Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

1Open Science in Research and Innova on
for Development in Africa

Geoﬀrey Boulton
University of Edinburgh, UK
Cheikh Loucoubar
Pasteur Ins tute, Dakar, Senegal
Joseph Mwelwa
Joint Minds Consult Ins tute, Gabarone, Botswana
Muliaro Wafula
Jomo Kenya a University of Agricultural Technology, Nairobi, Kenya
Nicholas Ozor
African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS)
Maurice Bolo
The Scinnovent Centre

HNO

LOGY PO

NET

WORK

LI C

IES

AFRIC

TUD

AN

YS

T

EC

TheScinnovent Centre

SCIENCE , INNOVATION AND ENTERPRISE

The African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) is atransdisciplinary network of researchers, policymakers, private
sector actors and the civil society promo ng the genera on,
dissemina on, use and mastery of Science, Technology andInnova ons (STI) for African development, environmental
sustainability and global inclusion. In collabora on with likeminded ins tu ons, ATPS provides pla orms for regional andinterna onal research and knowledge sharing in order to build
Africa’s capabili es in STI policy research, policymaking andimplementa on for sustainable development.

NO L O G Y P OLI

Published by the African Technology Policy
Studies Network (ATPS)

C

IES

AFRIC

TUD

AN

YS

T

H
EC

P O Box 10081, 00100 GPO Nairobi, Kenya© 2020NET

WORK

ISBN: 978-9966-124-93-7

Table of Contents
List of Boxes ...........................................................................
List of Figures .........................................................................
List of Tables ...........................................................................
About Science Gran ng Councils Ini a ve.............................
About the African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS)
About Scinnovent Centre........................................................
Acknowledgement..................................................................
Execu ve Summary.................................................................
1.
Introduc on.................................................................
1.1 Context for the paper...................................................
1.2 Methodology................................................................
1.3 Remit...........................................................................
2.
The digital revolu on: complexity, innova on
and open science ......................................................
2.1 Opportunity and challenges for science:
unravelling complexity..................................................
2.2 The digital revolu on, driver of the 4th industrial
revolu on.....................................................................
2.3 Empowering diverse voices and “post truth”...............
2.4 Emergence of the new “Open Science” paradigm........
2.5 The “dark side”..............................................................
3.
The impera ve for Africa ..............................................
3.1 Why must a modern state respond energe cally tothe digital revolu on?....................................................
3.2 What are the crucial ques ons to which African
states must respond? .....................................................
3.3 Could Open Science be the vehicle for a cost–eﬀec ve
response from Africa?.....................................................
3.4 Timeliness: the African Con nental Free Trade Area......
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

iv
v
vi
vii
viii
viii
ix
xi
1
1
2
3
5
6
8
9
10
12
13
14
14
15
17
i

4.

The essen als of open science: frameworks,
policies and tools............................................................. 19
4.1 Open Data....................................................................... 20
4.2 Open access and dissemina on of scien fic results ....... 35
4.2.2 Open Access publishing................................................... 39
4.3 Open to society................................................................ 46
5.
The poten al of open science systems: case studies ofpla orms and commons.................................................. 50
5.1 Interna onal disciplinary group: bioinforma cs
ELIXIR programme........................................................... 51
5.2 Interna onal Disciplinary Group: Pan African
Bioinforma cs Network for the Human Heredity and
Health in Africa - H3ABioNet (89)................................... 53
5.3 Interna onal, mul -disciplinary open sciencesystem: European Open Science Strategy(h ps://ec.europa.eu>research>openscience)............... 56
5.4 Poten al lessons for an African ini a ve........................ 58
6.
The evolving landscape of open science in Africa .......... 64
6.1 Science in sub-Saharan Africa......................................... 65
6.2 Sub-Saharan Africa’s status in the open science
movement....................................................................... 70
6.3. Open Data....................................................................... 74
6.4 Open Access publishing................................................... 86
6.5 Open to Society............................................................... 86
7.
Enablers and inhibitors of open science in sub-SaharanAfrica .............................................................................. 89
7.1 Na onal policy frameworks............................................. 89
7.2 Resistance to openness and sharing................................ 91
7.3 Incen ves & mo va ons................................................. 92
7.4 Skills and capacity building.............................................. 95
7.5 Data analy cs and machine learning............................... 97
ii

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

7.6
7.7

Contextualising Open Science.........................................
Perspec ves on Open Science from Science Gran ng
Councils...........................................................................
8.
Possible roles and responsibili es of andrecommenda ons for the Science Gran ng Councils.....
8.1 Principles........................................................................
8.2 Responses to Science Gran ng Councils ques ons........
8.3 Recommenda ons..........................................................
8.4 SGCs proposed Call to Ac on Framework.......................
9.
References.......................................................................
10. Appendices......................................................................
10.1 The Report Team.............................................................
10.2 Key Stakeholders.............................................................
10.3 The Ques onnaire to Science Gran ng Councils.............
Some ATPS Research Paper Series..................................

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

98
99
104
104
106
116
118
120
141
141
143
150
158

iii

List of Boxes
Box 2.1: Digital Revolu on....................................................... 6
Box 2:2 Relevance to a science gran ng councils' ini a ve.... 12
Box 4:1 Requirements for "Fair" data..................................... 27
Box 4:2 Joint declara on of data cita on principles (2014) ... 29
Box 4:3 Ten myths about open access .................................... 41
Box 4:4 Recommenda on for science gran ng councils on:
essen als of open science prac ce............................. 49
Box 4:4 Recommenda on for science gran ng councils on:
A systema c approach to open science in which tools
are embedded ............................................................ 63
Box 6.1 The african open science pla orm ............................. 73
Box 7. Recommenda on for science gran ng councils on:priori es for addressing enablers and inhibitorsof open science ....................................................
103

iv

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

List of Figures
Figure 4.1: Digital cura on centre (DCC) data cura on
lifecycle model..................................................... 21
Figure 4.2: Digital cura on centre's data service model........ 23
Figure 4.3: Processes in text and data mining (43)................ 30
Figure 6.1: Examples of open science ini a ves in Africa...... 64
Figure 6.2: Regional contribu ons to global R & D
expenditure........................................................... 66
Figure 6.2: Gross expenditure on R & D as a propor on of
GDP by country in Africa..................................... 67
Figure 6.4: Propor on of funding for selected African States
R & D from outside the con nent (World Bank)... 66
Figure 6.5: Ins tu onal commitment to science in Africa ...... 69
Figure 6.6: The global open data barometer 2016 (108)......... 70
Figure 6.7: Na onal Research and Educa on Networks'(NRENS) Alliances across Africa ............................ 79
Figure 6.8 (a): Interna onal response to the 2013-2016 Ebola
outbreak in West Africa ......................................... 80
Figure 6.8 (b): Data flight from Africa following resolu on of theepidemic................................................................ 81
Figure 6.9: Major internet connec ons around africa ........... 81
Figure 10.1: Average ranking of open science priori es........... 154
Figure 10.2: Ranking of priori es by individual countries......... 154

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africav

List of Tables
Table 6.1:
Table 8.1:

vi

Levels of maturity of NRENS in African States..... 77
Ac on Framework .............................................. 118

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

About Science Gran ng Councils
Ini a ve
The Science Gran ng Councils Ini a ve in Sub-Saharan Africa (SGCI)
seeks to strengthen capaci es of Science Gran ng Councils (SGCs)
in Eastern, Southern, Central and West Africa in order to support
research and evidence-based policies that will contribute to economic
and social development. It is jointly funded by the United Kingdom’s
Department for Interna onal Development (DFID), Canada’s
Interna onal Development Research Centre (IDRC), South Africa’s
Na onal Research Founda on (NRF) and the Swedish Interna onal
Development Coopera on Agency (Sida).
The objec ves of SGCI are to strengthen the ability of par cipa ng
SGCs to 1) manage research; 2) design and monitor research
programmes, and to formulate and implement policies based on theuse of robust science, technology and innova on (STI) indicators; 3)
support knowledge transfer to the private sector; and; 4) establish
partnerships with one another, and with other science system
actors. The implementa on of these objec ves is achieved throughregional training courses, individualised on-site training sessions, online training, webinars and, collabora ve research. The SGCI works
with 15 councils in Kenya, Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania, Ethiopia,
Cote d’Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Senegal, Ghana, Zambia, Mozambique,
Botswana, Malawi, Namibia and Zimbabwe.
The SGCIs principle output include 1) more eﬀec ve research
management prac ces among Councils, 2) strengthened abilityof Councils to design and monitor research programmes, and toformulate and implement policies based on the use of robust science
technology and innova on indicators, 3) increased knowledge transfer
to the private sector and 4) increasingly coordinated and networked
Councils. More eﬀec ve Councils are expected to strengthen na onal
science systems, and ul mately lead to na onally-led research that
contributes to development in par cipa ng African countries.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan AfricaviiAbout the African Technology
Policy Studies Network (ATPS)
The African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) is a transdisciplinary network of researchers, policymakers, private sector
actors and the civil society promo ng the genera on, dissemina on,
use and mastery of Science, Technology and Innova ons (STI) for
African development, environmental sustainability and global
inclusion. ATPS has over 1,300 members and 3000 stakeholders inover 51 countries in 5 con nents with ins tu onal partnerships
worldwide. We implement our programs through members in
na onal chapters established in 30 countries (27 in Africa and 3
Diaspora chapters in the Australia, United States of America, andUnited Kingdom). In collabora on with like-minded ins tu ons,
ATPS provides pla orms for regional and interna onal researchand knowledge sharing in order to build Africa’s capabili es in STI
policy research, policymaking and implementa on for sustainable
development.

About Scinnovent Centre
The Scinnovent Centre is a science, technology and innova on (STI)
policy think tank registered in Kenya as a not-for-profit company.
Their preliminary concern is that despite advancements in science,technology and innova on (STI), poverty levels in Africa are increasing;environment degrada on is worsening; the ecosystem has become
more fragile; sustainability has been compromised and livelihoods
threatened.
So they ask three big ques ons: Why have the developments
in science, technology and innova on not made any significant
diﬀerence in African development? Why have STI policies nottranslated into prac cal change on the ground? How come pockets
of success piloted across countries have not scaled?
viii

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Acknowledgement
This research paper was published by the African Technology Policy
Studies Network (ATPS) in partnership with the Scinnovent Centre
under the Science Gran ng Councils Ini a ve in sub-Saharan Africa.
The ATPS and Scinnovent Centre acknowledge the funding support
received from United Kingdom’s Department for Interna onal
Development (DFID), Canada’s Interna onal Development ResearchCentre (IDRC), South Africa’s Na onal Research Founda on (NRF)
and the Swedish Interna onal Development Coopera on Agency(Sida).

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africaix

xOpen Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Execu ve Summary
Chapter 1 The first target for this paper was the 2019 Annual Forum of
sub-Saharan Africa’s Science Gran ng Councils as basis for discussionof the new Open Science paradigm, its significance for Africa, andpossible roles for the Councils in promo ng its development. It
has developed further as a consequence of those discussions. Its
substan ves arguments are as follows.
Chapter 2 summarises the digital revolu on of the last three
decades that has seen unprecedented developments in themeans whereby vast fluxes of data and informa on are acquired,stored, communicated. It is a world historic event with profound,global implica ons. Its scien fic and technological importancelies in enabling a new scien fic mode, of data-driven science, that
contrasts with the classical mode of hypothesis-driven science. It
permits the recogni on of deep pa erns in complex phenomena, anapparently simple process, but one that is at the heart of the digital
revolu on’s benefit to science, to society and to development. It isalso the fundamental driver of the 4th industrial revolu on. A strong
na onal science and educa onal base is crucial in exploi ng theseopportuni es, with the new “open science” paradigm as a meansof addressing the opportuni es and amplifying the impact of thecollec ve scien fic eﬀort. The digital skill base is also a vital means ofprotec ng key na onal assets and formula ng relevant regula ons
and legisla on.
Chapter 3 discusses the pervasive and eﬃcient technologies
unleashed by the digital revolu on and argues that they cannot besidestepped. Their innova ons create new capabili es and reduce
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africaxicosts in ways that undermine and disrupt many established ways
of working, in both public and private sectors, and create newopportuni es for innova ve applica on. Na onal science systems,
both in Africa and beyond, must adapt to the new demands andopportuni es these technologies create, with open science as apoten ally cost eﬃcient way of doing so. The recent finalisa on ofagreements about the African Con nental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA)
and the mobility and dynamism that it is designed to enable, would
be an opportunity for powerful synergy if it were matched with mely
crea on of an African open science area.
Chapter 4 describes the array of essen al tools and processes
required for the new paradigm of open science, and the ra onale
for sharing scien fic data to permit their re-use by others as open
data. It requires eﬃcient management of research data, common
standards that enable data usability and data cita on, open
licensing, and access to cu ng edge machine learning capacity. It
requires the outputs of scien fic research, and the authoring of
scien fic papers, to be openly accessible at aﬀordable cost; a major
problema c issue for global science, and one with which Africa must
engage. It must be open to society, which requires the engagementof science as never before in joint crea on of ac onable knowledge
that has greater poten al for applica on and greater socio-poli cal
legi macy. Realising the poten al benefits of the open science mode,and exploi ng the capaci es of data-driven science require accessto powerful computa onal and cloud systems and communica on
networks.
In Chapter 5 we argue that the demands on researchers, researchgroups, or even ins tu ons to sa sfy these varied requirements ofopen science are poten ally overwhelming if they are dealt with ina piecemeal fashion. We posit that these func ons are inter-related,
and are parts of a system of func ons that need to be integrated,rather than being stand-alone processes. We describe open sciencepla orms or commons that provide more or less seamless support
xii

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

to the research process, from informa on technology infrastructure
to high-level analy c and ar ficial intelligence (AI) procedures. Suchpla orms generate major economies of scale, and enhance impact
and voice through coordina on of eﬀort. They have lessons for any
African ini a ve: that major programmes of pan-African relevanceare the best way to enthuse scien sts to create virtual cri cal masses
and intra-African collabora on; and that hub and node networks
ensure both na onal commitment and eﬀec ve coordina on.
In Chapter 6 we highlight the magnitude of the task of building astrong open science capacity on the contemporary frameworkof African science and its open science ac vi es. African sciencesuﬀers from the lowest rate of investment in science per head of
popula on of any con nent, such that the largest part of investment
in science comes from outside the con nent. It has few research
centres of a cri cal mass, a low level of intra-African collabora on,
and many of its universi es are deeply underfunded by interna onal
standards. There are few centres of high performance compu ng,
eﬀec ve Cloud systems are rare, networks are under-funded, andopen science policies and standards are not coordinated across the
con nent. Strengths that have poten al for development and impact
include the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) that is developing powerfulcomputa onal capacity between several member states. There are
a number, though too few, excellent databases and several pla orm
projects that have high poten al, and major World Bank investments,
par cularly in digital educa on. There are excellent circum-Africainternet connec ons, whilst the Na onal Research and Educa on
Networks (NRENs) have the poten al to develop as an eﬀec ve intraAfrican network provided that they are be er funded and federated.
Commitment and sustained support from interna onal agencies will
be important for future development.
Chapter 7 iden fies crucial enablers of open science that need to be
put in place and inhibitors that need to be minimised or removed.
Common policies are required for intellectual property, data standards,
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africaxiiiopen access publishing and shared and interoperable infrastructure.
Inter-ins tu onal work is required to develop performance metrics
for scien sts that incen vise rather than punish open science,and the skills required to support open science processes need tobe evaluated and planned. Africa, as elsewhere, needs to develop
its scien fic cultural norms in favour of open science. Ins tu ons
should be encouraged to endorse the Science Interna onal Accord
on Open Data. A concordat should be developed with interna onal
funders that protects the IP and career development prospects ofAfrican scien sts, and there needs to be a conversa on between
stakeholders about how to contextualise open science in an African
se ng. A ques onnaire circulated to 15 SGCI members elicited aunanimous view that engaging with the digital revolu on was a key
priority for Africa, and a strong view that a collabora ve open scienceini a ve in which the Science Gran ng Councils played a role should
be a priority.
In Chapter 8 we bring together the strands of our enquiry in aseries of recommenda ons. The strength of the Science Gran ng
Councils lies in their intermediary posi on between governments
and the science community, influencing and being influenced byboth. Ac ng as a collec ve, they could achieve eﬃciencies of scale,s mulate virtual cri cal masses, intra-African collabora on andenhanced impact. They should consider the mely crea on of an
African open science area. They should explore the poten al for
convergence of relevant na onal policies, for radical changes in themodes of scien fic communica on and the use of science evalua on
metrics. They should explore means of federa ng IT systems. They
should engage with stakeholders in plo ng a way forward, including
governments, policymakers and science academies; researchers
and their ins tu ons, par cularly the universi es; and interna onal
supporters in seeking greater strategic convergence between theirrespec ve priori es.

xivOpen Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

1. Introduc on
This paper has been commissioned by the African Science Gran ng
Councils’ Ini a ve (SCGI) as a mo va ng contribu on for the themeof the Science Gran ng Council’s 2019 Annual Forum in Tanzania:
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development.
1.1 Context for the paper
Science systems worldwide are grappling to adapt to the consequencesof the digital revolu on, to the opportuni es of the 4th industrial
revolu on that has been enabled by it, and to the challenges ofglobal sustainability and Agenda2030. The new paradigm of open
science has been widely seen as a powerful vehicle for responding tothese challenges, and poten ally as the future for science in the 21st
century. Given the inevitable uncertainty surrounding the hypothesisthat open science is indeed the future, the dilemma for Africa iswhether na onal systems should be le to respond in their own ways,
or whether the issue is so important that coordinated, collec ve
ac on is required to generate the energy and impact needed to avoid
Africa being le on the wrong side of a major knowledge divide. This
report is partly designed to help the Science Gran ng Councils assess
the risks associated with these choices.
The global Open Science movement has accelerated in development
and up-take over the last decade, and in a variety of exploratory
forms. The emerging paradigm is fashioned from converging,mutually reinforcing trends: universal access to knowledge via theworld-wide-web, open access to digital publishing that has displaced
the restric ons of paper text, data-driven science that adds a new
dimension to the classical hypothesis-driven mode of scien fic
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

1enquiry, and data sharing that enhances the eﬃciency of discovery andopens novel data-enabled poten al in understanding the complexity
at the heart of most major contemporary societal challenges, ofdevelopment and of global sustainability. This confluence is crea ng
new approaches to the genera on, diﬀusion and governance of thescien fic process, using new tools, technologies and frameworks
that are a consequence of the digital revolu on of the last 3
decades, which is also the driver of the “4th industrial revolu on”,
that is fundamentally dependent on these scien fic, technologicaland sociological innova ons. This Open Science (OS) is therefore
premised on the need for enhanced collabora ons in research andinnova on, increased knowledge exchange and greater uptake andu liza on of knowledge for socio-economic development [1].
At the same me science confronts an informa on-rich world that
although it needs scien fic understanding more than ever, does not
do so as a passive recipient of scien fic wisdom. To be eﬀec ve in its
societal contribu on, science must also be open to society in a twoway process of dialogue in which science engages more deeply withbusiness, policymakers, governments, communi es and ci zens as
knowledge partners in ways that are ac on-oriented and increase
both eﬀec veness and socio-poli cal legi macy [2].
.
1.2 Methodology
The study was undertaken by four scien sts (appendix 1), experienced
in the domain of science policy, with a range of complementary
experiences of open science at both the global and African levels.
The study method comprised three parts:a) An ini al analysis of the new paradigm of open science, its
evolu on, its tools and its poten al for Africa, was submi ed
as a basis for the proposed paper’s chapter sequence andcontent. It was the core of our bid for the contract, and wehave largely followed that sequence in the resul ng paper.
b) Analysis of the peer-reviewed and grey literature with the
purpose broadening and deepening the issues iden fied
2

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

c)in a) and in par cular exploring arguments about workableconceptual and opera onal frameworks to enable eﬃcientand eﬀec ve open science in Africa. Knowledge derived fromthis process informed our recommenda ons on poten al
roles of SGCs in enabling open science research and innova on
for development. (The involvement of three of us - Boulton,
Mwelwa, Wafula - in the landscape study of open science inAfrica conducted by the South African Academy of Science onbehalf of the African Open Science Pla orm was a valuable
source of informa on about the African landscape of open
science - chapter 6).
A ques onnaire survey of SGCs was undertaken to elicit theirexperiences of and approach to open science, and its relevanceto development and to the 4th industrial revolu on. The
ques onnaire is shown in appendix 3. Responses are analysedand discussed in chapter 7 (Sec ons 7.7). The relevance of
these analyses to our conclusions is presented in chapter 8.

