Juan Pablo Alperin

*Keynote presented by Juan Pablo Alperin at the first* [***United
Nations Open Science
Conference***](http://research.un.org/conferences/OpenScienceUN){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} *on November 19, 2019, organized by the UN*
[*Dag Hammarskjöld
Library*](https://www.un.org/en/library){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} *and the Scholarly Publishing and Academic
Resources Coalition (*[*SPARC*](https://sparcopen.org/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}*).*

Good morning. It is a true honour to be here and have an opportunity to
share with you my thoughts on policies and incentives for open science.

I will do so in 3 parts:

1.  [My mini-crisis as I prepared this talk](#crisis)
2.  [What open access can teach us](#lesson)
3.  [Where we go from here](#future)

 

# Part 1: My mini-crisis as I prepared this talk

I obviously started by leafing through the [Sustainable Development
Goals](https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}... and then I started to feel that there are
more pressing issues in the world than ensuring that research is shared
openly. What could I say about incentivizing people to share their
research openly that would be more important than asking them to take
direct action towards ending poverty, tackling the climate crisis,
ensuring healthy lives, making cities safe, and so on.

Asking myself this question was no small thing---I have spent the
greater part of the last ten years doing a lot of work to promote open
access to research! So I was up late one night thinking about what I
could come here to say and I went to bed questioning my life choices.
Needless to say, it was not a good sleep.

By the time I got back to working on this the next evening---I do all my
best work after I put my son to bed---I had talked myself down from this
brief existential crisis. I started by remembering how it is I got here:
In case you didn't know, nobody grows up dreaming of being a scholarly
communications researcher. I fell into this line of work, just as
everyone does, through a series of experiences that are meaningful for
me. After growing up in Argentina and emigrating to Canada, I started
sharing my university library passwords with my Tia Marta and my Tio
Horacio. They were university professors in Argentina, but, as an
undergrad, I had more access than they did. Many years later, I happened
upon a job with the [Public Knowledge
Project](https://pkp.sfu.ca/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, which I accepted largely because it would
give me a chance to travel around the Latin America I had left behind,
and, in doing so, speak to journal editors and scholars from around the
region. It was then that I came to discover that my skills, experience,
and perspectives were appreciated, and that this was a field where I
could feel that I was doing meaningful work for a part of the world I
felt connected to, but had largely left behind.

::: {.perfect-pullquote .vcard .pullquote-align-left .pullquote-border-placement-right}
> "To me, the connection between open scholarship and the Sustainable
> Development Goals is evident, if still somewhat nebulous."
:::

But what really got me out of my mini-crisis is that I remembered that I
*actually* believe that open scholarship has the potential to affect all
of these larger societal challenges. That is, to me, the connection
between open scholarship and the Sustainable Development Goals is
evident, if still somewhat nebulous. I was able to talk myself down from
this existential crisis by thinking through how open scholarship
practices could play a role in reinvigorating the public mission of
universities and helping them become vehicles for social development
along all those dimensions outlined in the SDGs. I am driven by a desire
to shape open scholarship with this vision in mind, and I practice open
scholarship because I fundamentally believe it to be true---not because
of some incentive or policy that rewards me when I do. In addition---and
this is important for the topic at hand today---I practice open
scholarship *despite* the barriers that stand in the way of doing so.

You'll notice that I am *not* saying I found motivation in terms of how
open scholarship affects my own career. What I just shared with you is
my story, and that story is the only incentive I need.  
[]{#lesson}

# Part 2: What open access can teach us

As I have been [researching
incentives](https://www.scholcommlab.ca/research/rpt-project/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} for review, promotion, and tenure in
academia, I have come to believe that career incentives are far less
consequential than many people make them out to be. We collected
hundreds of the guidelines and documents that govern the review process
in universities in the US and Canada, and I have now seen work by others
that looked at Europe and Asia. All of us found the same thing: that
"traditional" research outputs---things like academic articles and
books---are mentioned in the vast majority of the documents. Emerging
forms of scholarship---it won't surprise you to learn---are not. Open
access? Virtually non-existent. Present in the documents of [only 5% of
institutions](https://elifesciences.org/articles/42254){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, and mostly in negative terms.

