” (e-InfraNet.eu). The project is an ERA-NET co-funded by the 7th Framework Programme of the European Commission. The members of the consortium are: Participant organisation name Short Name Country Higher Education Authority HEA IE Higher Education Funding Council for England HEFCE (JISC) UK SURF SURF NL Foundation for Science and Technology FCT PT Latvian Academy of Sciences LAS LV Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness MINECO ES CSC - IT Center for Science CSC FI National Information Infrastructure Development Institute NIIFI HU The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey TUBITAK TR The Israel-Europe R&D Directorate ISERD IL The General Secretariat for Research and Technology GSRT GR Department of Economy, Science and Innovation, Flemish Government EWI BE Disclaimer: The information in this document is subject to change without notice. Company or product names mentioned in this document may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies. e-InfraNet: ‘Open’ as the default modus operandi for research and higher education by e-InfraNet is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. This document reflects only the authors’ view. The European Community is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein. Front page quote from “Open Source Paradigm Shift”, Tim O’Reilly, June 2004, http://tim.oreilly.com/lpt/a/4868 Illustrations: The public domain work of numerous illustrators was used to formulate some of the graphics in this publication. Their contribution is hereby acknowledged. Author(s): Lilian van der Vaart (SURF) Co-authors/editors: Marnix van Berchum (SURF), Rachel Bruce (JISC), Maureen Burgess (HEA), Gabriel Hanganu (JISC), Neil Jacobs (JISC), Damien Lecarpentier (CSC), Stephen Pinfield (Sheffield University), Paul Stokes (JISC) Page 2 of 78 e-InfraNet—246651 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. 2 Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................... 3 Figures ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive summary.................................................................................................................................. 5 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Structure ..................................................................................................................................... 8 1.3 Intended audience ...................................................................................................................... 9 2 Context and definitions ............................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Context ..................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 The meaning of ‘Open’—Definitions ........................................................................................ 11 2.3 The meaning of ‘Open’—Motivations ...................................................................................... 13 3 State of Play—Where has ‘Open’ got us so far? ......................................................................... 17 3.1 Open Access to research literature .......................................................................................... 18 3.2 Open Data ................................................................................................................................. 20 3.3 Open Educational Resources .................................................................................................... 22 3.4 Open Infrastructure and Open Standards ................................................................................ 24 3.5 Open Source Software and Open Development ...................................................................... 26 3.6 Open Education ........................................................................................................................ 28 3.7 Open Peer Review .................................................................................................................... 30 3.8 Open Research .......................................................................................................................... 32 3.9 Open Innovation ....................................................................................................................... 34 4 Challenges ................................................................................................................................... 36 4.1 How open is ‘Open’? ................................................................................................................. 36 4.2 Evaluation and reward or perverse triggers? ........................................................................... 41 4.3 The Longer Term ....................................................................................................................... 42 4.4 Diversity .................................................................................................................................... 45 4.5 Skills .......................................................................................................................................... 45 5 Ways forward .............................................................................................................................. 47 5.1 Research and higher education as an Open Enterprise? .......................................................... 47 5.2 Individual or coordinated development? ................................................................................. 48 5.3 Implications for policy and implementation ............................................................................ 49 6 Conclusions and recommendations ............................................................................................ 53 Annexes ................................................................................................................................................. 56 A Stakeholder map ......................................................................................................................... 57 B Reports and projects consulted .................................................................................................. 62 B.1 Reports ...................................................................................................................................... 62 B.2 Projects / Initiatives .................................................................................................................. 70 B.3 Other sources ........................................................................................................................... 73 C Survey of sustainability models ................................................................................................... 76 D Data/Services model ................................................................................................................... 77 Page 3 of 78 e-InfraNet—246651 Figures Figure 1—one of many open access logos in common use ............................................................................ 7 Figure 2—The range of ‘Opens’ ..................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3 5 star system for open content ...................................................................................................... 37 Figure 4 The 5 stars of linked data ................................................................................................................ 37 Figure 5 The 5 stars of online journal access ................................................................................................. 37 Figure 6—Stakeholder impact—Research institutions ................................................................................. 58 Figure 7—Stakeholder impact—Teachers/Tutors ......................................................................................... 58 Figure 8—Stakeholder impact—Researchers ................................................................................................ 58 Figure 9—Stakeholder impact—Learners (students. lifelong) ...................................................................... 58 Figure 10—Stakeholder impact—Research funders ..................................................................................... 59 Figure 11—Stakeholder impact—Infrastructure providers ..........................................................................