The famous movie National Treasure has a very interesting climax wherein Benjamin Gates, (a role portrayed by Nicolas Cage) a treasure hunter, painstakingly finds the greatest wealth left by the founding fathers of the country. He informs of his discovery to the FBI agent which transcends into a stimulating conversation. When the FBI agent asks him what is to be done with the treasure since it is too great for any one person to own, Gates responds by saying that the treasure should be divided among museums and directly or indirectly should be returned to the people.
The movie no doubt was exciting, however the point I wish to stress here is the aspect of human nature to keep secrets. Be it Da Vinci’s unusual backward writing to keep thieves at bay or Newton’s anagrams for fear of someone stealing his ideas, ‘secrecy’, was the only mode of operation. In the movie, Gates was absolutely right in suggesting the wealth and knowledge discovered should be shared with all of mankind. In the real world however, nothing is free. Of all the other things I strongly believe that knowledge at least should be freely available and in our case ‘accessible’. Now, let’s move on from the Gates in the movie world to the Gates in the real world. Bill Gates (founder of Microsoft) recently became a part of ResearchGate- a well known networking and information sharing website for scientists. A man who has championed the cause of eradication of polio, malaria and tuberculosis is now keen on investing in ventures which advocate openness in sciences. He recently said that, by the next two decades most of the countries in the world would be rich. An open and transparent scientific community may well become the catalyst for his prophecy to become a reality.
Openness in Science collectively embodies a lot of facets like sharing of raw data, publishing in open access journals, making journals available to universities and research institutes free of cost, discussing failures and successes in experiments etc. As a part of the scientific world we may question and argue that we “researchers” are fairly open considering the high number of symposiums and conferences happening worldwide. In contrast most of us know that the real science happening in the four walls of our laboratory seldom leaves the lab. The discussions, arguments and debates decay in the laboratory itself. Only the positive results actually come out and that too in the form of a published article in a peer reviewed journal having limited reach.
Published articles give a very small window into a research activity carried out by a particular group. It is the raw data which in essence showcases the trials and failures the experimentalist has gone through. Discussing raw data is crucial so as to incorporate viewpoints from every angle. Some scientists fear that discussing lab notebooks may open a can of worms and will expose them to unnecessary criticism and opinions. The other risk includes that of a competitor or colleague using the available data for his/her own publication without giving due credits. Nevertheless, the benefits by far outweigh the perils which include increased opportunities for partnership, more feedback from the scientific community, and a greater possibility that the research will get to the people who can use it.
Another way of maximizing interactions and sharing research is by publishing in open access journals. Open access extends the reach of research beyond its immediate academic circle. A person from any field can access these articles. One of the major beneficiaries of open access are users in developing countries, where currently some universities find it difficult to pay for subscriptions required to access the most recent journals. However publishing in open access journals boils down to the choice of an individual. Many would prefer to publish in a high impact factor journal as the open access journals generally rank low on impact scores. Instead of making “Openness in Science” an issue of morality an institutional change is required. Various chemical societies, some even owning high impact journals, have been toying with the idea of opening up the chemical sciences for quite some time. Some of them, like the RSC itself have started surveys, studies and research pertaining to open science. These studies will definitely help to take a correct and cautious step towards opening up scientific information.
Opening up the chemical sciences won’t be easy and there will be many hurdles like funding, managing data, accountability, fear of plagiarism etc. Nonetheless, with concrete systems in place this initiative will soon become a reality. The tennis world steered into an Open Era in 1968 (in a different context) and I hope in the near future there will be an Open Era for sciences as well.




Image Courtesy- Pearline Veigas