Then, when we [surveyed
faculty](https://www.scholcommlab.ca/2019/07/30/rpt-publishing-decisions/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} about how they choose where to publish, we
found that researchers are motivated first and foremost by a desire to
have their work read and to find audiences for their research. But, in
survey after survey carried out around the world, when researchers are
asked what they consider when choosing where to submit their work, open
access comes in pretty far down the list. In some surveys, it comes in
last.

::: {.perfect-pullquote .vcard .pullquote-align-left .pullquote-border-placement-right}
> "The open access incentives we put in place really only nudge scholars
> to go a little out of their way...in fact, the biggest thing we have
> done is made open access more of a norm"
:::

And yet. And yet... we have made much progress in terms of making a
significant portion of the research---currently [around
50%](https://peerj.com/articles/4375/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} of what is published---freely available. More
importantly, a recent estimate by the team at the non-profit [Our
Research](https://ourresearch.org/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} calculated that, if we keep progressing at
the current rate, in 5 years, over 70% of what people seek to read will
be open access. This is *huge* progress. But we have achieved this
without fundamentally challenging how individual researchers do their
day-to-day work. We haven't redefined the profession, and we haven't
really changed what motivates researchers. The open access incentives we
put in place really only nudge scholars to go a little out of their
way---mostly to deposit articles into repositories---and, even then,
they've had quite variable success­. But, in fact, the biggest thing we
have done is made open access more of a norm, and ensured that we have
mechanisms in place to pay extra for those works to be available.

## **The lesson**

So here is what I want us to consider as we think about open scholarship
policies: The fact that we have largely adopted open access without
fundamentally changing researchers' motivations represents a missed
opportunity.

I believe we have neglected to tackle some of the fundamental ways in
which scholarship today runs in opposition to larger goals we might have
as a society, including the SDGs. Or, perhaps less cynically, we have
missed the opportunity to better align scholarly activities with these
larger goals. Or, even less cynically still, our path for adoption of OA
successfully focused on individual targets---that is, on the number of
articles that are freely available---but has done less well at
considering a more integrated approach that considers the many
interconnections and cross-cutting ways in which open access address
larger goals.

::: {.perfect-pullquote .vcard .pullquote-align-full .pullquote-border-placement-left}
> "We have neglected to tackle some of the fundamental ways in which
> scholarship today runs in opposition to larger goals we might have as
> a society, including the SDGs. Or, perhaps less cynically, we have
> missed the opportunity to better align scholarly activities with these
> larger goals."
:::

I'm not alone in this critique of the OA movement, but I think it is
particularly relevant as we push for open scholarship more broadly.
[Samuel Moore](https://www.samuelmoore.org/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, a lecturer in Digital Media and
Communication at King's College London, recently wrote a [wonderful
article](https://hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:24075/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} in which he describes the pre-history of the
OA movement, going back to the years before the OA movement was
officially born with the [Budapest Open Access Initiative
Declaration](https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}. In it, he points out that: "The BOAI
declaration instilled the idea that OA research can be achieved without
the dominant cultures of market-based publishing needing to change."

Moore is careful, as am I, not to blame the BOIA declaration for the
models of OA that ensued. But he argues quite convincingly that the text
of this foundational document is indicative---not causal---of a lack of
consensus around what OA should or *could* achieve. He explicitly points
out the "techno-solutionist tone to the declaration." Again, without
wanting to minimize the value of declaration, I think it serves as a
good reference point to compare what it is that we are trying to
accomplish here today, and what governments and institutions around the
world are setting in motion as we push for policies that promote "Open
Science."

I repeat these points that others have made because I want to argue that
we are at a similar moment now with regards to open scholarship---here I
very actively resist the tendency of calling it *open science,* a term
that is problematic in its exclusion of the humanities and of other
communities who are also involved in knowledge production in various
ways. If we focus on personal incentives to achieve individual openness
goals like depositing data, transparency, and reproducibility, we may
succeed, as with have done with OA, on meeting specific targets. But we
will fail to ensure that the broader goals we hope the openness will
achieve.