At the end of the each of the chapters in the following text, we haveset out shaded text boxes containing key messages that are relevantto the poten al roles of the SGCs. These then contribute to thesynthesising discussion and recommenda ons in the final chapter.
1.3 Remit
The remit of this paper is to review the issues surrounding the
evolving open science movement, the challenges and opportuni es
it presents for Africa, and the ways in which the Councils could
beneficially intervene. It was framed by the following ques ons:•
What roles could Science Gran ng Councils play in fostering
Open Science in research and innova on for Africa’s
development and how can they eﬀec vely play this role
within the OS ecosystem?
•
What tools, interven ons, policies, incen ves, infrastructureand frameworks are required to foster OS in research andinnova on for development? Which of these are of immediate
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

3

•

•

•

4

relevance and importance for Africa’s Science Gran ng
Councils?
What are the key enablers and inhibiters for mainstreaming andimplemen ng OS policies, ini a ves and ac vi es in Africa;and how can they be sustained and resolved respec vely?
How is OS governed? Who are the key players? How are therules, roles and responsibili es determined in the co-crea on
and u liza on of open knowledge? What are the experiences
across the 15 SGCI countries?
What are the pros and cons of OS? Is OS increasing
marginaliza on or bridging the divides? How can OS benefit
excluded/vulnerable groups?

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

2. The digital revolu on: complexity,
innova on and open science
Open science is not new. The first published scien fic journals in the
17th century ushered in the modern era of scien fic openness. They
required authors not only to submit their ideas, but also the evidence,the data, on which these were based. This permi ed others to
scru nise the logic of the postulated concept/data rela onship, andto replicate experiments or observa ons. It was a process that waswell adapted to the discovery of error, a process termed scien fic
self-correc on by historians of science, and one on which therigour of modern science is based. It is reflected in Albert Einstein’scomment, that “no amount of experimenta on can prove me right.
A single experiment can prove me wrong” [3]. It is the reason why
science has become the most reliable way to acquire new knowledge
and the basis for its benefit to society.
The condi ons for such openness have now changed. Since the turn ofthe millennium, the replacement of analogue by digital technologies
for the acquisi on, storage, communica on and analysis of data
have created a digital revolu on (Box 1) with powerful and pervasive
consequences for science, economies and society, as a consequenceof cost savings and flexibility [4]. This digital revolu on has had four
broad consequences for science and society, which are summarised
below (2.1-2.3) and which lie at the heart of the ra onale for ac on
by the Science Gran ng Councils.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

5BOX 2.1 – THE DIGITAL REVOLUTION
New modes of digital data acquisi on have created enormous and growing
volumes, now measured in ze abytes, equivalent to a trillion gigabytes, with
1 ze abyte equivalent to approximately 3 million galaxies of stars. Some
data acquisi on systems acquire “big data”, flowing into storage systems at
formidable speeds, and which quickly create enormous data volumes. But wealso collect a huge diversity of data, much of which is not “big’ as described,
but poten ally of immense value in permi ng integra on of data aboutwide sets of a ributes that characterise components of complex systems,
enabling the recogni on of deep pa erns that have never previously been
seen. The challenge for data science is to integrate data from diverse sources
to reveal deep-lying pa erns the complexi es of nature and society.

2.1

Opportunity and challenges for science:
unravelling complexity
The major, pressing global scien fic, economic and societal issues ofthe 21st century (including climate change, sustainable development,
disaster risk reduc on) are inherently complex. They are embedded
in complex systems whose property is to show emergent behaviour,which is behaviour that cannot be predicted simply by considering
the inputs separately, but requires the interopera on of all major
6Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

system elements to be analysed. The outcome is not merely the sumof system parts. Achieving these ends depends on the use of new
tools, new tasks and new ways of working.
New tools. Machine learning algorithms mimic human cogni ve
func ons such as trial-and-error learning and pa ern recogni onthat have always been essen al components of scien fic analysis.
Like us, they learn from experience, with data as the experience.
A con nuing “big data” flux permits progressive learning that has
the capacity to reveal deep, hitherto unrecognised pa erns in data.
They oﬀer a novel route to understanding and ac on using machinelearning to extract knowledge directly from the data deluge. It is thebasis of a new scien fic paradigm of “data-driven science”, which
permits us to discern spa al and temporal structures in data that go
far beyond pre-exis ng capaci es. It creates a basis for models thatlearn much more than tradi onal data assimila on approaches andcan form a firmer basis for policy and ac on in science and otherareas of life.
New tasks. Understanding such systems can only be achieved
through research that works across disciplines, and which uses atransdisciplinary approach to translate understanding into ac on.
Achieving this depends upon our capacity to extract knowledge
from the large and diverse volumes of heterogeneous data that are
increasingly available, and which reflect the behaviour of complex
systems. However, our ability to combine data from heterogeneous
sources and across disciplines remains rudimentary at worst,
excessively resource intensive at best. It is a founda onal issue for 21st
century science that is an increasing focus of interna onal a en on(see Interna onal Science Council Ac on Plan: 2019-2021- 3). A
further task lies in managing unprecedented data fluxes so they areopen to scru ny at the me of publica on of concepts based on themin ways that uphold the vital principle of scien fic self-correc on.
Not only does all relevant data need to be made available, but also
the metadata (the data about data), relevant computer codes, andOpen Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

7

in many instances the details of machines used in computa onal
analysis. These requirements are summed up in the FAIR principles(Findable-Accessible-Interoperable-Reusable). Failure to ensure thatdata management and sta s cal procedures keep pace with thedigital explosion in ways that are compa ble with the requirementsof the principle of self-correc on are in part responsible for the
epidemic of non-reproducibility that has occurred in many fields ofscience [5].
New ways of working. Addressing the challenge of complexity
requires scien sts to have access to broad ranges of interdisciplinary
data. Maintaining the pre-exis ng mode, whereby scien sts only
have access to data that they have created, subverts this poten al
and the poten al of much data-driven science. It is a major driver
for the promo on of the new open science paradigm. Such data
sharing and marke ng between commercial companies provides
the feedstock for the technologies that companies use to enhancetheir eﬃciency and market impact. The same is true in science.
2.2 The digital revolu on, driver of the 4th industrial revolu on
The digital revolu on is an event of world historic significance. Its
technologies together cons tute a “general purpose” technology thatis driving what has become known as the fourth industrial revolu on(Figure 2.1), though penetra ng far beyond the confines of industry.
These are technologies that con nually transform themselves,
progressively penetra ng new domains, boos ng produc vity
across all sectors and industries because of their cost eﬀec veness.
They are globally pervasive, with profound economic and social
implica ons that fundamentally disrupt pre-exis ng norms. They
have unleashed an unprecedented new era of innova on, withprofound implica ons, not only for science, industry and economies,
but also for society and all levels of governance.

8

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Revolu onising, economies, socie es, lives
Banking
Insurance
Educa onHealthThe Digital Revolu on
Digital Science& Technology

Agriculture

General Purpose
Technology

Infrastructure
Human Capacity
Analy cs
Research

Tourism

4th Industrial
Revolu on

Media

Industry

PublicServices

Commerce
Smart
Ci es

Figure 2.1. How the digital revolu on drives and is at the core of the“4 th industrial revolution” and its ubiquitous applications.

2.3 Empowering diverse voices and “post truth”
A major consequence of the digital revolu on has been the crea on
and adop on of digital communica on devices, with a global
penetra on of “smartphones” at 37% of the global popula on, andwith Africa at 26%, but increasing at the fast annual compound rateof 6.7%. They are now the preferred means of web access, and havefundamentally changed social and commercial interac ons and retailac vi es. Whilst a decade ago it was assumed that these technologies
would democra se communica on and ac on, the unan cipateddynamic has been their use as means of dividing socie es into
poli cal and social siloes. It is increasingly described as a means ofbroadcas ng misleading or blatantly untruthful statements, as an
aspect of a so-called “post-truth” world, where a par al opinion, noma er how outlandish, can be given the same credibility as a fact.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

9A recent study of Twi er [6] found that falsehood diﬀused faster,
deeper, and more broadly than truth in all categories of informa on.
They were 70% more likely to be re-tweeted than the truth, andreached more people, due in part to peer-to-peer sharing. Within
the typology of false news, poli cal news travelled more deeply
and more broadly. For scien sts this appears most damaging where
well-established rela onships or rigorously tested concepts, such as
the smoking-cancer link, the health benefits of vaccina on or theevidence of human-induced climate change, are denied without
credible evidence. It has been supposed that this reflects a lessening
in public trust for science, but if anything, trust in science is rising [7].
However, although the propor onal trust for science may be rising,
the powerful tools of ubiquitous communica on and the world-wide
web have given dissen ng voices a broadcas ng power that they
have previously lacked, making them “the most powerful machinefor the spreading of lies that the world has ever known” [8].
2.4 Emergence of the new “Open Science” paradigm
The suite of powerful digital technologies that have emerged in recent
decades have naturally led to new ideas about the opportuni es thatthey oﬀer for science and how science systems and norms mightneed to be re-configured if these opportuni es are to be seized.
This new paradigm of open science is based on open data and open
access to the results of scien fic inquiry, as means of enhancing
eﬃciency, the rate of discovery, understanding of complex systems
and, in collabora on with other societal actors, of innova on. At thesame me, it has become clear, in the face of the data deluge, that
greater discipline in data use in par cular will be needed if science isto retain sta s cal rigour and uphold the principle of reproducibility
in the face of the data deluge. As Jim Gray [9] commented “wescien sts do terrible things with our data”. The recogni on of theseopportuni es and challenges has led to the defini on by computerscien sts of what has been called a fourth paradigm for science, an“E-science” that adds computer simula on linked to data-intensive
science (with its three basic ac vi es of: capture-cura on-analysis),
10Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

to the classical scien fic paradigms of observa on, experiment andtheory. It adds an approach of “data-led science” to the classicalapproach of hypothesis-led science.
This is an important technical root for the new open science
paradigm, but by no means the only one. Analysis by social scien stsof the assump ons, drivers and habits of scien fic enquiry suggested
that the established paradigm of scien fic discovery (mode 1),characterised by the hegemony of disciplinary science, with its
strong sense of an internal hierarchy between the disciplines anddriven by the autonomy of scien sts and their host ins tu ons, theuniversi es, was being superseded, although not replaced, by a newparadigm of knowledge produc on (‘Mode 2’) which was sociallydistributed, applica on-oriented, trans-disciplinary and subject tomul ple accountabili es [10] [11].
These two percep ons are the forebears of the modern open science
paradigm. The first based on the use of powerful digital technologies
to enhance the capacity of science to discover new knowledge: thesecond as a response to the need for a broader disciplinary input
in understanding the complexi es of nature and society, and a
responsibility for broader societal engagement in transla ng thisunderstanding into ac onable knowledge.
These are perspec ves that have arisen from and been driven by
the science community and are the background to and conceptual
drivers of open science. They create an evolving se ng within
which the necessary inter- and trans-disciplinary collabora ons
needed to understand complex systems can be forged. They imply
that without science becoming a more publicly engaged enterprise,
the applica on of its understanding to the problems of the modern
world will have a diminished poten al. As a consequence, the ini alfocus of open science on open data and open access publishing has
extended recently to include open engagement with society.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

112.5 The “dark side”
Most technologies are ethically neutral but have the poten al to be
used for harm as well as benefit. It is incumbent on governments
to determine whether and how regula ons or legal restraints are
required to prevent harmful use, but also to ensure that na onal
technical skills are developed that are able to iden fy and mi gate
risks. The dark side of the digital revolu on lies in cyber-fraud, a
massively growing industry, cyber-warfare, including a acks on
na onal infrastructure, cyber-espionage, including a acks on the
integrity of databases, and cyber-lies that undermine civic consensus
and electoral integrity. Access to the skills and capaci es necessary
to iden fy and deflect threats or mi gate their consequences arevital capabili es for a modern state.
2.2 Relevance to the Science Gran ng Councils’ ini a ve
Points of advocacy to government• the digital revolu on is a world-historic event• its technologies are the bedrock of the 4th industrial revolu on• a strong science base is essen al to exploit its opportuni es
and address its challenges• a new paradigm of “open science” is developing as an eﬃcient
way of doing so• high level data science and IT are vital in protec ng key na onal
assets and formula ng relevant regula ons and legisla on

12Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

3. The impera ve for Africa
3.1 Why must a modern state respond energe cally to the digital
revolu on?
The technologies of the digital revolu on have already shown
enormous capacity to create long-term benefit precisely because
they are so flexible and pervasive, with many benefits coming notsimply from adop ng the technology, but from adap ng to it. But by
their very nature, they are highly disrup ve in the short-term, rapidly
redefining rela onships between customers, workers and employers,and permea ng almost everything we do, progressively overhaulingall industries whilst crea ng new ones. African governments cannot
avoid these forces that technology has unleashed, which may haveshort-term disrup ve consequences as well as long-term benefits.
Just as their western and Asian counterparts are doing, they must
promote crea ve thinking and ac ng, in and beyond government,
about structural adapta on, widespread re-skilling and educa onal
innova on, to minimise short-term disrup on and maximise longterm benefit.
The digital revolu on, which has largely replaced the prin ng
technologies invented in the fi eenth century, oﬀers immediate,
democra sed access and has destroyed distance as a barrier to the
spread of informa on. It has also reduced costs and has done awaywith the space limita ons of print pages and books. It has serious
implica ons for the conduct of science and technology in Africa andthroughout society. We argue that African governments need to take acue from counterparts elsewhere by developing systema c adop ve
and adap ve responses that are aligned with the aspira ons of theAfrican Union Science, Technology and Innova on 2024 report [12],Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

13

in order to capitalise on the digital revolu on. However, me is short.
Whereas the full impacts of the prin ng revolu on were centennial,
those of the digital revolu on are decadal. Although the la er has
not yet run its course and its ul mate des na on remains hiddenfrom usG, playing catch-up holds much less promise than being near
the head of the pack.
3.2 What are the crucial ques ons to which African states must
respond?
The impera ve to respond to the digital revolu on is global. Its
impacts cannot be avoided, in Africa or elsewhere. Governments,
industry, commerce and na onal science systems worldwide arestruggling to understand their long-term significance whilst adap ng
to what are seen as immediate impera ves. For science, these are
currently supposed to be in three dimensions:a) How should priori es, incen ves, infrastructure and funding in
na onal science systems be adapted to exploit the new digitalworld to best eﬀect across the whole spectrum of science andits applica on?
b) How should capaci es and capabili es in informa cs(computer science-data science-ar ficial intelligence) and indata engineering be developed and priori zed, not only forthe benefit of the science system but also in their provision ofskills for public and private sectors?
c) A na onal science system does not operate in a social vacuum.
It is an essen al element of na onal intellectual infrastructurewith a value to society largely determined by the way in which
it interacts with society to simulate innova on. How does ascience system need to adapt to a digitally-aware society with
its social media, instantaneous communica ons and global
informa on and disinforma on webs?

G When Zhou Enlai, Chinese premier from 1949 to 1976, was asked what he thought were the benefits of the French
Revolu on (1789), he is reported to have replied: “it is too early to say”.

14

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

These ques ons are as urgent and insistent for African states as
they are for all others. They cannot be deflected or ignored, for thealterna ve would be to risk stagna ng in a scien fic backwater,
isolated from crea ve streams of social, cultural and economic
opportunity. A country that fails to develop its own capaci es will
inevitably be dependent upon skills bought in from elsewhere as apassive and ill-informed consumer of expensive data services, lacking
the crea vity to thrive in a fast-changing world [13]. A clear danger
is that Africa’s rela vely weak contribu on to global knowledge
crea on (see 6.1) [14] could deteriorate, with poten ally profoundconsequences for the con nent’s vitality.
Whilst there is a risk that even by strenuous, adap ve digital policies,
Africa’s economic performance could lose “market share” because of
the crea vity of other be er-favoured economies, failure to adapt at
all would certainly lead to serious economic deteriora on. Studies of
the impacts of digi zed informa on flows show that they have only
slightly decreased inequali es, with Africa lagging behind the rest of
the world [15]. On this basis, for a state to do other than equip itself
to the best of its abili es with the skills, the support mechanisms andthe opportuni es for transla on of cu ng-edge digital technologies
would be unwise in the extreme.
3.3 Could Open Science be the vehicle for a cost–eﬀec ve response
from Africa?
Open science is, in part, developing as a means of maximising thescien fic and socio-economic impact of the digital revolu on at thena onal and supra-na onal levels and at the levels of disciplines, andwith the inten on of mainstreaming its processes within na onal ordisciplinary science systems.
The cost eﬀec veness of the open science project has been a major
issue [16a, 16b], and whether, in the African case, the net economic
eﬀect would be posi ve or nega ve. To this extent, our search of theAfrican landscape for data on the poten al economic eﬀect of open
science yielded few results, as there is li le coverage [17]. A World
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

15

Bank study however [18] concludes that the economic poten al ofopen data is very large indeed, and that these conclusions apply
equally to both developed and under-developed economies. It
suggests that governments should see themselves not only as
supplier of open data but also as leaders, catalysts and users. A 2015
study for the European Commission [19] argued that a European
open data portal would have the poten al to generate a mul billion euro bonus per year, including a cumula ve eﬃciency benefitof 1.7Bn euros by 2020 [20]. Another report oﬀers a deliberately
conserva ve es mate of the opportunity costs (benefits foregone)
for the European Union of not developing an open regime, wheredata is findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR data),
as at least 10.2 Bn euros and possibly as high as 26 Bn euros [21].
These considera ons form a fundamental jus fica on for the major
European investment in an Open Science Cloud.
These are powerful arguments in favour of open science, although
we acknowledge that the African are diﬀerent from those ofEurope or the Unites States. However, in the absence of directly
applicable data, we suggest that they provide strong reassurance
that investment in relevant capaci es would be produc ve. It is thepoli cal dilemma that considera ons of the future always hold, but
one where inac vity is a strong, but in our view an ill-advised choice.
One of the elements of the open science enterprise that could beof great importance for Africa is the ethos and prac ce of sharing
and collabora on inherent in the socially distributed, applica onoriented, trans-disciplinary approach derived from the “mode 2”
discourse [22] described in 2.1, and increasingly embedded in the
open science paradigm. The 2024 STI Strategy for Africa [23] iden fies
two fundamental weaknesses of science systems in many Africancountries as weak intra-African collabora on and inadequate cri calmass. These are precisely the weaknesses that the collabora ve
prac ce of open science could correct. Furthermore, individually
weak systems can strengthen themselves through the eﬃciencies of
16

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

shared resources by:a) eﬃciencies of scale in planning, procurement and provision;b) scaling-up through collabora on and shared capaci es;c) s mula ng crea vity through interac on of diverse groups;d) amplifying impact through common purpose and voice;e) building consor a and collabora ons with a greater cri cal
mass;f) support from a shared capacity in cu ng-edge data science.
There are of course dangers and diﬃcul es [24]. These include
poten al loss of intellectual property to larger be er-funded groups
from beyond Africa, and the con nuing diﬃculty of aﬀordable accessto the interna onal scien fic literature; rela ve scarcity of a highband-width internet; lack of open access policies to govern open
science; and lack of standardiza on and interoperability amongst
data repositories.
3.4 Timeliness: the African Con nental Free Trade Area
In September 2019 the African Union launched the African Con nental
Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) comprising 54 out of 55 countries. Not only
has it great poten al to dynamise trade on the con nent, but, as theEuropean experience has shown, free trade and the mobility of ideas
and people also s mulate social and cultural dynamism. These are
precisely the quali es that science both thrives on and contributes
to. An ini a ve to create an African open science area following
hard on the heels of the AfCFTA announcement would represent a
major statement of intent from Africa about a confident and crea vescien fic future. The synergies between these ac ons would havethe poten al to be powerful levers of social, cultural and scien fic
vitality and of economic development.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

17

3. Relevance to a Science Gran ng Councils’ ini a ve
Points of advocacy to government• technologies unleashed by the digital revolu on cannot besidestepped• na onal science systems must adapt to new demands andopportuni es• “open science” may be a cost eﬃcient way of adap ng to them
• powerful poten al for synergy between AfCFTA and an African
Open Science Area

18

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

4. The essen als of open science:frameworks, policies and tools
The capacity to conduct open science in a data-intensive age isfundamentally dependent upon the development of tools andprocedures to acquire, store, communicate and analyse large andcomplex data fluxes, to manage these processes eﬃciently and in ahighly structured fashion, and to communicate the results in waysthat make them accessible to the largest number who may be able
to use them for personal or collec ve benefit. Knowledge, scien fic
knowledge in our case, when released into the public domain, haslong been regarded as a public good. Maintaining that public good ina data rich age is crucially dependent on our capacity to manage data
and knowledge transfer in an eﬃcient and coherent way. Otherwise,
we risk drowning in a data deluge, and fail to realise it as a publicgood.
We now analyse what have come to be regarded as the essen al
tools and processes that need to be in place and the problema c
issues that must be addressed if open science is to be eﬃciently
delivered. It is not Africa-specific, but draws on evidence of goodprac ce from wherever it is available. It sets the conceptual frame
for chapter 5, which describes how these principles and prac ceshave been implemented in open science systems. It is conven onal
to take open science as comprising open data and open accesspublishing, to which we add open to society as a necessary, outward
facing a ribute.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

194.1 Open Data
If the opportuni es of open science are to be grasped, the data, which
are essen al parts of the bedrock on which science is based, need tobe eﬃciently and eﬀec vely managed. Data are key conduits leading
to knowledge discovery and innova on, and need to be widely
available for scru ny to ensure the logical rigour of scien fic claims.
They need to be available for interdisciplinary integra on and forreuse by the community. Unfortunately, the exis ng digital ecosystemsurrounding scholarly data publica on prevents us from extrac ng
maximum benefit from our research investments, for example in text
and data mining and because many scien fic publishers s ll do not
require data to be accessible or FAIR as a condi on of publica on(25). If we are to make best use of the data deluge rather than being
confused or drowned by it, a series of technical demands need tobe sa sfied. We now set out the technical solu ons that have beendeveloped about how data resources should be managed, whatdefining characteris cs of data need to be maintained in order thatthey can be produc vely shared and re-used by others, how data
should be cited, and related legal issues. It is also cri cal that scien sts
are supported in ensuring sta s cal rigour in their analyses and in
the use of some of the powerful techniques of machine learning thatare able to discover deep structure in data.
4.1.1 Research Data Management
Such are the volumes and complexi es of modern research data,that any organisa on or ins tu on that has a sustained need tou lise these resources will need to develop a strategy and a system
for research data management (RDM). The crea on of an eﬃcient
database, able con nually to absorb new data and release datafor use in ways prescribed by users is not a trivial ma er. Several
such systems have been tried and tested, all of which have similar
characteris cs, being based on the so-called data lifecycle. The
influen al Digital Cura on Centre model of the data life cycle (26) isshown in figure 4.1.

20Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Figure 4.1: The Digital Cura on Centre (DCC) data cura on lifecycle model

The model provides a high-level graphical overview of the stages ofsuccessful cura on and preserva on of data from ini al receipt ofacquired data to its use or re-use in a scien fic analysis. Star ng withthe data there are five key components in the management system:a) Data, in binary digital form. It includes• Simple digital objects: discrete digital items.
• Complex digital objects: combining digital objects, suchas websites.
• Databases: structured collec ons of records or datastored in a computer system.
b) Descrip on and Representa on Informa on• Assign administra ve, descrip ve, technical, structural andpreserva on metadata.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

21•Collect and assign informa on to understand the digitalmaterial and its metadata.
c) Preserva on Planning• Plan for preserva on throughout the cura on lifecycle ofdigital material.
• Include plans for management and administra on of allcura on lifecycle ac ons.
d) Community Watch and Par cipa on• Maintain community ac vi es, and par cipate in thedevelopment of shared standards, tools and suitable so ware.
e) Cura on and Preserva on• Manage and generate ac ons to promote cura on andpreserva on throughout the lifecycle.
Once these management systems are in place, the life cycle for a
specific scien fic task is:• Conceptualise: by planning data capture strategy and storage
op ons.
• Create: digital objects and assign descriptors.
• Access and use: ensure rou ne access.
• Appraise and select: evaluate requirement for long-term
cura on and preserva on.
• Dispose: of digital objects not selected for long-term cura on
and preserva on.
• Ingest: transfer digital objects to a trusted digital repository ordata centre.
• Preserva on ac on: ensure long-term preserva on andreten on.
• Reappraise: digital objects that fail valida on are further
appraised and reselected.
• Store: keep the data in a secure manner as outlined by relevant
standards.
• Access and reuse: ensure data are accessible to designatedusers use and re-users.

22

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Understanding this life-cycle is of fundamental importance for theprac cal crea on of an opera onal data management system. Figure
4.2 illustrates the DDC Research Data Service Model, a management
system based on the lifecycle model in figure 4.1. This is a genericmodel that is adaptable to the needs of the organisa on or ins tu on,whether small or large, that needs to manage its research data. It
is based on the need to manage both technical infrastructure andhuman resources.
RDM policy& strategy

Business plan& sustainability

Data management
planning

Discovery

Ac ve data
management

Access &publishing

Appraisal &Risk assessment

Preserva on
Training& skills

Advisory
services

Figure 4.2. The Digital Cura on Centre’s Data Service Model

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

23

There are four fundamental a ributes of a system that is able toservice the data cycle shown in figure 4.1:
Purpose & strategy
It is vital that the purpose of the management system is clearly defined,
whether it is to serve all disciplines or a sub-set, whether it is for a
research group or ins tu on, whether it is na onal or regional, andwhether it is a federa on of interoperable RDM systems. Whichever
it is, coordina on is essen al because eﬀec ve RDM is extremely
diﬃcult to achieve when components are designed in isola on. An
open science system will be open to many diﬀerent groups, and may
face outwards towards society, and thus will need to embed thiscapability in its ini al policy for design. Irrespec ve of its purpose,the system must be clear about:•purpose and scope of the proposed service;•iden fying current provision;•
iden fying feasible levels of service provision;•roles and responsibili es iden fied in the policy;•
how policy is communicated to stakeholders;•mechanisms to monitor and review.
Business plans and sustainability
Many current databases have had severe diﬃcul es because of areliance on short-term funding. Important databases have collapsed
when such funding has ended. The business model must be based on
the design purpose and will need to address:•
making the business case for the service, considering its value
proposi on to service customers;•
commi ee processes and melines for securing resources for
improved technical and human infrastructure;•
costs and benefits associated with RDM support provision;•
cost recovery models and research funder rules that govern
what direct or indirect costs may be charged to research
grants.

24

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Advisory services
Many users will find management systems diﬃcult to understandor to engage with unless the user interface is a simple one. The
provision of online and face-to-face advice for researchers who needsupport with a par cular aspect of their research data management
is crucial. Important issues to resolve are:•which staﬀ deliver support to researchers across relevant
professional service units, and what scope is there to join thisup?
•on which topics is the advice provision strongest and weakest?
•which channels are used to connect researchers to any
support already available, and what scope is there for using
online connec on more eﬃciently?
Training
The provision of basic training in RDM principles, prac ces andprocesses is vital. This may be done through online and/or face-toface delivery of learning materials designed to meet the needs ofboth researchers and support staﬀ. It should involve planning:•
what objec ves does the training programme aim to address,
e.g. which capabili es of the service will be improved;•
whose skills or competencies need to be developed, and what
are they;•
what channels are used to connect staﬀ and researchers withtraining opportuni es;•
how can RDM be aligned with other learning approaches.
4.1.2 FAIR Data
It has been long recognised [27] that for data to be reused, par cularly
by those who are not the data originators, that it is not enough justto deposit the data in a repository and presume that others will beable to use it. For all but the simplest data, a great deal of metadata isrequired to make it (re-)useable. First it must be known to exist. Thenit must be able to be retrieved from wherever it is found [28]. Thenit must be able to be combined with data from other sources. Finally,
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

25

a full descrip on of the rela onships of the data must be available
so that it can be meaningfully re-used. A Royal Society report [29]ar culated a view of what it called “intelligent openness” which
required data to be Accessible, Assessable, Usable and Traceable. A
fuller analysis by Force11 [30] enunciated the FAIR principles, thatdata should be Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable.
Box 4.1 describes what is meant by each of these terms [31].
For many high value datasets, there are well-organised, deeply
integrated repository systems in areas such as gene cs, space physics
and astronomy, where these principles are readily and rou nely
applied. But there are many important datasets, from more tradi onal
low-throughput bench science or rou ne low-tech observa on, thatare o en of no less importance than their big data counterparts,
but where the applica on of FAIR principles is less standardised
and poten ally more onerous, and for which more general purpose
databases such as Figshare [32] or Dryad [33] have been developed.
A significant challenge is that of making scien fic data “machine
ac onable.” For example, a machine may be capable of determining
the datatype of a discovered digital object, but not capable ofprocessing the data or determining the licensing requirements.
The op mal state—where machines fully ‘understand’ and canautonomously and correctly operate-on a digital object—may rarely
be achieved. Nevertheless, the FAIR principles provide ‘steps along
a path’ toward machine-ac onability. Adop ng, in whole or in part,the FAIR principles, leads the resource along the con nuum towards
this op mal state [34].

26Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

BOX 4.1: REQUIREMENTS FOR “FAIR” DATA:
To be Findable:
F1: (meta) data are assigned a globally unique and persistent iden fierF2: data are described with rich metadata (defined by R1 below)
F3: metadata clearly and explicitly include the iden fier of the data it
describes
F4: (meta) data are registered or indexed in a searchable resource
To be Accessible:
A1: (meta) data are retrievable by their iden fier using astandardized communica ons protocol
A1.1: the protocol is open, free, and universally implementable
A1.2: the protocol allows for an authen ca on and authoriza onprocedure, where necessary
A2: metadata are accessible, even when the data are no longer
available
To be Interoperable:
I1: (meta) data use a formal, accessible, shared, and broadly
applicable language for knowledge representa on.
I2: (meta) data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles
I3: (meta) data include qualified references to other (meta) data
To be Reusable:
R1: meta (data) are richly described with a plurality of accurate andrelevant a ributes
R1.1: (meta) data are released with a clear and accessible usage license
R1.2: (meta) data are associated with detailed provenanceR1.3: (meta) data meet domain-relevant community standards

4.1.3 Data cita on
Data cita on is a key prac ce in support of data access, sharing,reuse, and of sound and reproducible scholarship. Many problems
arise when research findings become disconnected from theunderlying data that form the evidence for these findings. The mostwell-publicized of these problems is scien fic fraud.
Within the social sciences, the vast majority of datasets producedby sponsored research are never deposited or shared [35], and,as a result, reproducing published tables and figures, and directly
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

27

extending prior results is o en diﬃcult or impossible [36], [37], [38].
Similar problems exist in other fields. A recent study [39] of a sample
of zoology ar cles found that less than 30% of even the most recent
publica ons made data available, and that research data availability
declined rapidly with ar cle age, while loss of data increased.
The purposes of data cita on as they have developed so far are:•to facilitate descrip on and informa on retrieval, using theprinciples that data in archives should be described as works
rather than media, using author, tle, and version;•
to support data access and persistence, associated withthe principle that research data used in publica on should
be cited, and that those cita ons should include persistentiden fiers, and should be directly ac onable on the web;•to support the use of cita ons for verifica on andreproducibility, including the principle that cita ons should
support verifiable linkage of data and published claims.
Data cita on principles as developed by Force11 are described in box
4.2 [40].

28

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

BOX 4.2 Joint Declara on of Data Cita on Principles (2014)
1. Importance. Data should be considered legi mate, citable productsof research. Data cita ons should be accorded the same importancein the scholarly record as cita ons of other research objects, such as
publica ons.
2. Credit and A ribu on. Data cita ons procedures should facilitate
scholarly credit and norma ve and legal a ribu on to all contributorsof the data, recognizing that a single style or mechanism of a ribu on
may not be applicable to all data.
3. Evidence. In scholarly literature, whenever and wherever a claim
relies upon data, the corresponding data should be cited.
4. Unique Iden fica on. A data cita on should include a persistentmethod for iden fica on that is machine ac onable, globally unique,and widely used by a community.
5. Access. Data cita ons should facilitate access to the data themselves
and to such associated metadata, documenta on, code, and othermaterials, as are necessary for both humans and machines to makeinformed use of the referenced data.
6. Persistence. Unique iden fiers, and metadata describing the data,and its disposi on, should persist, even beyond the lifespan of thedata they describe.
7. Specificity and Verifiability. Data cita ons should facilitate
iden fica on of, access to, and verifica on of the specific data that
support a scien fic claim. Cita ons or cita on metadata should
include informa on about provenance and fixity suﬃcient to facilitate
verifying that the specific me-slice, version and/or granular por onof data retrieved subsequently is the same as was originally cited.
8. Interoperability and flexibility. Data cita on methods should be
suﬃciently flexible to accommodate varying prac ces amongst user
communi es, but should not diﬀer so much that they compromiseinteroperability of data cita on prac ces across communi es.

DataCite [41] is the leading non-profit organisa on that provides
persistent iden fiers (DOIs) for research data and other research
outputs to ensure that the above principles can be put into prac ce.
Organiza ons can become members in order to be able to assign
DOIs to all their research outputs to ensure that they are discoverable
and that associated metadata are made available to the community.
DataCite frequently up-dates metadata Schema Documenta on for
the Publica on and Cita on of Research Data [42].
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

29

4.1.4 Text and data mining
Text and data mining (TDM) is the process of deriving informa on
from machine-read material. It works by copying large quan es ofmaterial, extrac ng the data, and recombining it to iden fy pa erns.
There are four stages in the TDM process as shown in Figure 4.3.
Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

Stage 4

Enhanced
Informa on
Retrival

Linguis c
Analysis:
En ty
Recogni on

Informa on
Extrac on

Data miningthat leads toknowledge
discovery

The components of text and data mining

Figure 4.3: Processes in text and data mining [43]Poten ally relevant documents are iden fied and turned into amachine-readable format so that structured data can be extracted.
The useful informa on is extracted (Stage 3) and then mined (Stage4) to discover new knowledge, test hypotheses, and iden fy new
rela onships.
TDM will increase the progress of science exponen ally. It has thepoten al to facilitate the discovery of cures for diseases such as
cancer and Parkinson’s. It has already been used to discover how
exis ng drugs can be used to treat other condi ons. It will also act
as a founda on for innova on and new industry.
Ordinarily, authors are obliged to transfer their copyrights before
publica on to the commercial publishers and as a result they
relinquish control over how publica ons are used. Hence it has
not been possible to mine freely in legally accessed content madeavailable by commercial academic publishers. This obstructs scienceand the distribu on of scien fic knowledge beyond the scien fic
community. It also impedes the use of TDM by private par es,
depriving them of the ability to explore and innovate. Publishers
have been resistant to free use of TDM, even to those who already30

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

have legal access to their journals and notwithstanding the fact thatmaterial has been freely given to them by scien sts. There have beena empts to promote legisla on to remove this barrier to scien fic
progress, but as yet without success.
4.1.5 The legal framework: copyright, licensing etc
Given the vastly diﬀerent data prac ces and related ethics ofownership, cura on, storage and dissemina on in each discipline,
it is important to assess diﬀerences in disciplinary approaches
regarding data sharing and re-use, and to iden fy standards andrelated infrastructures that can foster communica on and exchanges
across fields while respec ng diverse methodological tradi ons.
The Budapest Open Access Ini a ve [44] in which “open access” wasdefined as the “free availability of scien fic literature on the public
internet, permi ng any users to read, download, copy, distribute,print, search, or link to the full texts of these ar cles, crawl them forindexing, pass them as data to so ware, or use them for any otherlawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers otherthan those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The
only constraint on reproduc on and distribu on, and the only rolefor copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control overthe integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged
and cited.” It is a declara on that if implemented legally, would
remove legal restric ons.
The use of recognized waivers or licenses that are appropriate forpar cular data is an emerging trend. Crea ve Commons licensing
is an established best prac ce that is well-understood, providing
a suite of licences that cover all needs. Open access journals areusually licensed under one of the six core Crea ve Commons (CC)licenses. Crea ve Commons oﬀers six basic model clauses, two of
which sa sfy the above criteria of a free license: CC BY and CC BY-SA.
CC BY- license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build uponan originator’s work, even commercially, as long as they credit theOpen Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

31

original crea on. This type of license promotes open science and istherefore highly recommended. CC BY-SA -license lets others remix,
tweak, and build upon prior work, even for commercial purposes,
as long as they credit the originator and license their new crea ons
under iden cal terms. All new works would carry the same license,so that any deriva ves would also allow commercial use.
There are increasing numbers of ar cles and journals focusing on
detailed descrip ons of data and arguments about the value ofthe data for the future. Data journals do not host data themselves
but recommend suitable repositories where data sets should be
deposited, and then link to it. Notable examples of data journals are:Giga Science [45] Scien fic Data [46] and Data in Brief [47].
It is generally the case, and we expect it to be the case in Africa,that where na onal research councils support a move towards
open science they will issue policy statements for research grants
applicants that commit them to publishing their results underopen access condi ons. For instance countries like Germany havesuch polices supported by an ar cle in the Copyright Act [48]. It is
important that African countries reconsider their legal frameworks
to ensure that such enabling provisions for open science are in place.
This is especially important for text and data mining.
4.1.5 Limits of Open Data
Legi mate reasons limi ng data openness include the privacy of
individuals or organisa ons, na onal security and safety. This calls
for formula on and implementa on of suitable procedures andpolicies that best protect the use of data in the context of developing
open science [49]. The nature of compe veness in a given field
influences the researcher’s willingness to collaborate and shareresearch data with peers [50], an inherent barrier to openness.
Collabora ons between researchers and industrial partners with aview to commercializing the output also comes with constraints on
sharing and dissemina on of data resources and research findings
32

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

[51]. Unless revised in line with the requirements of a new open
science paradigm and its limits, copyright law and other relevant
intellectual property rights guidelines will nega vely aﬀect thedissemina on of scien fic results [52].
4.1.6 Data Analy cs
Rejuvenated skills in sta s cal analysis are vital for handling large
and complex data volumes where the pi alls are serious for theunskilled. At the same me, massive, novel data resources havebrought the approaches of ar ficial intelligence, par cularly machinelearning, into their own. These were developed some decades ago,
with much hype, but because of the small data volumes available
to them, they were only able to produce rela vely trivial results.
That has changed. Modern data resources are o en able to sa sfy
the voracious appe tes of these learning algorithms, which are now
powerful tools in the armoury of science and of both public andprivate sectors. Machine leaning is at the heart of this new poten al.
Algorithms mimic human cogni ve func ons of pa ern recogni on,which are now supercharged through the data acquisi on andprocessing power of modern digital devices.
4.1.7 Data Governance and Ethics
Data and AI technologies taken together are not just anotheru lity that needs to be regulated once it is mature. It is a powerfulforce, a new form of smart agency, which is already reshaping ourlives, our interac ons, and our environments. In this fast-moving
landscape of the data and AI world, governance challenges need tobe addressed in a mely manner if an overall system of governancefor data management and data use is to maintain public trust [172].
Exis ng data governance concepts, such as privacy and consent,
are under unprecedented strain: their meanings in policy, law andpublic discourse have shi ed, and will con nue to do so in new andunpredictable ways. Personal data and its AI applica ons are able touse data that we freely give away by clicking the “Accept” box on asmart phone or laptop or every me we shop or fill in a form, in ways
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

33

over which we rarely have control. Principles of good governanceare essen al in this new world of ubiquitous data if we are not torelinquish all standards of privacy and confiden ality without ourconsent, and thereby give free rein to cyber intrusion, cyber crimeand cyber manipula on.
A set of high-level principles is needed to visibly shape all forms of data
governance and ensure trustworthiness and trust in the management
and use of data as a whole. New governance procedures are required
to protect individual and collec ve rights and interests. They should
ensure that trade-oﬀs aﬀected by data management and data use are
made transparently, accountably and inclusively. They need to adopt
good prac ces by learning from successes and failures to enhanceexis ng democra c governance. The governance framework for data
management and data use should perform three broad categories offunc ons:• an cipate, monitor and evaluate;• build prac ces and set standards;• clarify, enforce and remedy.
Most countries have a range of actors already carrying out someof these important governance func ons in their specific sectors
or domains, but there is a clear need for a new body to steward
the landscape as a whole, rather than being directly responsiblefor implementa on within specific domains. The purpose of suchna onal stewardship bodies would be to support delivery of the fullbreadth of cri cal func ons in accordance with the principles set out
above, and to relay them to branches of government that have theresponsibility for sectoral oversight and regula on. A stewardshipbody would be expected to conduct inclusive dialogue and expert
inves ga on into novel ques ons and issues, and to enable new
ways to an cipate the future consequences of today’s decisions.
They should be independent, connected to diverse communi es,
expert across and beyond disciplines and ghtly coupled to decision
processes. They should be durable and visible, na onally focused but
globally relevant.
34

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

An obvious area where there have been major eﬀorts to address
serious concerns is that of biomedical research and health systems
in general [173]. There are significant advances in terms of personal
data governance that have followed the crea on of na onal orinterna onal ethical commi ees. Such commi ees assess any datacollec on ini a ve involving individual subjects, such that dataprotec on and sharing in these cases are generally well regulated.
However, global ini a ves would improve governance of personal
informa on, especially related to human gene c data use inresearch and the rapid evolu on of sequencing techniques. For
instance, the same consent already signed by study volunteers andapproved by commi ees could become obsolete as a consequenceof the exploita on poten al of modern genomics data produc onmachines. In such situa ons, inves gators may need to return to
pa ents to re-aﬃrm their consent. Such a global perspec ve andmanagement processes that include lawyers, biologists as well as
data and biomedical technicians could help to frame more inclusive
and sustainable governance systems. The World Health Organisa on
is currently considering such a development.
4.2 Open access and dissemina on of scien fic results
The public interest is almost invariably best served by the widest
possible dissemina on of scien fic results as a means of s mula ng
innova on across society. It is an impera ve that has been widely
acknowledged in the United Na on’s Sustainable Development
Goals, and par cularly Goal 9, which stresses the importance ofindustrial innova on and infrastructural development to ensuresustainable development for all, [53], [54]. For Africa, this impera ve
is two-fold. The first is for access to the internet, where the outlook
is promising. The Interna onal Telecommunica ons Union sta s cs
[55] show that globally in 2018, 3.9 billion people or 51.2% had
access to the Internet, Africa’s share being 24.4%, having grownfrom 2.1% in 2005, the highest growth rate interna onally, although
in the volume of use it s ll lags the rest of the world. Even if internet
access of suﬃcient bandwidth is available however, scien fic results
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

