From Gutenberg to Open Science

An Unfulfilled Odyssey

Christopher Triggle, David J. Triggle

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

(Table presented.). With the almost global availability of the Internet comes the expectation of universal accessibility to knowledge, including scientific knowledge-particularly that generated by public funding. Currently this is not the case. In this Commentary we discuss access to this knowledge, the politics that govern peer review and publication, and the role of this knowledge as a public good in medicine.  Gutenberg's invention of the printing press in 1440 opened an avenue for the distribution of scholarly information to the entire world. The scientific literature first appeared in 1665 with Le Journal des Sçavans followed in the same year by Philosophical Transactions. Today there are more than 5000 scientific publishing companies, 25,000 journals and 1.5 million articles published/year generating revenue of $25 billion USD.  The European Union and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have argued for open access (OA) to scientific data for all publicly funded research by 2020 with a similar initiative in the USA via the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR). However, OA to published science is but one step in this odyssey. If the products of science are not openly available then it can be argued that the norms of science as defined by Merton including “universalism” and “communalism” have yet to be accomplished. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the delivery of medicines to the poor and for rare diseases, the attempts to privatize human genetic information and, not least, dealing with the challenges of antibiotic resistance and new disease pandemics exacerbated by climate change. Drug Dev Res 78 : 3–23, 2017.   

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3-23
Number of pages21
JournalDrug Development Research
Volume78
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2017

Fingerprint

Literature
Printing
Peer Review
Information Dissemination
Climate Change
Medical Genetics
Pandemics
European Union
Politics
Microbial Drug Resistance
Rare Diseases
Research
Internet
Publications
Medicine
Technology
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development

Keywords

  • drug costs
  • impact
  • metrics
  • open access
  • open science
  • predatory publishing
  • publications
  • rent seeking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Drug Discovery

Cite this

From Gutenberg to Open Science : An Unfulfilled Odyssey. / Triggle, Christopher; Triggle, David J.

In: Drug Development Research, Vol. 78, No. 1, 01.02.2017, p. 3-23.

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

@article{0734ea6d48ac4e93a9b7724bf0510c1e,
title = "From Gutenberg to Open Science: An Unfulfilled Odyssey",
abstract = "(Table presented.). With the almost global availability of the Internet comes the expectation of universal accessibility to knowledge, including scientific knowledge-particularly that generated by public funding. Currently this is not the case. In this Commentary we discuss access to this knowledge, the politics that govern peer review and publication, and the role of this knowledge as a public good in medicine.  Gutenberg's invention of the printing press in 1440 opened an avenue for the distribution of scholarly information to the entire world. The scientific literature first appeared in 1665 with Le Journal des S{\cc}avans followed in the same year by Philosophical Transactions. Today there are more than 5000 scientific publishing companies, 25,000 journals and 1.5 million articles published/year generating revenue of $25 billion USD.  The European Union and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have argued for open access (OA) to scientific data for all publicly funded research by 2020 with a similar initiative in the USA via the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR). However, OA to published science is but one step in this odyssey. If the products of science are not openly available then it can be argued that the norms of science as defined by Merton including “universalism” and “communalism” have yet to be accomplished. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the delivery of medicines to the poor and for rare diseases, the attempts to privatize human genetic information and, not least, dealing with the challenges of antibiotic resistance and new disease pandemics exacerbated by climate change. Drug Dev Res 78 : 3–23, 2017.   ",
keywords = "drug costs, impact, metrics, open access, open science, predatory publishing, publications, rent seeking",
author = "Christopher Triggle and Triggle, {David J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/ddr.21369",
language = "English",
volume = "78",
pages = "3--23",
journal = "Drug Development Research",
issn = "0272-4391",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - From Gutenberg to Open Science

T2 - An Unfulfilled Odyssey

AU - Triggle, Christopher

AU - Triggle, David J.

PY - 2017/2/1

Y1 - 2017/2/1

N2 - (Table presented.). With the almost global availability of the Internet comes the expectation of universal accessibility to knowledge, including scientific knowledge-particularly that generated by public funding. Currently this is not the case. In this Commentary we discuss access to this knowledge, the politics that govern peer review and publication, and the role of this knowledge as a public good in medicine.  Gutenberg's invention of the printing press in 1440 opened an avenue for the distribution of scholarly information to the entire world. The scientific literature first appeared in 1665 with Le Journal des Sçavans followed in the same year by Philosophical Transactions. Today there are more than 5000 scientific publishing companies, 25,000 journals and 1.5 million articles published/year generating revenue of $25 billion USD.  The European Union and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have argued for open access (OA) to scientific data for all publicly funded research by 2020 with a similar initiative in the USA via the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR). However, OA to published science is but one step in this odyssey. If the products of science are not openly available then it can be argued that the norms of science as defined by Merton including “universalism” and “communalism” have yet to be accomplished. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the delivery of medicines to the poor and for rare diseases, the attempts to privatize human genetic information and, not least, dealing with the challenges of antibiotic resistance and new disease pandemics exacerbated by climate change. Drug Dev Res 78 : 3–23, 2017.   

AB - (Table presented.). With the almost global availability of the Internet comes the expectation of universal accessibility to knowledge, including scientific knowledge-particularly that generated by public funding. Currently this is not the case. In this Commentary we discuss access to this knowledge, the politics that govern peer review and publication, and the role of this knowledge as a public good in medicine.  Gutenberg's invention of the printing press in 1440 opened an avenue for the distribution of scholarly information to the entire world. The scientific literature first appeared in 1665 with Le Journal des Sçavans followed in the same year by Philosophical Transactions. Today there are more than 5000 scientific publishing companies, 25,000 journals and 1.5 million articles published/year generating revenue of $25 billion USD.  The European Union and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have argued for open access (OA) to scientific data for all publicly funded research by 2020 with a similar initiative in the USA via the Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR). However, OA to published science is but one step in this odyssey. If the products of science are not openly available then it can be argued that the norms of science as defined by Merton including “universalism” and “communalism” have yet to be accomplished. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the delivery of medicines to the poor and for rare diseases, the attempts to privatize human genetic information and, not least, dealing with the challenges of antibiotic resistance and new disease pandemics exacerbated by climate change. Drug Dev Res 78 : 3–23, 2017.   

KW - drug costs

KW - impact

KW - metrics

KW - open access

KW - open science

KW - predatory publishing

KW - publications

KW - rent seeking

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995480017&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995480017&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ddr.21369

DO - 10.1002/ddr.21369

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 78

SP - 3

EP - 23

JO - Drug Development Research

JF - Drug Development Research

SN - 0272-4391

IS - 1

ER -