::: {.perfect-pullquote .vcard .pullquote-align-left .pullquote-border-placement-right}
> "If we focus on personal incentives to achieve individual openness
> goals like depositing data, transparency, and reproducibility, we may
> succeed, as with have done with OA, on meeting specific targets. But
> we will fail to ensure that the broader goals we hope the openness
> will achieve."
:::

To better illustrate what I see as the failure of open access today, I
need only point to the dominance of article process charges as the
dominant model for providing access. The APC model sees journals charge
a fee in order to make articles publicly available. This model trades a
restriction on who is able to read with a restriction on who is able to
author. With APC costs for a typical journal at somewhere over \$2000
US, we are asking for more than many researchers' monthly salaries---a
sum that, in some places, is an enviable amount of money for an entire
research project.

To make matters worse, we have seen that other parts of the
world---notably Latin America---have embraced a model of OA that does
not rely on APCs. This means that when a researcher from the Global
North submits to a journal from Latin America, Latin American
universities and governments cover the costs of its public availability,
but when a researcher from Latin America submits to a journal in the
Global North, it is again Latin American governments that need to send
money to the North. The problems are more far-reaching, and they are not
getting any better with initiatives like [Plan
S](https://www.coalition-s.org/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} continuing to favor this model. But this
offers one example of how academic journal publishing---including the
open access we worked so hard to achieve---continues to reinforce global
inequalities in ways that are very much contrary to the spirit and
substance of the SDGs.  
[]{#future}

# Part 3: Where we go from here

So where do we go from here? Fortunately, there are those who are
already calling for a broader, more integrated approach to open
scholarship. I am encouraged by the work of the Open and Collaborative
Science Development Network
([OCSDNet](https://ocsdnet.org/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}), which released a manifesto that calls
for: 1) an expansion of the term *open science* to *open and
collaborative science*, and 2) a model of open and collaborative science
that seriously considers cognitive justice, equitable collaboration,
inclusive infrastructures, sustainable development, and a paradigm
OCSDNet describes as "situated openness." I believe their work should
serve as a starting point for any policy framework that seeks to promote
openness.

I can also point to the [Panama
Declaration](http://openaccessweek.org/profiles/blogs/open-scicence-panama-declaration-latin-america-going-beyond-open){.broken_link
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"} on Open Science, made by an
ad-hoc group of advocates and civil society organizations. It adopts
some of the principles of the OCSDNet manifesto and describes a need to
consider a holistic approach to open science that includes participation
from citizens and civil society organizations, among others.

Thinking more broadly means, at least to me, that open scholarship
policies can grapple with the fact that academia is still plagued with
issues of inequality and discrimination---based on race, gender, sexual
orientation, ability, and more---and then, on top of that,
epistemological discrimination. This inequality flows through academia.
It extends beyond its bounds to the public it is supposed to serve. It
extends across institutions, and certainly across countries. We can see
it in how resources are allocated, whose knowledge is privileged, what
type of work is welcome, and who is even allowed to participate---as in
the case of APCs.

::: {.perfect-pullquote .vcard .pullquote-align-left .pullquote-border-placement-right}
> "Inequality flows through academia. It extends beyond its bounds to
> the public it is supposed to serve. It extends across institutions,
> and certainly across countries."
:::

So, I propose that, just as the drafters of the SDGs resisted
disentangling the goals and targets from each other and instead
emphasized that the need to consider their interconnections, so must
we---proponents of open scholarship---resist separating out the issues
plaguing academia from the goals of open scholarship itself.

At the very least, policies pushing for greater open scholarship need to
be careful to avoid deepening historical and structural power structures
that---and here I am [quoting Leslie
Chan](https://www.openlibhums.org/news/314/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, one of the original signatories of the BOAI
Declaration---"positioned former colonial masters as the centres of
knowledge production, while relegating former colonies to peripheral
roles, largely as suppliers of raw data."