35

must be available on the medium. The second priority therefore isto ensure that published scien fic results are not only available but
aﬀordable. Aﬀordability is a fundamental issue for Africa, as it is forthe worldwide scien fic community. Addressing the global problems
that are a concern for us all requires global involvement. It is in theinterests of science worldwide that their colleagues in Africa, and in
the “global south” generally, are integral parts of the global scien fic
network, which they cannot be if excluded from access to scien fic
results from elsewhere. Conversely, although it is important for
Africa, as it is for all science systems worldwide, to assess the extent
to which current models of publica ons are consistent with theirown interests, they must also strive to ensure that principles andprocesses of publica on serve the whole interna onal community,
and not merely one segment. We need global solu ons to the
problem of aﬀordability, which we explore below, not just Africanones.
4.2.1 Recent history
With these issues in mind, it is useful to consider how current problems
have arisen. The tools of the digital revolu on have largely madeconven onal print-based approaches to dissemina on of scien fic
work obsolete and should have led to a reduc on in cost. Neither has
the la er happened, nor have the current modes of dissemina on
adapted as well as they should to the opportuni es the tools oﬀer. As
a consequence, there is an increasing body of opinion in the scien fic
community that regards the current system of scien fic publica on
as dysfunc onal. A li le history is informa ve.
a) The business model
Un l the 1960s/70s, most scien fic publica on was in the handsof learned socie es through the medium of their journals. As
learned socie es were deemed to act in the interests of scien sts
in their various fields, it seemed natural that scien sts should
entrust copyright to the journals and freely oﬀer their services tosupport editorial boards and refereeing processes. As commercial
36

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

publishers began to invade this market at scale, they simply
assumed the rela onships of trust that had existed between
scien sts and learned socie es were also open to them, eventhough their principal responsibility is to their shareholders, notto scien sts. The outcome has been a business model of uniqueasymmetry. Scien sts provide their work freely, or at their own
cost, to publishers, give up copyright to publishers, staﬀ publishers’
editorial commi ees, provide peer reviews freely, and then buy
back their published work at inflated costs. It has been calculated[56] that the actual cost of produc on of well-found ar cles isof the order of €300-€400. In prac ce, commercial publishers
charge the order of 10x that amount. For example, Germany
recently paid €26 million to the publisher Wiley to publish 9,500
open access ar cles a year over three years, at €2,750 per ar cle.
It has been calculated that their average real cost of produc on
would have been no more than about €350. Such deals haveproduced for Wiley an opera ng profit margin of around 29.5 per
cent, implying that about €7.7 million of that fee goes straight
into its shareholders’ pockets [57].
b) Impact factors
A trump card in the hands of commercial and non-commercial
publishers that persuades researchers and their ins tu ons that
it is worthwhile to pay a premium for publica on in a par cularjournal, rather than paying less for publica on in a journal withequally high standards, is the so-called “impact factor”. If it
were not for this, there would be no reason to pay a premium.
The San Francisco declara on of May 13, 2013 [58], signed bymore than 150 scien sts and 75 major scien fic organisa ons
worldwide called for a halt the prac ce of correla ng the journal
impact factor to the merits of a specific scien st’s contribu ons.
It argued that this prac ce created biases and inaccuracies whenappraising scien fic research, and that the impact factor should
not to be used as a subs tute “measure of the quality of individual
research ar cles, or in hiring, promo on, or funding decisions”
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa37

[59]. Nonetheless, impact factors con nue to have a stranglehold
because of the desires of scien sts and their ins tu ons totarget this proxy measure of excellence, irrespec ve of how gooda proxy it is, and notwithstanding any pressure it may exert on
scien sts to “sex-up” their results to ensure publica on in highimpact journals. Breaking this habit would do much to reducethe cost of publica onc) Other trends in publishing
There have been two other trends in the last 30 years. Firstly,
towards concentra on in the scien fic publishing market, witha few commercial publishers buying-up smaller publishers,
including the publishing arms of learned socie es. All of thelargest commercial publishers are now based in Europe or North
America, and regularly report profit margins of over 30%, fundedlargely from the contribu ons of publicly funded libraries andresearchers to which they oﬀer bundled journal deals. This
unique profitability has con nued even as the former costly printintensive role of publishers in typese ng and forma ng has
disappeared. At the same me, commercial scien fic publishers
are tending to re-brand themselves as technology companies,
increasingly expanding into all parts of the scholarly research
life cycle, including data analy cs for ‘impact factors’, university
rankings and management of research data. It risks giving bodies
whose only accountability is to their shareholders an increasingly
monopolis c stranglehold over many of the core components ofthe scien fic enterprise [60].
Secondly, many university systems worldwide have adopted
incen ves for researcher recogni on and advancement basedon the number of cita ons gleaned by their published work. It
has generated a global avalanche of publica ons, with over 3
million scien fic papers published per year [61a], less than 5%of which receive significant numbers of cita ons. Coupled withthe asymmetry of the business model, it has released a bonanza
38

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

for publishers, with more than 30,000 scien fic journals [61b],
at excessive cost to the public purse, and with li le incen ve toinnovate in the face of current profitability.
The open access movement seeks to replace this system, which it
regards as exploita ve [62] and ineﬃcient, in ways that serves the
public interest be er in terms of aﬀordability and func onality increa vely exploi ng modern technology.
4.2.2 Open Access publishing
It is largely in response to the above trends that the movement
towards open access (OA) publishing has developed. Besides
making scien fic results freely available on the internet, OA is alsoa means of ensuring that hypotheses and evidence are most widely
accessible so that they might be scru nised and tested as part of theprocess of self-regula on of science. The internet has the poten al,
par excellence, to make results widely available, comprehensible
to other societal stakeholders (policymakers, business, professions,NGOs, ci zen scien sts and ci zens), globally aﬀordable, irrespec veof the wealth of science systems and publics, and as a means ofs mula ng crea vity to increase func onality (e.g. all papers online,
all data online and ensuring that the two interoperate on a stablepla orm).
It is vitally important to Africa, as it is globally, to be able to nego ate
the point of entry into this system at aﬀordable cost in order topar cipate in the global nexus of knowledge, informa on, innova on
and exchange. The issue of OA at aﬀordable cost is fundamental. In
prac cal terms this has taken two routes, the so-called green andgold [63].
a) Gold open accessThis is when an author publishes in an online open accessjournal, with the advantage of making publica ons freely
and immediately accessible. The open content license grants
wide-ranging exploita on rights, whilst immediate availability
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

39enhances dissemina on and the frequency of cita on. Publica on
costs are borne by the author, or by their ins tu on or funding
body on their behalf. Other advantages are that of peer review
before acceptance for online publica on, the readership baseassociated with the publisher is available to the author, and an
author benefits from measurement metrics such as the Impact
Factor that adds reputa on to their research (see however Box4.3) [64]. Gold downsides include Ar cle Processing Costs (APC)
and the signing away of author’s rights to the Online publisher.
b) Green open access
In Green Open Access, the peer-reviewed ar cle is available
on the publisher’s website, but behind a pay-wall, althoughauthors are permi ed to upload their post-print versions on theirown ins tu onal repositories. It does not oﬀer the same legal
framework for content licensing as in the Gold case. Exploita on
is only permi ed within the confines of copyright law, which inprinciple requires an author’s contract to be carefully reviewed
to enable an ar cle to be re-used in a way that fulfils all thelegal s pula ons [65]. Its advantages are: that published work is
freely available through self-archiving; an author can make thework openly available on an OA repository or their own website
while awai ng an open access publisher; it is not incompa blewith peer review as most works that are self-archived are peer
reviewed prior to publishing [66]. Its disadvantages are the needfor addi onal statements about quality, and the poten al toviolate the rights of a publisher, with whom an agreement would
be needed.
It is important to note that many authors rou nely violate
copyright agreements by placing published papers on online
academic network sites, reflec ng a rejec on by authors of an
exis ng system that is supposed to protect them. It is clear thatthe system is no longer fulfilling all the needs of its main market
and audience: scholarly researchers and the ins tu ons in which
they work.
40

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

The debates about costs and open access have inevitably raised thelevel of rhetoric, to the extent that many ra onally unsubstan atedclaims have been made. Tennant et al [67] have usefully summarised
these (see BOX 4.3).

BOX 4.3 - Ten myths about open access1. Pre-prints will get your research “scooped”. Preprints typicallyprovide a me-stamp and a DOI, thereby establishing the priorityof discovery.
2. Journal impact factors are a measure of quality. They are a flawed
metric, never intended for this use.
3. Peer review proves you can trust an ar cle. Current peer review
has a poor record of finding error. Post-publica on review is more
eﬃcient in this.
4. The quality of science suﬀers without peer review. There isno evidence for this. The integrity of the researcher is the key
determinant of quality.
5. Open access has created predatory publishers. Wrong, they haveflourished because of perversely excessive profits and the flawed
market in scien fic publishing.
6. Copyright transfer protects authors. They neither protect authors
nor benefit scien fic progress. They protect commercial publishers’
profits.
7. Gold open access is synonymous with the ar cle publishing charge(APC) business model. Most DOAJ-indexed journals do not have
APCs. They are funded from other sources.
8. Embargo periods on Green OA are needed to sustain publishers.
Tradi onal publishers can peacefully co-exist with zero-embargo,
self-archiving policies.
9. Web of Science and Scopus are global databases of knowledge.
Neither represent the sum of global knowledge, excluding much of
Africa, La n America, and South-East Asia.
10. Publishers add no value to the scholarly publica on process.
They are responsible for key func ons, including peer review
management and produc on and archiving final version ar cles.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

41

4.2.3 The dilemma of aﬀordability
Arguably, the cost of making the results of scien fic work freely
available as public goods [68] and of funding researchers to publish
their work, should not be excessive. In other domains an impact of thedigital revolu on has been drama cally to reduce cost. In scien fic
publishing, costs have risen year by year, o en at rates far in excess
of infla on. It is not diﬃcult to conclude that a grossly asymmetricbusiness model is the cause, one that overturns normal rela onships
between supply and demand, and where producers (researchers),
who are also consumers, have largely permi ed commercial suppliers
to manipulate the market, although there are increasingly hopefulsigns of a “peasants revolt”.
Given the inherent diﬃcul es in realising the benefits of OA, a
European consor um of funding agencies and councils (cOALITION
S [69]) from twelve member states of the European Union havelaunched Plan S, whose aim is to accelerate the transi on to full and
immediate open access to all scien fic publica ons by January 2021.
The aim is that any publica on created from data whose researchis financed with public funds should be published/archived on an
OA pla orm and be freely and openly accessible as a public good.
Plan S explicitly outlines processes and procedures for compliance[70]. In the plan, the APC would not be borne by the author/s, who
would retain their authorial rights, but by funding agencies. The
plan advocates publishing and archiving through the gold and green
routes. Lately, a new “diamond” route has been developed, in which
the author and reader would neither pay for publishing nor reading.
Plan S and its short metable reflects a determined European a empt
to achieve a “global flip” towards open access [71]. It requires that
papers must be freely accessible from the day of publica on witha CC BY licence. If widely implemented, it would mean that legacy
publishers (those with long back runs of journals) would have toreplace subscrip on revenues with ar cle-processing charges (APCs).
As legacy publishers dominate scholarly publishing, it would lead to anear universal pay-to-publish system, with APCs ranging from several
42

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

$100s to over $5,000 per ar cle. The consequences for Africa would
be that researchers could freely read research but be largely unable
to publish. There have been similar responses in La n America [72],and calls for regional solu ons. India on the other hand has signed
up to Plan S, though calling for caps on APCs.
cOAli on S has responded by saying that no one will be unable topublish for lack of funds. Does it mean that Europe would subsidise
the global south? Even if it were to, it will con nue to be necessary
to pay subscrip ons for content already pay-walled. Publish-andRead agreements (PARs [73]) are an interes ng development, where
rights to access pay-walled content are combined with OA publishingrights. A similar approach is developing in North America where theUniversity of California is seeking to force Elsevier in this direc on.
Egypt launched a similar portal called the Egyp an Knowledge Bank
(EKB) in 2016 [74], which provides free-at-the-point-of-use accessto content from interna onal publishers to all 92 million Egyp an
ci zens.
The Global South has an advantage however as many journals are
s ll government-funded and run by universi es, not outsourced tofor-profit companies, and are therefore much cheaper to operate.
The dilemma is that the historically eminent journals of the Global
North, that are largely in commercial hands, tend to dominate global
a en on to the detriment of the south. An alterna ve strategy
would be to support exis ng APC free journals, create new ones forthe publish element, and nego ate ci zen-wide na onal licensing
deals for the read element, using the many ins tu onal repositories
that have been established in universi es [75]. Despite concerted
eﬀort to enlist membership from Africa, only one country, Zambia,
has signed up to Plan S [76]. One reason for the resistance has been
the view that Africa needs a home-grown alterna ve, although thisis yet to materialise. Valuable insights by Dominique Babini [77] from
La n America may provide a useful exemplar for Africa.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

43

These are issues that the Science Gran ng Councils will need toaddress if they are to pursue the opportuni es oﬀered by OpenScience. It is fortunate that there is increasing dissa sfac on withthe current commercial science publishing regime, no lack of radical
ideas and an increasing number of poten al allies. The Interna onal
Science Council’s new ac on plan [78] iden fies scien fic publishing
as a priority issue. The Science Gran ng Councils should ensure thatthey engage with the ISC over this issue.
4.2.4 The contribu on of African knowledge
Despite Africa’s surging interest in the Internet and other digitalcomputa onal technologies [79], its par cipa on in the crea onof culturally relevant knowledge is negligible in comparison to theglobal north. As an example, a landscape survey by the Academy of
Science South Africa (ASSAf) on Open Science/Open Data ini a ves
in Africa [80] reported an es mate of around “0.74% of global
scien fic knowledge” as Africa’s contribu on. Several reasons could
explain why this may be so: African scien fic research outputs are
not adequately visible on the internet as they are locked away
behind pay-walls, and open access online journals have only begun
to make an impact. The African Journal Online (AJOL [81] lamentsthat “mainly due to diﬃcul es of accessing them, African-publishedresearch papers have been under-u lised, under-valued and undercited in both the interna onal and the African research arenas”. Theinternet oﬀers ways of changing this, but many hundreds of worthy,
peer-reviewed scholarly journals publishing from Africa cannot hosttheir content online in isola on because of resource limita ons andthe digital divide.
Consequently, the bulk of global knowledge on the internet comesfrom the USA, Canada, Europe, China and Australia. It conflicts
with the expecta on that OA would maximise access and reduce
inequali es among the scien fic communi es. Professor SanchezAzofeifa of the University of Alberta, Canada [82] has drawn a en on
to the fact that open access is now a very exclusive club, dominated44Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

by a few developed countries. Unless Africa can create more content,
the non-African content will penetrate increasingly deeply into
African scien fic communi es, to the detriment of African context.
If OA and publishing are to unleash innova on and crea vity in the
African scien fic community, there needs to be a dis nc ve African
contribu on that is highly relevant to its communi es. In his keynote
address to the Southern African Research Innova on Management
Associa on (SARIMA) conference (March 23 – 25, 2017), Dr.
Mangwende, NEPAD agency head of the STI cluster, argued that
innova on and cultural context were interlinked, and that Africa could
not innovate if she le her cultural context behind. “We need data
to innovate, and Africa has a strong narra ve and cultural context,
so let us use this data to support Africa’s development narra ve”[83]. This must not however be a monocultural lens. Compared withother con nents, Africa’s cultural diversity is immense. This diversity
should become a strength, not a weakness. Hence, deliberate open
access policies across Africa, designed to s mulate par cipa on
and penetra on of African produced knowledge and innova on
are ma ers of priority. African repositories with major absorp ve
capaci es should be developed, replica ng the model of AJOL whichhas 500 journals across Africa. It would be a good star ng point.
4.2.5 Barriers to eﬃcient delivery
In summary there are a number of barriers to eﬃcient delivery of
OA that need to be addressed. Some are global problems, some areproblems of development:a) business models of publica on with inadequate balances
between publisher profit and scien fic need;b) inadequate protocols for access to data and publica on;c) infrastructural and network constraints across Africa, intermi ent
power supply generally in sub-Saharan Africa, which, unresolved
have the poten al to severely limit the poten al of open science
for Africa.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

45

4.3 Open to society
4.3.1 Why?
The public good argument for open data and open access and theirroles as s muli to innova on is fundamental, and the ul mate
jus fica on for public funding of science. It is also fundamental to theconcept of open science. If scien fic knowledge created by the open
processes discussed in the previous two sec ons (4.1 and 4.2) does
not in prac ce find its way into the hands of societal stakeholders
to whose work, innova ve ins nct or pleasure it is relevant, it
would be merely “science talking to itself”. If the processes of open
access scien fic publica on fulfilled the crucial condi on of deeply
dissemina ng scien fic understanding into society, open sciencewould indeed need to entail no more than open data and open accesspublishing; the duo that we primarily address in this paper. It is selfevident however that scien fic publishing does not adequately fulfill
this condi on, and therefore that open science must be concernedwith its openness to society beyond formal scien fic publishing.
This issue is deeply relevant to the present era. Unarguably it isan era that needs to hear the voice of science more than ever totackle many of the profound challenges that global society faces,
many of them embedded in the sustainable development goals:
but society has arguably become less inclined to listen. The present
era is characterized by an increasingly fragmented and polarizedpoli cal and media environment, in which science is less influen al
in shaping public opinion than appeals to emo on and beliefs basedon personal experience or prejudice. While levels of public trust inscience remain rela vely high, pervasive digital technologies and theubiquity of social media enable the widespread dissemina on of fakenews and of misleading and biased informa on. This in turn feeds
new expressions of science denialism, casts doubt on the need forscien fic understanding and interpreta on, and threatens evidenceinformed decision making in policy and public ac on. It poses afundamental – and pernicious – a ack on the public value of science,
which in turn undermines eﬀorts to build a robust global science
46

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

system. This aﬀects all scien fic fields, all types of research, and allscien fic communi es around the world. It is of great concern, as our
future health and survival depend on the adop on by governmentsof policies that have a sound scien fic basis. The case for a publicly
engaged open science is unanswerable.
4.3.2 Societal stakeholders and open innova on
The eﬃcient dissemina on of scien fic knowledge into society isvital as feedstock for innova on, in government, in business and insociety. It is most eﬃcient when two condi ons are met: that welltested scien fic findings are made rapidly accessible in the publicdomain, and that the knowledge is comprehensible to the largest
number that may be able to use it in beneficial ways.
The term innova on has come to be used as a jargon term, restricted
to commercial innova on. We use it here in its proper sense of
crea ng something new. If society is to flourish and to overcome
its many current challenges, the simula on of innova on must be
directed to all parts of society. This larger sense of open innova on
is important for our common future. Its commercial sense, ofpromo ng an informa on age mindset towards innova on that runs
counter to the secrecy and silo mentality of tradi onal corporate
research labs, is equally applicable to government, and indeed toscience itself. A consequence of this view is that knowledge shouldbe openly available in ways that respect the needs and absorp ve
capaci es of all sectors of society and the open data value chain
needs to respect both supply and demand.
4.3.3 How?
The role of publicly funded scien sts in business-facing innova on
has developed greatly in recent years, par cularly in universi es,
and has become widely accepted. The broader public engagementof science has also been strongly promoted. Ini ally this was badged
as “public understanding of science”, implying that the central issue
was a public deficit in scien fic understanding, and all that wasOpen Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

47required was for ci zens to understand more science in order toaccept scien fically based pronouncements. The error of this viewis powerfully represented by the failure to persuade many in society
on issues where the scien fic evidence is strong. We now speak ofpublic engagement, a two-way process of dialogue in which scienceengages more deeply with business, policymakers, governments,
communi es and ci zens as knowledge partners in ways that increase
both eﬀec veness and legi macy. In the changing world describedin 4.3.1, it is increasingly diﬃcult for governments to act on major
issues without deeper public consent.
The game-changing development that has the poten al to enable
such developments to flourish is the modern, global communica on
network. If the process of developing open science networks in Africa
progresses, careful thought is needed about how this might happen,
bearing in mind the capacity of the web to spread misinforma on.
A careful analysis of the parallel development of engagement
processes that are sensi ve to and capitalize on Africa’s cultures isneeded, though beyond the immediate scope of this report.
4.3.4 Ci zen science
An important development of recent years has been that of so-called“ci zen science”. This has developed as a mode of scien fic research
conducted by non-professional scien sts. It is frequently carried out
in associa on with formal, professional scien fic programmes or withprofessional scien sts [84], [85], [86]. The degree of organisa on,embedded within a professional eﬀort, associated with it, or en rely
independent, varies greatly, as does the degree of eﬀort or sustained
involvement from par cipants. The most popular are associatedwith nature in such programmes as iNaturalist [87], eBird [88] andZooniverse [89].

48Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

There is significant African engagement with such ini a ves and anumber developing from within Africa involve a growing body ofpeople and data, par cularly in the domain of nature conserva on,for example in the Tropical Biology Associa on-led “Ci zen Sciencein Africa” programme [90]. An extension of the ci zen science model
into schools could have major impact on the science literacy of therising genera on. Important though these ini a ves are however,they are only part of the “open to society” agenda, the main thrustof which is not interest in science for its own sake, but the needs ofsociety where the engagement in science is a crucial component.
Box 4.4 Recommenda ons for Science Gran ng Councils on:
Essen als of open science prac ce
Open Data• Adopt and mandate standards and create advice capacity for
research data management• Plan for movement towards a FAIR data regime• Adopt and mandate standards for data cita on• Mandate crea ve commons licensing for SGC-funded research• Support an ini a ve to create a cu ng edge, distributed AI
capacity• Create governance structures to oversee ethical data access anduseOpen Access publishing• Engage with interna onal eﬀorts on costs and access for:• text and data mining• public access to scien fic publica ons• scien sts’ access to publica on vehicles• Create a task force to devise an op mal publishing model for
AfricaOpen to Society• Adopt a broad view of innova on priori es – business,governance, society• Develop a ci zen science strategy and its poten al for schools

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

49

5. The poten al of open sciencesystems: case studies of pla orms
and commons
Chapter 5 describes the diversity of func ons and related technicalskills that are required to cope with the research data deluge andits diversity. It would be highly ineﬃcient for every researcher or
research group working in data-rich fields to develop their own
capaci es to handle their own data in the ways described above.
To do so would either submerge the individual or group in a tangleof data, create confusion in data management thereby undermining
the prospect of crea ng FAIR data, or deter them from working in adata-rich environment, in addi on to crea ng a confusing plethoraof incompa ble data management systems. It has proved far more
eﬃcient at ins tu onal, disciplinary, na onal, or interna onal levels
to scale up the eﬀort and develop well-managed services in the formof open science pla orms or commons that serve a wide community.
These recognize that the individual func ons described in chapter
4 are inter-related, all parts of system of func ons, rather thanbeing stand-alones. Ini a ves to create open science or open datapla orms or commons are designed to provide more or less seamlessprovision of support, from IT infrastructure to high-level analy cand AI procedures, and in many cases, not merely in the provisionof infrastructural support but also in direct involvement in thema cscience priori es. They free domain scien sts to concentrate on their
immediate priori es rather than ac ng as amateur data scien sts.
They may operate at the level of individual disciplines or a wide range
disciplines, or at na onal or regional levels. We here summarise
50

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

a number of such pla orms and the issues from their opera onal
func ons, costs, governance, principles and prac ces, impacts oran cipated impacts, to draw lessons that might be applicable to theAfrican context and the roles of the Science Gran ng Councils.
5.1 Interna onal disciplinary group: bioinforma cs ELIXIR
programme
ELIXIR is an intergovernmental organisa on that brings together life
science resources from across Europe [91]. These resources include
databases, so ware tools, training materials, cloud storage andsupercompu ng access. The goal of ELIXIR is to coordinate theseresources so that they form a single infrastructure. This infrastructure
makes it easier for scien sts to find and share data, exchange
exper se, and agree on best prac ces. Its long-term purpose is to help
scien sts gain new insights into how living organisms work. ELIXIR
includes 23 na onal members and over 220 research organisa ons.
It was founded in 2014, and is currently implemen ng its second
five-year scien fic programme. Its opera onal structure is based ona series of integrated pla orms as follows:
Compute Pla orm develops ways that researchers across Europe
can access, store, transfer and analyse large amounts of life science
data.
Data Pla orm iden fies key data resources across Europe andsupports the linkages between data and literature e.g. by making iteasier to move from a scien fic paper to the dataset on which thepaper was based.
Tools Pla orm provides ways for researchers to find the best so wareto analyse their data.
Interoperability Pla orm establishes Europe-wide standards thatcan be used to describe life science data, and makes diﬀerent data
sets easier to compare and analyse.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

51

Training Pla orm helps scien sts and developers find the training
they need, and also provides that training.
Communi es Pla orm develops communi es, standards, databases
and tools in selected life science domains (e.g. Marine Metagenomics,
Human Data).
Its governance structure is defined by the ELIXIR Consor um
Agreement as:
ELIXIR Board: the highest decision-making body.
Scien fic Advisory Board: advises the Board on ELIXIR’s scien fic
strategy and reviews Node applica ons.
Industry Advisory Commi ee: gives advice and guidance on industry
needs.
Director: responsible to the ELIXIR Board for implemen ng ELIXIR’s
scien fic programme.
Heads of Nodes commi ee: consists of the Director and the heads ofthe ELIXIR na onal infrastructures (Nodes). The Commi ee develops
ELIXIR’s scien fic and technical strategy, including its scien fic
programmes.
The ELIXIR Hub is located at the Wellcome Genome Campus in
Cambridge, UK. It accommodates execu ve management andadministra ve staﬀ. It is responsible for developing and delivering
the scien fic strategy, coordina ng the services run from the ELIXIR
Nodes, suppor ng governance bodies, working with other biomedical
science infrastructures to address the challenges of Big Data, leading
communica ons and external rela ons ac vi es, suppor ng theins tu ons within the Nodes and collabora ng with na onal andEuropean funders and policy-makers. The cost of the ELIXIR Hub overa five-year period, 2014-2018, was £5M.
52

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

An ELIXIR Node is a collec on of research ins tutes within amember country, and is responsible for the resources and services
that are part of ELIXIR. Each Node has a lead ins tute that oversees
the work of that Node. The Norwegian node for example, comprisesa lead ins tute at the University of Bergen, together with fourother ins tutes. The Nodes build on the strengths of the scien fic
communi es of that country. The European Molecular Biology
Laboratory is an intergovernmental organisa on and the only Nodenot associated with a specific country.
ELIXIR has a mixed funding model with contribu ons coming froma number of mostly public sources. The Hub is funded throughmembership fees paid by member countries. Nodes are typicallyfunded through na onal-level investments, suppor ng na onal
coordina on, and the development and opera on of services. Itsscience programmes compete for grant funding from the European
Union, na onal funding bodies and some interna onal funders (e.g.
US Na onal Ins tute of Health). Some Nodes are able to access
European Union Structural Funds that are allocated to developing
areas within the Union.

5.2 Interna onal Disciplinary Group: Pan African Bioinforma cs
Network for the Human Heredity and Health in Africa - H3ABioNet (89)
It is par cularly helpful to contrast the preceding European eﬀort
to create a major open science bioinforma cs enterprise withan analogous eﬀort in Africa. H3ABioNet [92] was established todevelop bioinforma cs capacity in Africa and specifically to support
genomic data analysis by H3Africa researchers across the con nent.
It develops human capacity through training and support for data
analysis, facilitates access to informa cs infrastructure by developing
or providing access to pipelines and tools for human, microbiome
and pathogen genomic data analysis. Its mandate is to develop androll out a coordinated bioinforma cs research infrastructure that is
ghtly coupled to a sophis cated pan-African bioinforma cs training
programme (90).
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

53

The development and applica on of eﬀec ve genomic medicine
is heavily dependent upon the ability to aggregate and analyze
large data sets and to interpret and disseminate knowledge across
mul ple biomedical disciplines. In Africa, there are few centres ofexper se where large numbers of clinicians, genome scien sts,
and bioinforma cians are situated to jointly perform compe ve
genomic medical research. As part of a strategy to develop cri cal
mass through intra-African collabora on, as echoed in the STI 2024
Strategy for Africa (see also 3.3), African bioinforma cs groups have,over the last 10 years, been collabora ng to develop the capacity
to perform globally compe ve research on public and local data
sets, in spite of the geographical distances separa ng them [94].
These eﬀorts recently received a major funding boost that catalyzed
the nascent African genomics research community through thecrea on of H3Africa Bioinforma cs Network (H3ABioNet), which wasestablished with a grant from the US Na onal Ins tutes of Health(NIH) Common Fund, as part of its contribu ons to the Human
Heredity and Health in Africa ini a ve [95], [96].
The consor um is based on a system of collabora ng nodes. The
network, which is run from a central node at the University of CapeTown, consists of more than 30 nodes across 15 African countries [97]with one partner in the United States and one in the United Kingdom.
The ins tu ons range in their current capacity from full nodes with atrack record in bioinforma cs research, training, and support; throughassociate nodes with some bioinforma cs ac vi es; to development
nodes with li le or no bioinforma cs capacity. Altogether, thenetwork funds more than 40 staﬀ and students and includes morethan 80 addi onal members who contribute to H3ABioNet ac vi es.
The nodes collec vely provide excellent exper se in diﬀerent areasof bioinforma cs including func onal genomics, human popula ongene cs, GWAS and NGS analysis, microbiome analysis, SNP linked
protein structure analysis, and biomedical and clinical data storageand management.

54

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

The consor um faces a number of high priority challenges that need
to be overcome to enable genomics research and compe venesson the con nent. These include, poor internet connec vity, data
access, transfer and remote compu ng; lack of significant compu ng
infrastructure for data storage and processing; lack of bioinforma cs
skills in clinical gene cs and genomics teams performing genomics
research; and disparate pockets of bioinforma cs exper se acrossthe con nent. There is an important contrast here with the ELIXIR
programme. Although both are designed to work on analogous
issues for which the approaches of open science are essen al, ELIXIR
can depend on high levels of computa onal, networking and cloudcapaci es that are provided by European states and the European
Union as a ma er of course for their science systems, whereas
H3ABioNet has to confront these issues itself and throughout its
network, and to perennially make the case for their development.
With ELIXIR, the case is already accepted at na onal and European
Union levels such that their requests for development are accepted
as parts of ongoing science system planning processes.
Major objec ve of H3ABioNet therefore are to develop humanresources through the training of bioinforma cians and researchersin computa onal techniques and to develop a robust, con nentwide research infrastructure that provides access to bioinforma cs
tools, compu ng resources, and technical and data management
exper se. Network ac vi es are being achieved through dedicatedworking groups and task forces comprising representa ves frommul ple countries. Full nodes, including those situated abroad, arehelping to build capacity in the less resourced nodes, thus, ensuring
the transfer and dissemina on of knowledge and skills within Africa.
Some nodes have already or plan to set up their own bioinforma cs
centres dedicated to training and research in bioinforma cs.
Long-term sustainability is a key objec ve of the network but is notrealis cally achievable within the first five years of its existence.
However, the project has increased compu ng facili es and provided
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

55

for eBioKits in many nodes, which will remain in place beyond theend of the five-year project. In Egypt, H3ABioNet funds facilitatedestablishment of an eBioKit-based computer laboratory connectedto the internet. Joint collabora ve project funding proposals arebeing developed using bilateral agreements between some ofthe par cipa ng countries, and mul -ins tu on research project
proposals have been submi ed to funding agencies in response to
specific calls.
5.3 Interna onal, mul -disciplinary open science system: European
Open Science Strategy(h ps://ec.europa.eu>research>openscience)
The European Union research strategy recognises an ongoing majortransi on in how research is performed and how knowledge isshared. In response it has adopted an ambi ous strategy that seeks
to make open science a reality across all its member states.
It contrasts with the two previous examples in being a top-down
policy-driven ini a ve in contrast to being science-driven, althoughscien fic researchers are involved in advising on its policies. The othercontrast lies in its being designed to address the interests of a wide
range of varying needs from the whole science community such thatno single science agenda that is able to a ract enthusiasms of a welldefined disciplinary group is par cularly targeted. The Commission
does however have a powerful means of persuasion in the form of:• its annual science budget of mul -billion euros [98], part ofwhich can be targeted on developing take-up by researchers of
its open science priori es;• its ability to provide access to high end compu ng and cloud
facili es which can again be condi onal on adherence to open
science prac ces;
• its power to require data created through Commission-funded
programmes to be deposited in open access repositories and to
publish in open access journals as condi ons of grant, and as will
be mandated by its projects.
56

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

The Commission has set in place several open science policies andmandates in its framework programmes, par cularly:• strategies for promo ng economic growth, job crea on,transna onal coopera on, access to and transfer of scien fic
knowledge;• policies promo ng open access to scien fic publica ons anddata;• recommenda ons to EU Members States to implement open
access policies;• strategies to promote ci zen science in more inclusive,transparent and accessible ways.
The problems that its policies face are common ones:• incen ves in na onal systems that do not align with EU priori es;• diﬃcul es in achieving interoperability between diverse data
streams and managing heterogeneous data systems that are
par cularly prevalent in some disciplines;• discrepancies between per capita funding and the maturity ofdiﬀerent European science systems;• governance that is contained within the European Commission,
and which does not necessarily reflect na onal priori es.
The strategy’s s component parts are:
The Open Science Policy Pla orm with the role to advise theCommission and act as a consul ng body for all European open
science policies and the development of a Science Policy Agenda toradically improve the quality and impact of European science acrossmember states and interna onally.
The European Open Science Cloud designed to provide a public datarepository which conforms to open science values. It is projected to
become a reality by 2020. It aspires to be Europe’s virtual environment
for all researchers to store, manage, analyse and re-use data forresearch, innova on and educa onal purposes. It is also intended
that data submi ed to the system should progressively conform to
FAIR data principles.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

57

Open Access Publica on policies that require all projects receiving
Horizon 2020 funding to make sure that any peer-reviewed journal
ar cle that they publish is openly accessible, free of charge.
The EU Ci zen Science Pla orm is designed to support the ac vi es ofindividuals and groups wishing to undertake ci zen science projects.
It will be interes ng to observe how the projects undertaken on thispla orm evolve.
The structure of governance of the European Open Science Cloud(EOSOC) is planned to be based on three layers:
Strategic Layer comprising a board that combines state-of-theart exper se on scien fic cloud infrastructures with the Funders
and Policy Makers. It will therefore include EU Member States andAssociated Countries representa ves. It will mainly make strategic
decisions on the development and evolu on of the EOSOC.
Execu ve Layer comprising an execu ve board to manage dayto-day opera on of the EOSC and procurers, and designing andplanning work-related future developments. It is the only full- me
staﬀed layer, will be supported by Working Groups, and will havethe responsibility of ensuring that user needs are met and strategic
requirements addressed.
Stakeholder Layer organised in the form of a stakeholders’ forum toprovide a medium for stakeholders (users (consumers), providers andIntermediaries of EOSC Resources). This would have the main role ofdiscussing, supervising and channelling communica on between the
EOSC and the communi es across all three layers.
5.4 Poten al lessons for an African ini a ve
It is important to recognise that the purpose of this report is to explore
whether there are benefits to African science and its applica on indeveloping open science approaches, and if so to suggest how thismight best be done. The examples above are of systemic rather than
58

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

piecemeal approaches. They are based on strong collabora on andcommon purpose. The way that they integrate resources from aninterna onal network to support a common infrastructure embeds
cost eﬃcient economies of scale that is a poten ally a rac ve example
to Africa and to the interests of the SGCI. They are a demonstra onof the case made for cost eﬀec veness in 3.3. They have also beencost eﬀec ve in genera ng good science and s mula ng innova on.
How is this best achieved?
5.4.1 Enthusing scien sts
Even when they work in teams, as they increasingly do, scien sts tend
to be driven by an individualis c curiosity for discovery in their chosen
fields, not by the desire to use novel technologies nor develop new
ways of collabora on. They are means to ends rather than ends inthemselves. In the cases of ELIXIR and H3ABioNet, successful bo omup developments have occurred because of the overt poten al of
openness and a shared technological capacity to achieve scien fic
ends. The European Open Science ini a ves represent work inprogress where it is too early to judge success. In some overtly dataintensive fields, such as high-energy physics or cosmology, the OpenScience Cloud is a powerful s mulator of enthusiasm because of theimmediate poten al it oﬀers for discovery. In others, the pathways toscien fic discovery through open science are more arduous becauseof the technical complexity of the data-intensive challenge. This iswhere the financial leverage of the European Commission is a potent
driver of behaviour.
In the African case, the financial leverage of the Science Gran ng
Councils, though significant, is propor onately less than its European
Commission counterpart, as much funding for science comes fromoutwith the con nent. We have li le doubt but that scien fic
poten al must be a key driver, in which the development of open
science prac ces goes hand-in-hand with funding of priority issues
in ways that strongly favour intra-African collabora on and deliver
the benefits summarised in 3.3. Obvious science priori es are such
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

59

as those iden fied in the 2024 STI Strategy for Africa, such as theburden of disease [99], sustainable agriculture, resilient ci es,
disaster risk reduc on etc., where intra-African collabora on
supported by open science processes have the poten al to create thevirtual cri cal masses of eﬀort and engagement of funders that could
yield substan al benefits in these fields as well as crea ng powerfulcapacity in African science systems. Such programmes, embedded inopen science prac ces, should be designed not only to deliver value
in themselves in the specific field, but also to act as demonstrators
to the wider African community of governments, policymakers
and scien sts of the value of the open science approach and more
important s ll, to act as s mulus to vitalize African science.
5.4.2 Enthusing engagement through inclusive structures
ELIXIR and H3ABioNet have a similar structure: a central hub withresponsibility to plan overall strategy, service governance andcoordinate the network; and na onal nodes that support work in
na onal ins tu ons in ways that are sensi ve to the level of na onal
science system maturity. This structure seems highly relevant to theAfrican need, delivering a common supra-na onal strategy whilst
being sensi ve to na onal issues. For nodes, a careful strategicbalance would need to be struck between na onal priori es, thepoten al of a network to deliver the high-level, long-term benefitsof s mula on of intra-African collabora on and the development of
virtual cri cal masses.
The hub/nodes structure could also be one that is well a uned tofunding poten al. With major interna onal funders such as theWorld Bank and Development Agencies poten ally being able tosupport a hub together with na onal contribu ons, and nodes being
funded na onally and through external funders that tradi onallyfund specific countries. Such a structure could also map well onto
the coordina on pa erns necessary for essen al collabora on with
Na onal Research and Educa on Networks (NRENs).

60

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

5.4.3 Addressing specific barriers
There are a series of barriers that are Implicit in the examples above,and in the long experience interna onally of providing common
resources for science, that need to be taken into account when
crea ng such systems.
a) Trust/Competence. It is inevitable that some degree ofcentraliza on of eﬀort is required, whether a par cular facility(e.g. high performance compu ng, cloud management, expensive
experimental facility) is located in one place or whether (as in
ELIXIRor H3ABioNet) it is a node in a network of nodes. There areseveral fundamental requirements:• that the centre or node has relevant exper se;• that it is trusted by partners;• that it has a highly professional management;• that is has eﬃcient and eﬀec ve governance structures.
The centre or node must operate for the benefit of the partnershipand not primarily for its own local advantage. Its remit andstructure of governance must act and be seen to act to the benefitof the network and in response to agreed priori es. Access to thefacility’s capaci es should favour all partners equally.
b) Connec vity. The developing network should therefore priori se
minimal levels of eﬀec ve connec vity. This is a major challenge
for Africa where connec vity is a non-negligible barrier for accessto science materials because of low internet access rate. E.g., in
Sub-Saharan Africa, only 22% in average (range = [1 - 59%]) of the
popula on have access to the internet [100].
c) Data protec veness. Not all ins tu ons or states in Africa areready to go from protec ng data to oﬀering open access. Even
if open science has recognized benefits, it is also the case that
individual researchers will feel threatened by such openness.
Researchers generally share their data if they have guarantee orif they feel to be in a win-win collabora on (e.g., recogni on of
their work in the resul ng publica ons, exchanges in terms ofOpen Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

61

knowledge, experimental protocols or equipment allowing themto raise their technical level).
d) Intellectual property (IP). Diﬀerent states have diﬀerent IP
regula ons or laws that influence data use and sharing, andvarying approaches to copyright. Ideally they need to behomogenized or to be brought under a common conven on thatminimizes barriers to exchange and sharing.
e) Confiden ality. Data on human subjects in par cular is a sensi ve
ma er that will need strong, agreed regula on within any open
science ini a ve (see 4.1.7).
f) Language. Sub-Saharan Africa is home to four non-African
languages, English, French, Portuguese, Arabic and many African
language groups. An open science ini a ve will need to takethis issue seriously, partly because much of Africa’s meaningfulproduc on of knowledge for innova on cannot be readily
separated from its indigenous linguis c and cultural contexts(see discussion in 4.2.2).
g) Security. Protec ve security measures are vital in preven ng
unauthorized access to computers, databases and websites andin protec ng data from corrup on. It will be necessary to build
conven onal and secure data sharing infrastructures to promoteexchange [101].
h) Incen ves. Many of the current incen ves for academics areeﬀec ve barriers to open science. They are discussed further in
7.3.2.

62

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Box 5. Recommenda ons for Science Gran ng Councils on:
A systemic approach to open science in which its tools are embedded• Collabora ve systems (pla orms or commons) are powerfulmean of delivering the essen als of open science prac ce• They create:• Eﬃcient and accessible services• Economies of scale• Impact and voice through intra-na onal coordina on ofeﬀort• They should also focus on:• Major programmes of pan-African relevance to enthusescien sts and create virtual cri cal masses• A hub and network of nodes to ensure both na onal
commitment and eﬀec ve coordina on• Recognise and address the prac cal issues that perenniallyarise in providing services for science

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

63

6. The evolving landscape of open
science in Africa
Chapter 6 describes the purposes and structures of currently
opera onal open science enterprises and draws a number of lessons
such as establishment of collabora ve systems that form a hub thatis eﬃcient, focuses on key agenda of the region and at the same me
creates economies of scale. These prac ces are poten ally applicable
to an open science ini a ve that the Science Funding Councils mightchoose to launch which would build on some of the experiences ofopen science in Africa and apply lessons learned elsewhere. Figure
6.1 shows examples of open science ini a ves in Africa. We now
assess the evolving landscape in sub-Saharan Africa on which an
ini a ve would need to build.
EthiopiaOpen
Data/AccessPolicyTanzania
TODI - D Lab
South Africa-Policy,-RDM-SKA

Zambia- Plan S
SenegalPart of a node
H3 BioInforma cs
network

Ethiopia
Botswana
ODOS
Forum

Burkina Faso
Government
Open Science
WebsiteAgridata - BF

GODAN
West
Africa
Egypt
EKB

AOSA?