I hope that seeing how things have panned out with open access can offer
us some guidance here. In some sense, it is great to have had that
learning opportunity, because the opportunity for open scholarship is
far greater than it ever was for open access. Open scholarship is a mode
of thinking and working that lends itself well to addressing the global
politics of knowledge production, and the historical exclusion and
marginalization of diverse perspectives. It offers us the opportunity to
change in thinking about more than just how and where we publish our
work. However, I'm sorry to tell those of you who are looking for a
quick solution, that it will certainly require more than adding a few
carrots for researchers to count and measure how "open" they are.

Here, please forgive a lengthy quote from Kathleen Fitzpatrick's book
[*Generous
Thinking*](https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/title/generous-thinking){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, where she says: "All those analytics lead us
back to the cycle we're currently trapped in: competition, austerity,
increasing privatization, and a growing divide between the university
and the public it is meant to serve. Breaking that cycle and
establishing a new mode of both thinking and structuring the role of the
university in contemporary culture requires nothing short of a paradigm
shift." She goes on to add: "What I am arguing for is thus not a
disruption but a revolution in our thinking, one specifically focused on
demanding the good that higher education can create."

::: {.perfect-pullquote .vcard .pullquote-align-full .pullquote-border-placement-left}
> I believe open scholarship policies *can and should* have bringing
> about that change in thinking as their primary aim.
:::

Okay, with my time almost up, or possibly already over, allow me to
close by bringing it back to the incentives and motivations that I
started with. Perhaps I am too naïve or optimistic, but I fundamentally
believe that the people who go into this line of work---myself
included---are already on board with the notion of serving the public
good. Policies and incentives might encourage us to share our work more
broadly and can help nudge us along to specific practices, but they will
never be our guiding force. That is, I don't think we should be worried
about incentivizing scholars to *want* to serve society. But we *do*
need to make policies that transform the role of the university so that
serving the public good is first and foremost on the minds of faculty,
and serves as a compass guiding how they work.

This change is not just one that universities need to make. It also
requires that the infrastructures, organizations, and societies around
our universities shift their priorities and expectations of the role of
scholarship.

As we think about what open scholarship policies we want, we need to do
far more than support the targets laid out in the SDGs. We need to craft
policies that put the university and scholarship in direct service to
society again. Doing so will directly address all of the SDG goals.

Are you ready to take up the challenge?


Keynote presented by Juan Pablo Alperin at the first


 
 United Nations Open Science Conference
 


 on November 19, 2019, organized by the UN


 Dag Hammarskjöld Library


 and the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (


 SPARC


 ).

Good morning.

Policies and Incentives for Open Scholarly Communication

This month, lab members took part in three conferences: the Canadian Science Policy Conference in Ottawa, the United Nations Open Science Conference, and the PKP 2019 International Scholarly Publishing Conference in Barcelona.

Alice Fleerackers

It's been a busy November for the ScholCommLab! This month, lab members
took part in three conferences: the [Canadian Science Policy
Conference](https://sciencepolicyconference.ca/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} in Ottawa, the [United Nations Open Science
Conference](https://research.un.org/conferences/OpenScienceUN){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, and the PKP 2019 International Scholarly
Publishing Conference in Barcelona. For those who couldn't make it,
we're sharing highlights from each event, right here on the blog.

## **Canadian Science Policy Conference ** {#canadian-science-policy-conference}

Taking place from November 14 to 16, CSPC is a wide-ranging conference
aimed at "uniting stakeholders, strengthening dialogue, and enabling
action" on top issues in Canadian science and technology policy. This
year's gathering was the biggest yet, with more than 800 participants
and 40 panels. ScholCommLabbers Stefanie Haustein and Alice Fleerackers
both attended, and each presented panels at the conference.

<figure id="attachment_2411" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2411" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics1-1024x768.jpg"
class="wp-image-2411 size-large" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics1-1024x768.jpg 1024w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics1-300x225.jpg 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics1-768x576.jpg 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics1-1536x1152.jpg 1536w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics1-2048x1536.jpg 2048w"
sizes="(max-width: 840px) 100vw, 840px" width="840" height="630"
alt="Alice presents at CSPC" />
<figcaption>Presenting some writing tips for effective Science
Communication at CSPC 2019</figcaption>
</figure>

On November 14, Alice joined fellow science communicators Dorina
Simoneov, Cat Lau, and Julia Krolik at CSPC 2019 for [*Creating SciComm:
An Interactive Session Connecting Scientists, Policymakers, and the
Public*](https://cspc2019.sched.com/event/Raqx/creating-scicomm-an-interactive-session-connecting-scientists-policy-makers-and-the-public-developper-une-communication-scientifique-une-seance-interactive-reunissant-des-scientifiques-des-decideurs-politiques-et-le-public?iframe=no&w=100%&sidebar=yes&bg=no){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}. Hands-on and participatory, their session
engaged attendees in infographic-making---a visual communication
activity aimed at bridging gaps between public and scientific knowledge.

Participants used paper, markers, glue sticks, and their own creativity
to communicate research about four issues of public concern: climate
change, artificial intelligence, genetically modified foods, and
vaccinations. They collaborated and trouble-shooted to find simple ways
to share complex scientific information. The completed
infographics---all of which are publicly [available
online](https://artthescience.com/events/creating-scicomm/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}---are evidence of participants' originality,
enthusiasm, and willingness to connect with communities beyond the
conference.

<figure id="attachment_2415" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2415" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics5-scaled-e1574898161902-1024x833.jpg"
class="wp-image-2415 size-large" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics5-scaled-e1574898161902-1024x833.jpg 1024w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics5-scaled-e1574898161902-300x244.jpg 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics5-scaled-e1574898161902-768x624.jpg 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics5-scaled-e1574898161902-1536x1249.jpg 1536w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics5-scaled-e1574898161902.jpg 1920w"
sizes="(max-width: 840px) 100vw, 840px" width="840" height="683"
alt="Participants at the infographics panel at CSPC" />
<figcaption>Hard at work creating infographics at CSPC 2019</figcaption>
</figure>

<figure id="attachment_2412" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2412" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics2-scaled-e1574898250402-1024x619.jpg"
class="wp-image-2412 size-large" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics2-scaled-e1574898250402-1024x619.jpg 1024w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics2-scaled-e1574898250402-300x181.jpg 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics2-scaled-e1574898250402-768x464.jpg 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics2-scaled-e1574898250402-1536x929.jpg 1536w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/infographics2-scaled-e1574898250402-2048x1238.jpg 2048w"
sizes="(max-width: 840px) 100vw, 840px" width="840" height="508"
alt="materials from the Creative SciComm panel CSPC" />
<figcaption>Attendees received simple materials to communicate science
in a low-cost, visual way</figcaption>
</figure>

Stefanie's panel, [*Mapping Dynamic Research Ecosystems: Tapping into
New Indicators, Big Data and Emerging
Technologies*](https://cspc2019.sched.com/event/R7xj/mapping-dynamic-research-ecosystems-tapping-into-new-indicators-big-data-and-emerging-technologies-visualiser-des-ecosystemes-de-recherche-dynamiques-exploiter-les-nouveaux-indicateurs-les-megadonnees-et-les-technologies-emergentes?iframe=no&w=100%&sidebar=yes&bg=no){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, centred on a very different science policy
issue: the future of research analytics. This wide-ranging conversation
was organized by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
of Canada, moderated by Eric M. Meslin (Council of Canadian Academies),
and featured speakers Elizabeth Boston, Xiaodan Zhu, and Adam Bradley,
as well as Stefanie. Together, the panelists discussed the [biggest
challenges facing research data
today](https://twitter.com/ShawnMcGuirk/status/1195377030457626625){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, including how to understand and make use of
the massive amounts of information available to us, the opportunities
made possible by AI, the biases inherent in current bibliometrics
practices, and more.