AOSP
Kenya,JKUAT,VIZ AFRICA
OD4D

Figure 6.1 Examples of Open Science Ini a ves in Africa

64Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

6.1 Science in sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa spends less than 1% of the global expenditure
on research and development (Figures 6.1 and 6.2). La n America
and the Caribbean account for 3%; Europe 27%; Asia 31%, and North
America 37% [102]. The result is that Africa contributes a meagre
0.74% (Bank, 2014) to the global research output, although a WorldBank Study showed a marked increase from 0.44% in 2003 to 0.72%
in 2012. African countries’ expenditure on research and development
is low as a percentage of their GDP [103], which contrasts with theirdevelopmental goals and aspira ons [104]. Although Sub-SaharanAfrica gained an addi onal percentage point of world popula on
between 2007 and 2013 (to 12.5%), its gross domes c product (GDP)grew by just 0.3% and gross domes c expenditure on R&D (GERD)
by just 0.1% [105]. This has le very li le lee-way for the funding
necessary to enhance the performance of their universi es andother higher learning ins tu ons and to develop the capaci es that
contribute to development and innova on in their economies.
However, several countries have seen strong growth in their scien fic
produc on, including Ethiopia, Ghana, Mozambique and Rwanda.
Although South Africa accounted for 46% of sub-Saharan Africa’s
publica ons in 2014, low-income countries such as Benin and Gambia
have scien fic produc vity levels (ar cles per million inhabitants)
comparable to those of middle-income economies. Ethiopia (0.61%
in 2013), Kenya (0.79% in 2010) and Mali (0.66% in 2010) have all
increased their R&D eﬀort (GERD as a percentage of GDP) in recent
years to the level of a middle-income economy. Malawi's reported
commitment of 1.06% of GDP to R&D is ques onable given current
constraints on na onal budgets. However, if these sta s cs were to
be relied upon, Malawi would claim the highest ra o in Africa with
its scien sts publishing more in mainstream journals – rela ve to
GDP – than any other country of a similar popula on size [106].
Although these la er developments are encouraging, a consequenceof low investment is that sub-Saharan countries consume research
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

65

outputs from outside the con nent, but contribute very li lefrom their own resources. They depend heavily on interna onal
collabora on and visi ng academics for their research output.
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Asia

North
America

Europe2017

Russia2018

Middle EastSouth
America

Africa2019

Figure 6.2. Regional contribu ons to global R&D expenditure

Such collaborators bring grants and technical exper se tocomplement the work of local counterparts. In 2012 for example,
southern Africa, east Africa, and west and central Africa produced
79%, 70%, and 45% of all their research output, respec vely, throughinterna onal collabora ons (see also Fig. 6.4). Ironically, intra-Africa
collabora on remains poor. World Bank data show that collabora onamong local researchers in sub-Saharan Africa range from 0.9% inwest and central Africa to 2.9% in southern Africa [107]. Observers ofAfrican researchers a emp ng to work together cite several barriers
to intra-Africa collabora ons that span from the geographical, to thepoli cal, linguis c [108] and financial.

66

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Figure 6.3. Gross Expenditure on R &D as a propor on of GDP by country in Africa

78.
1

Mozambique
BurkinaF aso

59.6

Uganda

57.3
47.1

Kenya
40.5

Senegal
Ghana

31.2

Ethiopia

30

SouthA frica

12.1

Togo

11.7

Malawi
Zimbabwe

6.2
2.9

2010 or latest year available

Figure 6.4. Propor on of funding for selected African states R & D from outside thecon nent (World Bank)
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

67Notwithstanding the sustained eﬀorts of some donors in support ofspecific countries, or on specific science priori es, the overall impact
is arguably less than it might be. Donor aid is likely to reflect thedonor’s priority rather than necessarily responding to the recipient’s
top priority, much is rela vely short term and project-based rather
than sustained and strategic, and many donors required a recipient
contribu on, typically of the order of 20-40%, which many poten al
recipients are unable to aﬀord. It would be a great improvement if
the Science Gran ng Council’s ini a ve could develop by presen ng
a coherent view of an op mal medium to long-term science strategy
that might best serve Africa’s needs, by engagement with external
donors through a joint forum. These are issues to which we return inchapter 8.
That being said, there are scien fic highlights in sub-SaharanAfrica. South Africa stands out as having the greatest number of
researchers per million inhabitants and by far the greatest output
in terms of scien fic publica ons and patents. With nearly a thirdof their publica ons in chemistry, engineering, mathema cs andphysics, South Africa and Mauri us stand out as being more akin todeveloped countries than the other countries of the Southern African
Development Community (SADC) or of sub-Saharan Africa as a whole,where research tends to favour bio-medical science and geosciences[109], reflec ng priori es for health and primary mineral extrac on
respec vely. The African Ins tute for Mathema cal Sciences (AIMS)[110] is a pan-African ini a ve that has been highly crea ve informing excellent scien sts. The Next Einstein Forum [111], that is
pan-African in inspira on, shows that Africa has the talents that itneeds. What seems to be needed are ins tu onal frameworks andscience structures across Africa that create opportuni es and provide
con nuing support to nourish the talents of the con nent and support
intra-African ini a ves. Figure 6.5 illustrates important elements ofthe developing ins tu onal framework in Africa. Addi onally, it isvital to have recogni on by African governments, both individuallyand collec vely, that support for the science base and associated68Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

educa on is the single most vital investment that African society
can make for its future vitality. It is here that the Science Gran ng
Councils can be so vital, in represen ng a powerful and coherent viewto their governments and to external donor agencies of the priori es
for African science, whilst coordina ng their mutual priori es within
the states that they represent.

Figure 6.5. Ins tu onal commitments to science in Africa(African Open Science Pla orm pilot)

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

69

6.2 Sub-Saharan Africa’s status in the open science movement
The pa ern of engagement with the global open science movement
and Africa’s place in this developing patchwork (2016) is shown in
Figure 6.6.

Figure 6.6. The Global Open Data Barometer 2016 (108)The basis on which the African assessment was created is:a) Opera onal open science projects of interna onal significance:• The H3ABionet project (H3ABioNet, 2019 that we describe in
5.2.
• The South African Na onal Biodiversity Ins tute (SANBI) isa major node of the Global Biodiversity Informa on Facility[112] which hosts biodiversity informa on to make it freely
available on the internet so that policy makers, managers andresearchers can make well-informed decisions that contributeto sustainable development. • DataFirst is the only African database that has the CoreTrustSealof the Interna onal Science Council’s World Data System [113].
70

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

It provides a trusted repository service for SA and other Africanusers, with training and research on the quality and usability ofdata.
• AAS Open Research [114] is a pla orm for rapid publica on
and open peer review for researchers. It enables researchers
to publish any research they wish to share, suppor ng
reproducibility, transparency and impact. It uses an open
research publishing model, including all suppor ng data,reanalyses, replica on and reuse. Key benefits include: all typesof research can be published rapidly, standard research ar cles,
clinical trial findings, systema c reviews, study protocols, data
sets, results, and case reports. It supports research assessment
based on the intrinsic value of the research, not the venue of
publica on, and reduces the barrier to collabora ve researchthrough data sharing, transparency and a ribu on.
b) Ac ve, sectoral ini a ves with the poten al to contribute toa major development:• ICT development: NRENS, SADC cyber-infrastructure roadmap,
high-performance compu ng facili es in 10 countries.
• Data science courses in 15 HE ins tu ons, of which 6 are in SA.
• Open Access/Data declara ons or agreements endorsed by 12
governments.
• 63 Research data repositories, of which 24 registered with
re3data.org.
• Open data awards in 2 countries.
c) Projects in development with major poten al:• The African component of the Square Kilometre Array (SKA)
is based in South Africa and involves 8 African na onal
partners (South Africa, Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar,
Mozambique, Namibia, Zambia) [115]. It is developing an
African Data Intensive Research Cloud and the associated skills
needed to cope with the vast big data streams to be producedby the astronomical programme.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

71• Indigenous Knowledge and Climate Change Adapta on
Research Project among the Griqua and Nama peoples inSouth Africa [116]. It includes par cipatory ac on research(“PAR”) design and methods with the aim of promo ng open
science by reducing the power rela ons within and between
researchers/researched. PAR takes a “bo om-up” approachby developing partnerships with communi es to iden fy key
issues of importance and find means of conduc ng research,
interpre ng results, and ac ng on the findings [117].
• The African Open Science Pla orm (AOSP) has the mission
to put African scien sts at the cu ng edge of contemporary,data-intensive science. It is developing an integrated approach
involving a federated hardware, communica ons and so ware
infrastructure, including policies and enabling prac ces
to support open science in the digital era, and a networkof excellence in open science that supports scien sts andother societal actors in accumula ng and using modern data
resources to maximise scien fic, social and economic benefit.
It plans for an opera onal launch in 2020 (see Box 6.1).
• The World Bank project: The Digital Economy for Africa [118].
This is a con nent-wide ini a ve that has five pillars, including
Digital Infrastructure, Digital Skills, Digital Pla orms, Digital
Finance and Digital Entrepreneurship. The World Bank has
commi ed to lend $25 billion up to 2030 to contribute to theoverall goal of making every African individual, business andgovernment “digitally enabled”.
The fundamental ques on is whether the globally weak scien fic
performance of Africa could be radically improved through theadop on of a pan-African open science ini a ve. Could a powerful
open science ethos have a major impact? Its essence would be
to provide a nurturing frame for developing crea ve common
strategies, removing na onal boundaries as siloes for scien fic
72

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

policy and prac ce and s mula ng intra-African collabora on as ameans of crea ng virtual cri cal masses of researchers on importantcommon problems. It is an issue we will return to in chapter 8. We
also comment that it was precisely such a collec ve approach thatenhanced the crea vity of Europe to become a scien fic super-power.
In this context we now explore the open science landscape throughthe lens of the three domains described in chapter 4 that we consider
to be the building blocks of open science for the modern age: open
data, open dissemina on of scien fic results and open to society.
Sec ons 4.1, 4.2 and to some extent 4.3 provide a template andcheck-list against which the state of open science in Africa can beassessed.
BOX 6.1: THE AFRICAN OPEN SCIENCE PLATFORM
Its building blocks are:• a federated hardware, communica ons and so ware
infrastructure, including policies and enabling prac ces tosupport open science in the digital era;
• a network of excellence in open science that supports scien sts
and other societal actors in accumula ng and using modern
data resources to maximise scien fic, social and economic
benefit.
These objec ves are to be realised through six related strands ofac vity:
Strand 1: A federated network of computa onal facili es andservices.
Strand 2: So ware tools and advice on policies and prac ces ofresearch data management.
Strand 3: A Data Science and AI Ins tute at the cu ng edge of data
analy cs.
Strand 4: Priority applica on programmes: e.g. ci es, disease,biosphere, agriculture.
Strand 5: A Network for Educa on and Skills in data & informa on.
Strand 6: A Network for Open Science Access and Dialogue.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

73

6.3. Open Data
We briefly map the open data landscape by considering four
essen als: principles and policies, infrastructure, skills, and processes
and procedures.
6.3.1 Open Data policies
According to the Registry of Open Access Repository Mandates andPolicies (ROARMAP), there are currently 31 ins tu onal open accesspolicies registered across Africa. Examples of an ins tu onal open
research data policies are those of: the Jomo Kenya a Universityof Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT) Open Research Data (ORD)
Policy; the regional open data policy of the City of Cape Town, andthe South Africa Open Data policy, which addresses government
data. A further, intergovernmental, discipline-specific policy level,
is exemplified by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Pla orm on
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).
Examples of interna onal agreements that are in favour of open
science developed or signed by African states include:• Africa Data Consensus Interna onal (G8) Open Data Charter(adopted by Sierra Leone; endorsed by ins tu ons worldwide)• UN Agenda 2063 (55 African member states)• Berlin Declara on on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciencesand Humani es (17 African countries; 51 signatories)• Budapest Open Access Ini a ve (signatories from mul ple
African countries)• Cape Town Open Educa on Declara on (32 African countries;
533 signatories• Dakar Declara on on Open Science in Africa (Sci-GaIA) (12African signatories) (ASREN; CUBRe (Nigeria); DIT (Tanzania);
Eko-Konnect (Nigeria); GARNET (Ghana); MaliREN (Mali); NgREN(Nigeria); RENU (Uganda); RITER (Côte d’Ivoire); TogoRER (Togo);
Vice Chancellors of Ghana; WACREN)• ISC Accord on Open Data in a Big Data World (signatories KenyaJKUAT and others)
74

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

• Kigali Declara on on the Development of an Equitable
Informa on Society in Africa (signed by 27 African countries and4 intergovernmental organisa ons)
• Open Data Barometer (28 African countries) (Tunisia, Egypt,
Morocco, Benin, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Malawi, Mozambique,Rwanda, South Africa, Togo, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Côte d’Ivoire,
Ghana, Mali, Namibia, Senegal, Swaziland, Uganda, Burkina Faso,
Democra c Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Mauri us, Nigeria,
Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Zambia)• Open Knowledge Founda on Network (OKFN) (Establishedgroups - Burkina Faso; Incuba ng groups - Cameroon, Ethiopia,
Senegal; Aﬃliates - Nigeria; Hibernated groups - Egypt, Kenya,
Morocco)• African Center for Technology Studies (ACTS) Charter (4 African
signatories - Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Uganda)• Good Governance Africa (unknown)• The Principle of Universality of Science and Academic Freedom (28African members): Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon,
Côte d’Ivoire, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar,
Malawi, Mauri us, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria,
Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo,
Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe• Open Government Partnership Declara on (12 African
par cipants: Morocco, Tunisia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Liberia,
Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Burkina Faso, Nigeria, Kenya, Malawi, South
Africa0• Nairobi Data Sharing Principles (Kenya, Madagascar, other)
The Na onal Research Founda on (South Africa), as a science
funder, issued in 2015 a Statement on Open Access to Research
Publica ons from the Na onal Research Founda on (NRF) [119]making deposi ng data sets available a requirement (119).

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

75

6.3.2 Open Data infrastructure
Open data infrastructure has two fundamental components, accessto powerful computa onal and storage capacity through highbandwidth networks, and eﬀec ve systems of data repositories. The
former is a necessary pre-requisite, the la er is a powerful source ofstrength, both are needed if African scien sts are to engage eﬀec vely
with data-driven science and African society is to benefit from theapplica on of that science to the opportuni es and challenges that
it faces.
Networks must enable access to a spectrum of shared resources
including the provision of Cloud systems connected by large bandwidth
Wide Area Networks (WANs) that host so ware systems thatenable data analysis and provide access to massive data collec ons.
African higher educa on and research ins tu ons rely on Na onal
Research and Educa on Networks (NRENs) to provide connec vityand specialised services. They are key parts of the landscape andpromote collabora on among member academic ins tu ons and insharing infrastructure, content and high-end ICT talent. They vary intheir level of maturity as shown in the table 6.1. Level 6 NRENs oﬀer
numerous value-added services such as videoconferencing, federated
iden ty management and wireless roaming services. There is awell-established culture of collabora on amongst NRENs. The panEuropean GÉANT programme is also working to strengthen Europe’s
links with the African con nent and to provide African research andeduca on communi es with a gateway for global collabora ons.
NRENs also provide services to schools and Technical and Voca onal
Educa on and Training (TVET) ins tu ons, e.g. SABEN (South African
Broadband Educa on Networks) [120]. School networks can also
request to be connected via SABEN, but need to provide funding
for this. Another partnership between an NREN and schools is the
KENET Schools Connec vity Ini a ve (SCI) [121] that coordinatesvarious commercial, educa onal and government organiza ons
interested and willing to provide Internet access and promote the76

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

use of ICT in Kenyan schools. The SCI is a pla orm through which
public and private sectors partner in an eﬀort to provide scalable
and sustainable ICT and Internet access to schools. The SCI modelis based on a holis c approach that integrates Internet connec vity,
Internet access, relevant educa onal content and capacity building
for teachers.
Level 0Central African Republic, Djibou , Republic of theCongo, Lesotho, Libya

Level 1

Angola, Comoros, Eritrea, Seychelles, South
Sudan, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea Bissau, São
Tomé and Príncipe

Level 2

Botswana, Democra c Republic of the Congo(2.5), Malawi (2.5), Mauri us, Rwanda, Somalia,
Swaziland, Zimbabwe, Cape Verde, Chad, Gambia,
Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Mauritania

Level 3Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Gabon, Ghana(3.5), Mali, Niger, Togo

Level 4Burundi, Ethiopia (4.5), Madagascar, Mozambique(4.5), Namibia, Sudan (4.5), Tanzania (4.5), Côte
d'Ivoire, Nigeria, Senegal, Morocco (4.5), Tunisia(4.5)

Level 5

Uganda, Zambia

Level 6

Algeria, Egypt, Kenya, South Africa, [Zambia –2019]

Table 6.1 Levels of maturity of NRENS in African states. Level 0 is the lowest,
Level 6 the highest.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

77

High capacity networks are being established through AfricaConnect2.
This comprises three geographical areas (clusters) and involves therespec ve regional NRENS (Figure 6.6):• ASREN in North Africa (connec ng the Arab countries as well as
Algeria, Djibou , Egypt, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Somalia,
Sudan, Tunisia)• WACREN in West and Central Africa (Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire, Togo,
Niger, Nigeria, Cameroon, Mali, Chad, Guinea, Sierra Leone,
Burkina Faso, Senegal, Gabon, Benin)• UbuntuNet Alliance in Eastern and Southern Africa (Burundi,
Democra c Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Kenya,
Malawi, Mozambique, Uganda, Rwanda, Somali, Sudan, South
Africa, Tunisia, Namibia)
There are serious problems that stand in the way of developing
the NRENs in ways that would permit them to provide the level of
networked services that African needs. They receive limited support
for opera onal expenditure (OPEX) from their governments and arepoorly understood by the telecom and Internet community, where
they are regarded merely as specialised Internet service providers
that have to compete with very large telephone companies. Big Datarequires suﬃcient bandwidth and stable and reliable Wide Area
Network (WAN) connec ons, whereas universi es and researchins tu ons have very low WAN and Internet access budgets andmany areas in Africa struggle with ageing and unreliable power
infrastructure and frequent power outages.
Cloud services require expensive high-speed network access andshould be connected to NRENs, but this is undermined by the lack offunding for hardware in support of data sharing and commercial ISP
oﬀers that are too expensive for Africa. Researchers are o en unawareof the availability of Open Source So ware tools/applica ons tocollaborate and to share data as part of open science. Data security
is a huge concern, but despite this, many researchers store data on
78

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

their own laptops and worksta ons running opera ng systems thatare highly vulnerable to viruses that aim to expose their data.

AfricaConnect2 regions coordinated by:
ASREN
WACREN
UbuntuNet AllianceCountries yet to join

Figure 6.7.

Na onal Research and Educa on Networks’ (NRENs)
Alliances across Africa. (Africaconnect2.net, n.d.)

The poten al for development of the present computa onal andcommunica on network is very clear. The cable communica on
network around Africa is as good as that serving any other con nent(see figure 6.9). It is the internal network that is deficient and requires
major up-grades. Whilst telecommunica ons companies see a great
opportunity in Africa for an extension of their services, these are not
likely to be of the character required by the research community.
Experience shows that for a cost-eﬃcient research system to develop,
key parts of any network need to be publicly managed in ways that
do not make the system dependent en rely on any single providers’services. Extension and development of the NRENs, coupled with
eﬃcient wide area networks and Cloud compu ng are clear priori es.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

79

In this context, professionally managed, trustworthy data repositories
are vital. The development of open databases in Africa falls well shortof what is needed for an eﬀec ve open data ecology that is able tosupport compe ve data-intensive scien fic enquiry. A devasta ng
example of this lack was provided by the 2013-2016 Ebola outbreak(figure 8a-b). In response, and in search for eﬀec ve treatments,
clinical, epidemiological and laboratory data on tens of thousandsof pa ents were collected and then analysed in many collabora ng
bodies worldwide, and sca ered across many databases held bythese diﬀerent organisa ons, very few of them in Africa. Combining
databases in Africa, which has known more than two dozen Ebola
outbreaks in the last 40 years, would have been a far be er approach,to permit rou ne strategies for outbreak iden fica on, control andcharacteriza on to be developed and applied. Sadly, no such facility
was in place, although this may now be corrected through thedevelopment of an Ebola Data Pla orm [122].