<figure id="attachment_2426" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2426" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/stefanie-oa-panel-1024x768.jpg"
class="wp-image-2426 size-large" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/stefanie-oa-panel-1024x768.jpg 1024w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/stefanie-oa-panel-300x225.jpg 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/stefanie-oa-panel-768x576.jpg 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/stefanie-oa-panel-1536x1152.jpg 1536w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/stefanie-oa-panel.jpg 2048w"
sizes="(max-width: 840px) 100vw, 840px" width="840" height="630"
alt="Panelists at Mapping Dynamic Research Ecosystems, CSPC" />
<figcaption>Stefanie Haustein speaks at the Mapping Dynamic Research
Ecosystems Panel | Photo by <a
href="https://twitter.com/ShawnMcGuirk/status/1195364311088152579/photo/1"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Shawn McGuirk</a></figcaption>
</figure>

Stefanie also joined a provocative conversation at [*Fishing for Open
Science Innovation: Should Canada Join Plan
S*](https://cspc2019.sched.com/event/R7x8/fishing-for-open-science-innovation-should-canada-join-coalitionplan-s-explorer-linnovation-en-science-ouverte-le-canada-devrait-il-joindre-se-joindre-a-la-coalitionau-plan-s){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}*?* This fishbowl-style discussion invited
conference attendees to "pitch new ideas, pose new questions, and debate
the merits of Plan S for Canadian Science," [according to
CSPC](https://twitter.com/sciencepolicy/status/1150812359247781888).
Participants talked through pressing issues such as the feasibility of
Plan S, the need for more collaborative and international open
initiatives, and more. The conversation that followed revealed just as
many questions as answers, as well as some promising opportunities for a
more open future.

It was a busy couple of days, packed with presentations and networking.
But in the midst of the conference madness, Alice and Stefanie joined
uOttawa ScholCommLabbers Alyssa Jeffrey and Tristan Lamonica for some
food, conversation, and, of course, a few selfies:

<figure id="attachment_2427" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2427" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/uOttawa-ScholCommLab-1024x1024.jpg"
class="wp-image-2427 size-large" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/uOttawa-ScholCommLab-1024x1024.jpg 1024w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/uOttawa-ScholCommLab-300x300.jpg 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/uOttawa-ScholCommLab-150x150.jpg 150w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/uOttawa-ScholCommLab-768x768.jpg 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/uOttawa-ScholCommLab-1536x1536.jpg 1536w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/uOttawa-ScholCommLab.jpg 2048w"
sizes="(max-width: 840px) 100vw, 840px" width="840" height="840"
alt="hilarious scholcommlab selfie" />
<figcaption>ScholCommLab members Alyssa Jeffrey and Alice Fleerackers,
co-director Stefanie Haustein, and lab alum Tristan
Lamonica</figcaption>
</figure>

## **United Nations Open Science Conference**

Taking place on November 19, this year's United Nations Open Science
Conference was organized by the UN [Dag Hammarskjöld
Library](https://www.un.org/en/library){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} in collaboration with the Scholarly
Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition
([SPARC](https://sparcopen.org/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}). It brought together open advocates,
policymakers, library directors, and early career researchers from
across the world to discuss open science and open research at a global
level. This year's theme, "Towards Global Open Science: Core Enabler of
the UN 2030," focused the conversation on the 2030 Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) and the role open initiatives can play in
meeting them.

<figure id="attachment_2416" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2416" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Juan-OSUN-e1574898508671.jpeg"
class="wp-image-2416" loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="840"
height="491" alt="Juan Pablo Alperin presents at Open Science UN" />
<figcaption>Juan Pablo Alperin presents at OpenScienceUN</figcaption>
</figure>

ScholCommLab co-director Juan Pablo Alperin gave the opening keynote,
setting the tone for the talks and workshops that would follow. His
presentation, "Policies & Incentives for Open Scholarly Communication,"
centred on the role incentives can play in promoting open scholarship.
Building on [lab research into academic career
incentives](https://www.scholcommlab.ca/research/rpt-project/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, but pushed conference attendees to consider
other incentives as well.

"Researchers are driven by the big picture, the idea that they're
contributing to something greater," he explained. "We need to start
focusing on a discourse that goes above individualistic motivations and
consider the public role of researchers and universities." Drawing on
work by Kathleen Fitzpatrick on the [power of generous
thinking](https://www.scholcommlab.ca/2019/02/14/kathleen-fitzpatrick-generous-thinking/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, he argued that the move toward true open
scholarship will require a more "generous" approach---one that positions
the university more broadly within society.

<figure id="attachment_2420" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2420" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/OpenScienceUN-2.jpg"
class="wp-image-2420" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/OpenScienceUN-2.jpg 1024w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/OpenScienceUN-2-300x150.jpg 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/OpenScienceUN-2-768x384.jpg 768w"
sizes="(max-width: 840px) 100vw, 840px" width="840" height="420"
alt="A collection of photos from UN Open Science Conference" />
<figcaption>The UN Open Science Conference brought together researchers,
policymakers, and advocates from across the globe | Photo by <a
href="https://twitter.com/azoubig/status/1198914869610856449"
target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Assane Fall</a></figcaption>
</figure>

<figure id="attachment_2417" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2417" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Juan-Erin-Eunice-OSUN-1024x768.jpeg"
class="wp-image-2417" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Juan-Erin-Eunice-OSUN-1024x768.jpeg 1024w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Juan-Erin-Eunice-OSUN-300x225.jpeg 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Juan-Erin-Eunice-OSUN-768x576.jpeg 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Juan-Erin-Eunice-OSUN.jpeg 1280w"
sizes="(max-width: 840px) 100vw, 840px" width="840" height="630"
alt="Juan Pablo Alperin, Erin McKiernan, and Eunice Mercado in New York" />
<figcaption>Juan Pablo Alperin, Erin McKiernan, and Eunice Mercado at
OpenScienceUN</figcaption>
</figure>

## **PKP 2019 International Scholarly Publishing Conference ** {#pkp-2019-international-scholarly-publishing-conference}

Finally, the lab wrapped up a packed fall at the [Public Knowledge
Project](https://pkp.sfu.ca/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}'s bi-annual conference in Barcelona. This
international event engages participants in discussions and workshops
about the latest in open access research and publishing. This year's
meeting kicked off on November 18 with a two-day working sprint,
followed by a day of workshops and two days of presentations from
members of the community.

<figure id="attachment_2423" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2423" style="width: 840px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/PKP-Nate-Wright-1024x683.jpg"
class="wp-image-2423" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/PKP-Nate-Wright-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/PKP-Nate-Wright-300x200.jpg 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/PKP-Nate-Wright-768x512.jpg 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/PKP-Nate-Wright-1536x1025.jpg 1536w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/PKP-Nate-Wright.jpg 1800w"
sizes="(max-width: 840px) 100vw, 840px" width="840" height="560"
alt="Nate Wright at the PKP conference" />
<figcaption>Nate Wright, Head of Platform Experience at PKP, presents at
PKP BCN | Photo by Jason Nugent</figcaption>
</figure>

For Juan, PKP's Associate Faculty Director of Research, it offered a
valuable opportunity to connect with a global community of individuals
and organizations who are contributing to open access publishing. At the
conference, he offered a brief overview of some of the projects that the
ScholCommLab has been working on as part of its [ongoing collaboration
with
PKP](https://www.scholcommlab.ca/research/public-knowledge-project/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, all of which explore how scholarly knowledge
is created, circulated, and used in academia and beyond.

## **Happy to be home ** {#happy-to-be-home}

After a whirlwind fall, it's great to have everyone in the lab back at
their (respective) homes. We'll be back at it in the spring, but, for
now, we're enjoying a well-deserved break. Keep an eye out for our
upcoming [talks and
events](https://www.scholcommlab.ca/calendar/talks-and-events/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, and see you in 2020!

***For more, check out these video interviews with [Stefanie
Haustein](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah1Bz1i_c4I){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} and [Alice
Fleerackers](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evucInaKhh8&t=69s){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"} at CSPC 2019. ***

It’s been a busy November for the ScholCommLab! This month, lab members took part in three conferences: the Canadian Science Policy Conference in Ottawa, the United Nations Open Science Conference, and the PKP 2019 International Scholarly Publishing Conference in Barcelona. For those who couldn’t make it, we’re sharing highlights from each event, right here on the blog.

Messages de Rogue Scholar

Policies and Incentives for Open Scholarly Communication

ScholCommLab November Conference Blitz