The government-led response to the West
African Ebola outbreak included many
diﬀerent interna onal organisa on

Figure 6.8 a) Interna onal response to the 2013-2016 Ebola outbreakin west Africa

80

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

When the outbreak ended and organisa ons
le the region, the data was sca ered globally

Figure 6.8 b) Data flight from Africa following resolu on of the epidemic

Africa's global
Internetconnec ons

Figure 6.9 Major internet connec ons around Africa
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

81

6.3.3 Capacity building in open data skills
Capacity building in skills rela ng to the ‘science of data’ (data analysis,
visualisa on, sta s cs etc.) and those rela ng to data management(planning for cura on, annota on and metadata etc.) are cri cal if
OS in research and innova on for development in Africa is to have
any realis c impact. Skills in sta s cal analysis, database design,
data management, data analysis and integra on, visualisa on andinterpreta on [123] are rare on the African con nent.
As noted in 6.2, slightly over a dozen HE ins tu ons have developed
data science courses in Africa. Generally, universi es and collegesin Africa have undergraduate or cer ficate courses in computerscience that mainly focus on basic computer hardware and so ware
applica ons. To gain the benefits of open science, Africa must develop
its human capital in data science to u lise data for innova on anddevelopment. Data science courses require a diﬀerent focus fromgeneralised computer science courses and deliberate curriculum
design, coupled with emphasis that capitalizes on the deluge ofdigital data.
There are a number of ini a ves in data science that form a poten al
basis on which a more ambi ous and influen al eﬀort at appropriate
scale and cri cal mass could be built.
a) Data Science Africa (DSA) [123]. (Datascienceafrica.org, 2019).
The aim of DSA is to train par cipants in machine learning anddata science methods and providing an avenue for researchers
to present work that demonstrates the applica on of thesetechniques to problems relevant to the African context.
b) CODATA-RDA Data Schools Ini a ve. [125]. The aim of the school
is to teach data skills to researchers in every field and to thoseadvanced in their careers as a form of con nuing professional
development.
c) University Masters and PhD courses. Pan African University has
introduced MSc and PhD in Data Science [126a]. The Universityof Cape Town (UCT) introduced an MSc in Data Science in 2017[126b]. The University of the Western Cape (UWC) introduced
82

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

an MSc in Data Science in 2019 (Quan fy Your Future, 2019). The
University of Pretoria runs a post graduate course in Data Science[126c].
d) Online courses. Principa is an interna onal data analy cs
company based in South Africa that provides valuable online
courses [127].
e) Data carpentry training:i) In 2015, Integrated Digi zed Biocollec ons (iDigBio) [128],
conducted the first data carpentry workshop in Africa in
Nairobi. The focus was to provide training and skills ingenera ng be er data. If this workshop were to be a yearlyfeature on the African open data-training calendar, it would
add to the training infrastructure of data science shortcourses. However, it rotates biannually among developing
countries in the world.
ii) South Africa has ins tu onalized data carpentry training[129] and frequently hosts training for trainers in Unix
shell, version control with Git, and a programming language(Python or R) [130]. Trainers also frequently conduct training
in data organiza on, (clean-up, analysis, and visualiza on)
and library carpentry lessons on concepts so waredevelopment and data science to library contexts. Other
training ini a ves [131] aim to build bridges for digital andcomputa onal literacy.
iii) Most frequently, the data carpentry workshops across Africa
are being conducted through the NRENs [132], for the sole
reason that they have the basic infrastructure to support
such capacity building skills training and development indata skills.
A common trend amongst these ini a ves is that most trainers/
facilitators come from outside the con nent. Although theircontribu on is welcome, a system based on this cannot be built toOpen Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

83the scale that is required. A more strategic approach is required atseveral levels in:• developing systems of summer schools based on training thetrainers;• online courses for in service training;• more widespread development of university courses at postgraduate level.
The Science Gran ng Councils could play a significant role here ins mula ng the crea on of course content for the diﬀerent levels andmapping poten al demand and provision as a basis for concerted
investment and ac on amongst governments. Although the lack ofdata science (including data cura on) and so ware engineering skills
are problems worldwide, they are par cularly acute in Africa. It isalso important to recognise the need for a spectrum of skills as a vital
adapta on to the new digital world for:• governments and funding agencies;• primary, secondary, further and higher educa on• ci zens who need to be prepared for lives as responsible ci zensin a data-rich world.
6.3.4 Open Data processes and procedures
These processes and procedures are those of research data
management, FAIR data, data cita on, licensing and analy cs. It is
important to stress that the challenge that these rigorous processes
entail are not easy for even the best funded and supported scien fic
systems, and many are struggling to cope.
Research libraries across Africa are important key stakeholders interms of data cura on and RDM training and implementa on. The
current uptake is slow, and libraries should become part of broader
conversa on involving areas of science that are inherently dataintensive.

84

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

A valuable ques onnaire study of the provision of data services
by research and university libraries in southern Africa has been
conducted [133] to establish the readiness of libraries to engage
collabora vely with their stakeholders in providing ins tu on-wideservices and systems for research data management, including
data support services, archiving, organisa onal structures, staﬃng
and training, funding, outreach and partnerships, and challenges
and data management. It is clear that many services are s ll at an
early stage of development, with some countries and ins tu ons
not yet ready to implement any type of service. A small number ofins tu ons have policies in place or are planning to implement somein the near future. In some cases, exis ng ins tu onal repositories
are seen as a possible extension of data management services, andin some, recruitment of specialised personnel is taking place. Many
are up-skilling tradi onally trained library staﬀ. The report suggests
the need for advocacy and awareness-raising about research data
management with libraries taking a leading role in spearheading
data management and providing training and the technical support
needed to store and retrieve research output and data sets.
Processes such as the use of unique iden fiers and iden ty
management are well implemented on ISBN and ISSN levels, but moreawareness needs to be created about digital object iden fiers (DOIs)
and research IDs (ORCIDs). It is clear that the level of awareness ofneed as yet falls well below issues such as FAIR data, or the need forsupport in such advanced analy cs as machine learning.
The issue of awareness is crucial. However, we argue that it isawareness of how much be er a researcher’s science could be ifthey were to subject themselves to the disciplines of data-rigour thatis the most powerfully persuasive argument. We have argued above(5.4) that science-driven awareness of the poten al of data is thecorrect route, and add here that the example of enterprises such as
H3ABioNet need to be promoted as models of produc ve scien fic
enquiry in a data-rich age.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

85

A number of organisa ons already implement open access policies(see ROAMAP), but at an ins tu onal rather than na onal level. They
would need to be aligned with broader open science and IP policies
should countries adopt them.
6.4 Open Access publishing
Ini a ves from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) [134]and African Journals Online (AJOL) [135] are making progress on
working with journals to make the transi on to dissemina on. DOAJ
records the number of journals currently listed in 16 countries as:
Algeria (19), Angola (1), Cameroon (1), Egypt (50), Ethiopia (3), Ghana(5), Kenya (5), Libya (2), Mali (1), Mauri us (2), Morocco (12), Nigeria(6), South Africa (85), South Sudan (1), Tunisia (6), Uganda (1).
Scholarly journals are slowly adop ng policies for open access, for selfarchiving in ins tu onal repositories, and for data cura on. Recent
mega-journal ini a ves in the con nent include: AAS Open Research(funded through AESA, AAS & NEPAD) and Scien fic African (publishedby Elsevier, owned & managed by Next Einstein Forum (NEF).
Great progress has been made in making research output available in
the form of research ar cles (second copies), theses and disserta onsthat are available through ins tu onal repositories (IRs). openDOAR
lists 165 IRs from African countries (Eastern Africa 60; Middle Africa
1; Northern Africa 30; Southern Africa 44; Western Africa 30). ASSAf,
in collabora on with the AAU, have developed IR criteria for atrusted IR, to guide IRs. High quality IRs are being harvested through
DATAD-R (AAU).
6.5 Open to Society
We have argued (4.3) that greater openness to society has becomea necessary and increasingly important dimension of open science.
What ac vi es does it comprise, how important are they for Africa,
and what is currently happening in this domain in sub-Saharan Africa
that could be built on in an open science ini a ve? Put simply, an
open science ini a ve inspired by transdisciplinary values (the co86

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

design and co-produc on of knowledge between scien sts andother societal actors) should strengthen the engagement of science
with all those parts of society where it can add value. Its value liesin the crea on of networks of mutual learning and produc on ofsolu ons-oriented, ac onable knowledge, in collabora ons that are
profoundly enabled by digital technologies.
There are two important dimensions. Firstly, there should ideallybe pervasive network access, easier in urban areas, more diﬃcult
in rural areas, but where new wireless solu ons for remote accessare increasingly available [136]. Secondly there need to be structuresand processes that facilitate engagement with a diversity of societal
actors, where machine learning approaches can be powerfulmeans of iden fying, crea ng and managing networking between
knowledge partners in a controlled way. Rela vely formal structuresof engagement with business and commerce have been developingin many African universi es in recent years. The ISC’s Interna onal
Network for Government Scien fic Advice (ISC-INGSA) has developed
rapidly, whose INGSA-Africa chapter [137] might be a basis for an
INGSA node in an open science network.
A fundamental dimension is a wide, open science engagement withci zens and communi es, including those that are marginalised, adimension that plays an important role in contextualising science(see 7.6). It is one that has developed strongly in recent years. The
ISC programme, funded by SIDA, “Leading Integrated Research for
Agenda 2030 in Africa” (LIRA) seeks to increase the produc on ofhigh-quality, integrated (inter- and trans-disciplinary), solu onsoriented research on global sustainability by early career scien sts
in Africa [138]. It has demonstrated its capacity to bring real benefit
to communi es on crucial issues of prac cal relevance to them, suchas water supply, health, urban sustainability and disaster risk. There
are many NGO ini a ves that focus on the interface between social
need and technical/scien fic process. The Open Data4Development(OD4D) programme funded by IDRC seeks to create locally-driven
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

87

open data ecosystems around the world [139]. The ci zen science
movement is growing in Africa and the shi towards transdisciplinaryscience at an interna onal level has strong par cipa on fromAfrican scien sts, par cularly in areas such as public health, urban
sustainability and agriculture.
The role of an open science ini a ve could be as a coordinator offederated projects and programmes such as those illustrated above,
to maximise impact, increase intra-African collabora on, enhancemutual learning, provide and manage access to a wide variety ofskills and knowledge, and to facilitate provision and use of modern
digital tools. Careful and inclusive planning could put Africa in aleading posi on in a domain that is vital to social transforma on,to the achievement of sustainability and to defending the value andvalues of science in a “post-truth world”.
6. Context for a Science Gran ng Councils ini a ve
The sub-Saharan science landscape
Weaknesses• Low investment in R&D – 16.7 % of global popula on less than 1% of
global R&D spend• Majority of science funding from outwith the con nent
• Few centres of cri cal mass
• Very low level of intra-African collabora on• Universi es struggling financially• Few high performance or cloud compu ng facili es, and ineﬃcient wide
area networks• Piecemeal pa erns of open science policies and few common standards
Strengths to build on• Square Kilometre Array (SKA) collabora on between African statesdeveloping powerful computa onal and cloud capabili es• Some high quality database centres• Ambi ous Pla orm developments (e.g. H3ABioNet)• Major World Bank investments in digital skills educa on
Opportuni es• Strong circum-con nent internet connec ons• NRENS as poten al framework for a strong intra-con nental network• Open science and society ini a ves by overseas development agencies(e.g. SIDA & IRDC programmes)• Poten al for a coordina ng role for SGCs
88

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

7. Enablers and inhibitors of open
science in sub-Saharan Africa
We now discuss key enablers and inhibitors that need to be exploitedand overcome respec vely if a successful open science enterprise is tobe created in sub-Saharan Africa. Technology is a key enabler of open
science, whilst some pre-exis ng policies, processes and habits thatwere more or less well adapted as enablers for “pre-digital science”
have become inhibitors of innova on in a digital era, and need tochange. They include na onal policy frameworks, some incen ves
and norms of scien fic behaviour, technical skills and outmoded
cultural assump ons.
7.1 Na onal policy frameworks
Na onal governments and their funding agencies should consider,both individually and collec vely, adop ng policies that enable andencourage open science. Without a framework of regula on orlegisla on to unlock data and s mulate sharing of scien fic knowledge,
significant progress would be diﬃcult. For research undertaken inuniversi es, a typical process [140] has been for na onal funding
bodies to require, by regula on, data acquired in research thatthey have funded to be made open, with a prescribed deadline forsubmission to a trusted data repository and in a format prescribedby regula on or nego a on. In addi on, many governments haveadopted an open government charter [141] that requires them toopen some of their data holdings, and na onal sta s cs oﬃces now
collaborate interna onally in developing open data prac ces [142].
The principles underlying such developments should ideally be“openness as a default posi on” or “as open as possible, as closed
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa89

as necessary”, although the la er formula on begs the ques on,
who decides and what are the criteria? The extent to which theprivate sector monopolizes data, much of which is publicly sourced,
is a ma er of increasing interna onal concern, and under review by
the Interna onal Science Council. Companies such as Google andFacebook are now facing pressure to recognise that they do not own
much of the data that they rou nely acquire from public or private
sources. An African contribu on to this discussion is essen al.
Policies are also required for science management, funding,intellectual property, and copyright. It is par cularly importantthat IP protec on is well balanced between protec ng the rightsof originators and s fling innova on. A number of organisa ons
already implement open access policies, at organisa onal level (31OA policies from Africa registered on ROARMAP), though this also
needs to be done at na onal and intra-na onal levels. Relevant policy
statements that have been advocated for Africa comprise [143]:• Adopt Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR)
Data Principle• Observe Data Jus ce when distribu ng data, selec ng proceduresfor distribu ng data and finally using data.
• Establish open access to publica ons through repositories andjournals.
• Support submission of data to a repository before submi ng therespec ve manuscript analysing the data.
• Develop shared and interoperable data infrastructures.
• Encourage use of recognized waivers or licenses that areappropriate for data
• Public and private funders should adopt obligatory green, gold
or a hybrid of green and gold open access policies with theirrespec ve implementa on measures.
• Oﬀer incen ves to acknowledge open prac ces in publica ons.
• Encourage open peer-review models.

90

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

7.2 Resistance to openness and sharing
Although many scien sts support the OS agenda in principle, they
are o en resistant in prac ce. It is important to dis nguish between
three related issues:
7.2.1 The data suppor ng a published truth claim
The reproducibility crisis of recent years (see sec on 4.1.3) reflects inpart a widespread failure to make the data and metadata underlying
a published truth claim openly available. This subverts a processthat is at the heart of the scien fic enterprise. The mo va on forsuch failure is frequently that authors wish to mine the same data
for further publica on. Nevertheless, it is malprac ce and should be
non-nego able. Funders, scien fic bodies and par cularly sciencepublishers should work to ensure essen al compliance with what isa fundamental scien fic norm.
7.2.2 Other data from publicly-funded research
The a tude implicit in the behaviour of most publicly-funded
researchers is that that they “own” the data they have collected orhave caused to be collected. In contrast, the interna onal accord on
open data [144], endorsed by over 120 major scien fic bodies worldwide, enunciates the principle that – “Publicly funded scien sts havea responsibility to contribute to the public good through the crea on
and communica on of new knowledge, of which associated data are
intrinsic parts. They should make such data openly available to others
as soon as possible a er their produc on in ways that permit them tobe re-used and re-purposed” [145]. This implies that researchers do
not own their data. They are data custodians on behalf of taxpayers
who have funded the research, and their responsibility is to ensurethat the maximum benefit is derived from this data, whether bythem or others.
It is our view that this ethos is growing, but most strongly in thoseareas of science where collabora ve, sharing enterprises have shown
the power of openness in crea ng new scien fic understanding(e.g. crystallography, bioinforma cs, linguis cs, Earth science, etc).
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

91

The SGCI should take note of this in promo ng joint programmes ofAfrica-relevant open science (see 5.4.1).
7.2.3 Asymmetric benefits of N-S collabora on
There is concern that one of the consequences of adop ng an
OS agenda in Africa would be to enhance a process that has been
experienced in recent decades whereby collabora ve research
between African and Northern Scien sts has led to data migra on
from Africa and the loss of intellectual property, including fromindigenous sources. It has been referred to as “helicopter science”,
where collabora on with global north partners, funded by northern
agencies, are frequently dominated by northern scien sts, who fly in,collect data from their African partners, then fly out. Collabora ons
have proliferated in recent decades as interna onal agencies have
stepped up funding for research in Africa, par cularly in the fieldof health. Yet many African scien sts have o en been li le morethan data-collectors and laboratory technicians, with no realis cpath to develop as research leaders. However, overseas funders are
increasingly prepared for African agencies to influence the agenda[146]. The Science Gran ng Councils should consider an interven on
with the purpose of agreeing a concordat with overseas funders
to ensure that collabora ons support the career development ofAfrican scien sts.
7.3 Incen ves & mo va ons
7.3.1 The challenge of change
It is important to recognise the impacts on well-established personaland ins tu onal habits created by the technologies of the digital
revolu on and the open science transi on. Many of those habits, suchas those surrounding scien fic publica on, represent adapta ons
to modes of communica on and working that are well-suited topaper-based and pre-digital technologies that have become almost
obsolete, rather than ma ers of unavoidable scien fic necessity, andcan create a barrier to open science innova on. However, changing
embedded habits is not easy. It is vital to reconsider the incen ves for
92

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

change, and how those incen ves can draw upon deep mo va onsthat are shared by many or most scien sts.
OS fundamentally threatens the comfort zone of researchers,
ins tu ons, governments and interna onal funders who have had
long-held tradi ons on how to conduct science and how to handle
and treat data from the scien fic process. Systems of accountability
cut out the public, being considered as a ma er a between the
researchers, publishers and universi es alone. The dominant modeof work un l recently has been that of researchers working in
isola on or in small, closed groups sharing lab notes, with results
being published in pay-walled journals, inaccessible to the average
ci zen. However, the edifice of open science is built on sharing
scien fic ac vi es, knowledge and data beyond the nexus of theresearcher and pay-walled journals [147]. From the perspec ve ofthe tradi onal researcher/university/government, OS threatens aloss of power and control over informa on, data and managementof the research process.
The change in mind-set and of prac ce expected of par cipants inthe new open science paradigm is radical in destabilising the statusquo [148]. It is understandable therefore that some in the African
scien fic community, like their counterparts in other con nents,
should be lukewarm or even trenchantly resistant to OS. In this se ng
it is crucial to understand not only where established pa erns of
incen ve are barriers to change and where they need to change, butalso how open scien fic approaches can speak to the fundamental
mo va ons of scien sts and their ins tu ons.
7.3.2 Incen vising change
In recent decades, for good or for ill, research has become
perceived by universi es, which contain the majority of public
sector researchers, and their academic staﬀs, as the predominant
determinant of reputa on. Reputa ons of both scien sts and theirins tu ons have been predicated on the basis of metrics of research
income, numbers of cita ons, publica on in so-called “high-impact”
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

93journals, prizes and the academic league tables that purport to reflect
university excellence. Three immediate ques ons arise:•
are these proxy metrics appropriate?
•
are they barriers to desirable change?
•
do they have perverse consequences?
Proxy metrics tend, almost inevitably, to become targets, which
suﬀer from the consequences of “Goodhart’s law” [148], that “anyobserved sta s cal regularity will tend to collapse once pressureis placed upon it for control purposes”, which has been re-stated[150] as “when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a goodmeasure”, primarily because they can be and are “gamed.” Exactlythat has happened, sugges ng the need for new measures but withthe rider that they too are likely to become inappropriate targets.
These metrics have become barriers to change by concentra ng, atthe level of researchers, on the performance of the individual rather
than the team, and at the level of the university, of the performanceof the university team rather than the wider scien fic group of which
the university team or individual may be a member. They both militate
against the intra-African collabora on which we have argued could
be a powerfully posi ve impact of OS.
A major unintended and perverse outcomes of the power of the
publica on metric has been the massive growth in the number ofpublished scien fic ar cles, of which only a very small propor ongather significant indices of impact, together with rich market pickingsfor commercial scien fic journals that feed on the demand. It absorbs
a massive share of universi es’ poten als, to the detriment of theirprimary role as educators of the next genera on and dis nc ve
contributors of their knowledge base to innova on across the wholesocial, economic and poli cal spectrum.
It impera ve that incen ves are developed that are appropriate to
the evolu on of science [151]. Systems of so-called altmetrics are
94

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

being developed that permit recogni on and visibility in the scien fic
community whilst encouraging collabora on with other researchers,
and regaining authorial rights to their work and data stored online.
The Interna onal Science Council is shortly to announce major
projects on metrics and science publishing that will address theseissues. It would be appropriate to ensure African engagement withthis project to ensure that the dis nc ve concerns and voice ofAfrica, and indeed of the global south, are heard.
7.3.3 Mo va ng change
A fundamental lesson in the management of scien sts and sciencesystems is that scien sts are enthusiasts. They are profoundly
mo vated by the opportunity for discovery in their chosen fields.
Incen ves are the s ck, but self-mo va on is the carrot, and much
more nutri ous. It is one of the clear lessons to be drawn from theexamples of open science systems in chapter 5.
As suggested in 5.4, mul ple benefit would be realised by funding intraAfrican collabora on (benefit 1) on major issues for Africa (benefit2) that require cu ng edge, inter-disciplinary/transdisciplinary work
(benefit 3) that needs opera onal open science approaches for its
success (benefit 4), and that then inspires emula on in other fields
of science (benefit 5).
7.4 Skills and capacity building
Skills and educa onal programmes in data science and engineeringand data management in the broadest sense are fundamental tothe eﬀec ve exploita on of the digital revolu on and the adop onof open science in Africa as a powerful means of energising its
scien fic eﬀort. Such is the volume and diversity of digital data
streaming into storage systems from a large variety of sensors andsources, far greater than previously known, that rigorous control andmanagement of these data have become a fundamental issue formodern science and for the public and private enterprises for whichsuch data is crucial to their future success.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

95

Although the lack of data science (including data cura on) andso ware engineering skills are problems worldwide, they are
par cularly acute in Africa, which has not been able to train andproduce enough data analysts and scien sts and other support staﬀ
able to acquire and process large data sets, to iden fy pa erns,
establish rela onships and solve problems [152]. The gap between
Africa and much of the rest of the world is widening. The use ofresources is not op mised, training ins tu ons func on in silos, andAfrican students are only exposed to data science during ter ary level
educa on [153]. Ra onalised and coordinated training schemes andcommon, perennially up-dated curricula are essen al.
There is a par cular need in research, governmental and private
sectors for:
Data stewards who handle and manages data and whose
responsibili es include planning, implemen ng and managing
research data input, storage, search, and presenta on for thewhole data management lifecycle.1
Data scien sts who have exper se in the overlapping regimes ofbusiness needs, domain knowledge, analy cal skills, programmingand systems engineering, and managing end-to-end scien fic
processes through each stage of the data lifecycle, up to thedelivery of scien fic and business value to science or industry. 2
Primary factors that hinder the development of these skills are:• lack of poli cal/managerial leadership and awareness of theneed for investment;• lack of training opportuni es and acknowledgement ofcourses by na onal accredita on agencies;• Inadequate infrastructure: slow and unstable connec vity,
unreliable power supply, obsolete computer infrastructurefrom medium-scale server infrastructures to small numbersof worksta ons, lack of centralized and secure data storage.
1 The working defini on of data steward adopted in this framework is the Edison defini on for a data steward on p. 21of the Data Science Framework document presented at the Malta workshop June 8-9 2017.
2The working defini on of data scien st adopted in this framework is the Edison defini on of a data scien st on p. 9 of
the Data Science Framework document presented at the Malta workshop June 8-9 2017.

96

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Overcoming these barriers would benefit from:• developing a federated pan-African strategy and ac ons;
• developing agreements with a consor um of funders for a
decadal support programme;• enhancing and coordina ng suppor ve interna onal
collabora on;• funders making provision for capacity building as a part ofgrant alloca on;• ins tu ons making provision for capacity building as part ofins tu onal budgets;• including data science training as part of Con nuing
Professional Development (CPD).
7.5 Data analy cs and machine learning
Re-invigora on of skills in sta s cal analysis is vital for handlinglarge and complex data volumes where the pi alls are serious forthe unskilled, and training and degree oﬀerings must ensure thatthey are embedded in relevant programmes. A further major priority
derives from the impact that machine learning in par cular is havingon cu ng edge scien fic research, on governmental and businessprocesses, and in providing eﬃcient and cost-eﬀec ve solu ons fora wide variety of complex problems across the whole breadth ofhuman concern. Such is its ubiquitous applicability, that scien sts
and researchers from almost all fields need to understand, at leastin schema c form, how learning algorithms work, and to be able touse them.
A crucial issue for Africa is and will be, how to create, manage andapply high level skills in machine learning for a wide and diverse
community, whilst also maintaining a cu ng-edge presence in this
rapidly developing field. It is possibly that the African Ins tute forMathema cal Sciences, which has a distributed presence in Africa,
could fulfil this la er role. Deployment of state-of-the-art service,training and educa onal func ons for excellent scien sts in theirfield, whether it be biology, philology, economics or chemistry, should
also include support in ways that do not require such scien sts tobecome AI experts in order to use AI technologies with rigour.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

97

7.6 Contextualising Open Science
A major problema c issue for Africa, and it is true elsewhere, is how
to adapt to a major global movement in ways that are responsive
and sensi ve to the regional context and culture. We iden fy three
aspects of this problem for Africa.
a) The strength of the rela vely well-funded science systems of the
global north has been such that the global science agenda has
been dominated by issues defined through a northern lens, andamplified by the so-called “high impact journals” that are largelyin the hands of northern commercial publishers. It is importantthat African science builds on and develops a sense of Africanpriori es and adds its voice (see 3.3d) to the voice of the north iniden fying and framing truly global priori es. This is not to imply
that there is an African “truth” and a northern “truth”, but that
there are diﬀerent experiences, which may perceive diﬀerent
priori es in the search for truth. It is an essen al issue in the
project to de-colonise human aﬀairs [154].
b) Scien fic publishing is a vital means of ar cula ng the scien fic
voice, but the asymmetry of access to mainstream publica ons
as indicated above, either as reader or author, diminishes theextent to which that voice is ar culated or heard. It should bea major priority for the Science Gran ng Councils, as discussed
in 4.2.4 to explore how an African science publica on strategy
might be developed to serve the needs of the con nent andthereby the global scien fic community of which it is part.
c) We regard openness to society as par cularly important in the
African context, as it is a means whereby the sense of Africanpriori es alluded to in c) can be drawn out. It is cri cal to cra
the case for in an African context and to engage at the outset
with the inhibitors highlighted above from the perspec ves ofthe diﬀerent language communi es and indigenous knowledge
contexts. This is important because the language of the Internet
and the language of communica on that facilitate informa on,

98

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

knowledge and innova on exchange in the African scien fic
community and ci zenry is generally ed to monolingual legacies
of former colonial powers.
The push for bilingual and mul lingual awareness [155] in pedagogy
and general communica on is emerging on the African con nent.
Scien fic ac vity and outputs are slowly being made available online
and in data repositories. The implica on of this is that, besides thebilingual combina ons, African indigenous languages are finding
space on the Internet and may eventually assume the role of conduits
for African scien fic ac vi es, outputs and repositories. The discourse
on open science in research and innova on for development in
Africa must therefore be understood from this heterogenous mix ofcountries that share one underlying goal: to use science, researchand innova on to spur development and to improve their people’s
lives.
7.7 Perspec ves on Open Science from Science Gran ng Councils
A ques onnaire was circulated to a group of Science Gran ng
Councils, primarily those drawn from the SGCI, with the inten on ofunderstanding the poten als that they see in open science as a meansof delivering their mission, and understanding what they believe,
based on their experiences, to be key enablers and inhibitors of theprocess of embedding Open Science na onally or regionally. The fullques onnaire is shown in appendix 10.3, together with a summaryand sta s cs of responses. The ques onnaire was introduced withby two related hypotheses:• The fourth industrial revolu on is powered by the tools of
the digital revolu on.
• A collabora ve “open science” area would be an eﬃcient
response to this challenge.
All respondents agreed with these hypotheses, which validate ourdecision to place the crea on of an open science area at the centre of
our recommenda ons, and in the policy brief derived from this report.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

99Respondents were also asked to rank the priori es shown below, ona scale from 1 (low) to 10:• Wide area networks• Open science policies• Incen ves for researchers• Capacity building• Cloud compu ng• High Performance Compu ng (HPC)• Mul -na onal mission-led programmes (e.g. STISA2024)• Ins tu onal commitments (e.g. universi es)• Commitment of external funders etc.]• Collabora on among the 15 SGCI member countries
The average ranking are shown in figure 7.1, and rankings by state
are shown in the appendix, figure 10.1.

Uganda, Tanzania, Côte d’Ivore, Botswana, Ghana, Zambia, Mozambique,
Sudan, Sierra Leon, Malawi and Namimbia
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Open science
policies

Capacitybuilding

Collabor ation
amongt he 15
SGCI member
countries

Wide area
networ ks

Institutional Incentives for
High
Cloud
Multi-national Commitmentcommitments researchers Perf or mance computing miss ion-led of extern alComputingpr ogrammes
funders(e.g.
universities)

Figure 7.1. Average ranking of open science priori es.
100 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

The ranking is somewhat ar ficial in that is diﬃcult to rank one priority
higher than another if both are unavoidable necessi es in achievinga par cular aim. Thus, for a successful open science ini a ve as
advocated here, both appropriate policies and infrastructure are
essen al, although they are separated in the ranking. In broad
terms, vital so infrastructures, policies – capaci es – collabora on
are ranked as immediate pre-requisites without which an ini a ve
is unlikely to take oﬀ. It is heartening that external funding, though
likely to be an important part of a successful ini a ve, is most lowly
ranked, possibly reflec ng confidence in an African commitment,
and looking towards a me when external funding is a luxury rather
than a necessity. In the recommenda ons in chapter 8, we do stressthe vital importance of ITC systems and the programmes that wills mulate their use as well as addressing structural problems in
African science systems. But we also argue that the most eﬀec veand eﬃcient route to progress is through collabora on, and thatshared open science policies are cri cal enablers, ranked here as thehighest priority.
The ques onnaire reproduced in appendix 10.3 also poses a seriesof ques ons about issues that arise for the process of crea ng ofan open science area that would seek to realise the benefits that
Gran ng Councils agree are embedded in the two ini al hypotheses.
Table 10.1 in the appendix summarises responses to issues that are
central to any a empt to realise an open science area. The responses
were highly informa ve, illustra ng with clarity the percep ons
amongst the Councils about key contextual issues. Responses aregrouped together in broad categories:
Principle barriers to achieving collabora ve open science in Africa• Lack of understanding and commitment at poli cal and policy
levels.
• Lack of appropriate infrastructure, of human capaci es, of policy
and regula on at na onal levels.
• Career-related concerns amongst researchers, who are currently
mo vated by incen ves that are inimical to open science.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

101Roles for an SGC ini a ve in developing collabora ve open science• As lobbyist and advocate for open science to governments.
• As coordinator in implan ng ini a ves, and a supporter,
facilitator and funder of such ini a ves.
• As creator of awareness and culture change amongst researchersand of incen ves to drive collabora ve open science.
Merits of a collabora ve open science area:• Cost-eﬀec ve.
• Innova ve.
• Maximises u lisa on of research output.
• Speedy publica on, wide dissemina on and easy access toknowledge.
• A means of strengthening the common voice.
Demerits of a 15 SGCI collabora ve open science area:• Varying levels of capacity.
• Lack of mutual trust.
• High cost.
• Poor broadband access.
• Lack of confiden ality.
• Low impact factors of open access journals.
These responses are invaluable in iden fying the open scienceaspira ons of the Councils, the benefits that they seek to obtain fromany ini a ve, and the barriers and perceived disadvantages that any
ini a ve would need to overcome. They are important in framing
the analysis and recommenda ons in chapter 8.

102 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Box 7. Recommenda ons for Science Gran ng Councils on:
Priori es for addressing enablers and inhibitors of open science
Policies & prac ces:
• Commit themselves to collec ve ac on in developing open science• Develop common policies for:• Intellectual property• Fair data
• Open access publica on• Shared and interoperable infrastructure• Work with ins tu ons to create Africa-appropriate metrics forresearcher evalua on• Evaluate the needs for open science and data analy c skills and discusswith stakeholders how they might best be sa sfied
Culture change:• Endorse the Science Interna onal accord on open data and work withstakeholders to s mulate a culture of data sharing• Develop a concordat with interna onal funders for balanced
interna onal collabora on involving African scien sts• S mulate a conversa on on how open science might best becontextualised in the African se ng

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

103

8. Possible roles and responsibili esof and recommenda ons for the
Science Gran ng Councils
The ques onnaire responses from 13 SGCs revealed unanimity forstrong ac on to exploit the digital revolu on, enthusiasm for open
science as a means of doing so, prac cal realisa on that change
would be diﬃcult, but a view that joint ac on by SGCs could be an
important contribu on to achieving necessary change. We now
build on these conclusions to suggest a way forward.
8.1 Principles
The African Science Gran ng Councils, and similar bodies elsewhere,
have a pivotal role because of their unique, intermediary posi onin na onal science systems. On one hand they both represent
and influence government policies for science: on the other hand
they both influence and respond to the priori es of the scien fic
community. They have a crucial role to play when confron ng theepochal challenges such as that of the digital revolu on, primarily
because as intermediaries, they are able to deploy a binary strategy
to s mulate:• high-level, governmental and intergovernmental impact,
without which the resources required for eﬀec ve ac on will
not be mobilised; and• demonstrable grass-roots level u lity, without which any
mobilized resources will be under-u lized.
The preceding chapters have presented the evidence and developed
the arguments which we draw on here as the basis for responses to
104 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

the ques ons posed in our remit as set out in chapter 1, to adviseon the roles and responsibili es that the Science Gran ng Councils
might take in the development of open science in Africa.
It is important to be clear about the purpose of the interven ons
that we advocate, which are based on the arguments in chapters 4-6.
We argue that the aspira on for the near future of African scienceshould be to mobilise the resources needed to opera onalise thepolicies, infrastructures and prac ces that are needed for a powerful
open science capacity. These founda onal essen als are:• Shared, pan-African Policies for the purpose and prac ce ofopen science.
• Access to state-of-the-art computa on and communica on
systems, with major distributed nodes of capability that wills mulate and serve a growing network.
• Grand challenge research programmes that focus on major issues
for Africa that s mulate take-up of data intensive capaci es, thecrea on of virtual cri cal masses and enhanced intra-Africancollabora on in an African open science area.
• Major database centres that serve the above objec ves and are
powerful resources for open science.
• An interna onally compe ve ar ficial intelligence/machinelearning capacity to inspire and serve the open science
community.
We regard the ques ons posed by the Science Gran ng Councils as
poten al preliminaries for a strategy to achieve the above objec ves.
We now respond directly to each of these ques ons in turn and thenmake relevant recommenda ons that arise from our analyses which
are then mapped on to the SGCs framework for ac on.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

1058.2 Responses to Science Gran ng Councils ques ons
Ques on 1: What roles could Science Gran ng Councils play infostering Open Science in research and innova on for Africa’s
development and how can they eﬀec vely play this role within the
OS ecosystem?
Worldwide, the analogues of the Council have been grappling withthe same ques on. Their varied responses reflect ins tu onal
cultural habits, the level of na onal funding for research, the levelof relevant infrastructure, and the perceived benefits of par cularmodes of adapta on. These la er include policies and regula ons foropen data and open access publica on, policies for human capacity
development, major funded programmes to simulate data-intensive
science, and open science pla orms at disciplinary or na onal level.
The dilemma for the African Gran ng Councils is the rela vely low
level of resource that is available to most of their number in orderto s mulate and fund such changes, and the rela vely low levelof IT infrastructure provision that is required to support them, assummarised in chapter 6. In this se ng, it is incumbent on Councils
to use their unique intermediary posi ons to s mulate change and to
avoid the dangers of a looming knowledge divide. Their influencing,
convening and coordina ng roles should include:• influencing na onal government policymakers;• influencing na onal science systems including ins tu ons andtheir researchers;• using their collec ve aggregate resources strategically (assuming
the acquiescence of governments);• coordina ng policy and ac on;• making an integrated case for African science priori es anddrawing on support from interna onal development bodies
such as IDRC, SIDA, DFID etc;
• accessing the exper se of the interna onal science community
as represented by the Interna onal Science Council (ISC) and
its data bodies (CODATA, WDS), and the Research Data Alliance,
106 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

and par cipa ng in the work and influencing the policies of the
Global Research Council.
We have been impressed by an issue flagged in the African Union’s
STISA2024 report, that enhanced intra-African collabora on may
hold crucial poten al for the progress of African science and its
applica on. A way to achieve such collabora on and the cri cal
masses that are increasingly needed in modern science, would be
for SGCs to act as a collec ve in promo ng and coordina ng a major
open science ini a ve that could have the economies of scale andimpacts referred to in 3.3.
Ques on 2: What tools, interven ons, policies, incen ves,
infrastructure and frameworks are required to foster OS in researchand innova on for development? Which of these are of immediate
relevance and importance for Africa’s Science Gran ng Councils?
The issues relevant to these ques ons are discussed in chapter 4, which sets out
the basic toolkit that is currently regarded as intrinsic to open science together
with some of the problema c issues that require a en on; in chapter 5, whichsets out the systemic concept of pla orm or commons that have proven able tocreate a framework within which open science services can be most eﬃciently
delivered; in chapter 6, which describes the mosaic of open science ini a vesthat have or are being developed in sub-Saharan Africa, and draws a en on tothe overall lack of coherence; and in Chapter 7, which addresses the policies,
incen ves and some of the processes that are required to ensure eﬃcientdelivery.

Interven ons with government
The government-facing role of SGCs should be to make the case for:•••the vital role of the science system in crea ng and exploi ng
opportuni es in the 4th industrial revolu on;adap ng science systems to the new paradigm of open science
to maximise their crea ve poten al;
endorsing collec ve ac on by SGCs as a cost eﬀec ve meansof maximising impact and developing powerful synergy with
AfCFTA .
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

107Policiesa) Open Data. There is general consensus about the technicalissues that require specific policies if an open data regime is tobe implemented (sec on 4.1). They include policies for researchdata management, data cita on, whether open data should be
mandated as a condi on of public funding, when it should be
released and in what form it should be released (e.g. FAIR data),
how claims of intellectual property and copyright should be
adjudicated, the limits of openness, and policies for privacy, safety
and security. A common framework of standards should ideallybe developed to regulate the ethical use of open data, which
would need to be explored in the context of na onal legisla on.
Given our sugges on that intra-African collabora on should be
regarded as an important priority for any ini a ve, intra-African
varia ons in the extent and character of policy and regula on(see ch. 6) are an issue to be addressed.
b) Scien fic publica on. The issue of scien fic publica on is more
problema c (sec on 4.2). Aﬀordable access for both readers
and authors is a major issue, and, given its global ramifica ons,
should be pursued both through discussion between African
stakeholders and as part of the Interna onal Science Council’s
new project on scien fic publishing [156]. Discussions with La nAmerican colleagues would be useful in this regard [157].
Incen ves
Having incen ves for individuals and ins tu ons that are aligned with
their purpose is essen al to successful achievement of that purpose.
Sec on 7.3.2 argues that current incen ves for research have not
only led to increasing systemic dysfunc on but are also inhibitors ofopen science prac ces through improper use of metrics. These areissues that are increasingly discussed interna onally, and with muchwork on alterna ve metrics, though these too can be gamed, andshould be developed with that in mind [150]. Ul mately, discussion
is rooted in the fundamental purpose of research and universi es in
108 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

society, against a backdrop of reputa on and branding. If the SGCs
were to decide on a collec ve open science ini a ve [158], theissue of incen ves would be a vital topic for resolu on, both within
Africa with key stakeholders, including universi es, and as part ofthe interna onal eﬀort about to be led by the Interna onal Science
Council [159].
Infrastructure
Building on current capaci es to create an eﬀec ve pan-African,
networked computa onal and communica on system that is
managed to provide eﬃcient services to the scien fic community,
including cloud and high performance compu ng, is a vital prerequisite to enable modern open science. The major internet
connec ons around the shores of the African con nent (Fig. 8.2) are
as good as any other con nent or region. It is the inter-state andinternal connec ons that require investment, as described in chapter
6. This should be a fundamental priority for the collec ve SGCs in an
open science ini a ve.
Frameworks
We have argued (ch. 5) that because open science tools and processes
interact dynamically, the most eﬃcient way of deploying them is
as component parts of a common pla orm that provides seamlessservices to its members. It is important to note that there are levelsof ac vity within such a framework, from overall strategy, to technicalcoordina on of all services, to delivery of individual services.
“Innova on for Development”
Notwithstanding the poli cal and economic importance of theconcept of the 4th industrial revolu on, it is important to recognisemuch wider dimensions of innova on than the conven onal
industrial. Research-supported innova on needs to occur at all levelsof society, from individual ci zens to ci zen groups to all levels ofgovernance, and that an open science ini a ve should be inclusiveof all levels.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

109

Ques on 3: What are the key enablers and inhibiters for mainstreaming
and implemen ng OS policies, ini a ves and ac vi es in Africa; andhow can they be sustained and resolved respec vely?
This overlaps with our responses to ques on 2, so there will besome repe on although within a diﬀerent formula on. We
comment that the open science movement of the last decade has
been conceptually driven both by ac ve researchers and by science
policymakers and influencers (par cularly science academies andgovernment agencies), and has gathered increasing momentum. It isa response to the unprecedented opportuni es created by the digital
revolu on, the progressive replacement of the “lone scien st” byteams for whom sharing is second nature, and increasing awarenessof the global challenges facing humanity that require a collabora ve,interna onal eﬀort.
Surveys [160] demonstrate an increasing will to pursue the routeof open science, with every prospect that it will become embedded
as a fundamental norm of 21st century science; in the mainstream
and therefore sustainable. However, that poten al is at least slowed
down, and possibly undermined by major inhibitors, which are,primarily:a) metrics for individual performance and criteria for advancementthat are ill-adapted to teamwork and sharing (7.3.2);b) the burden of complex tasks required for eﬃcient management,
sharing and re-use of data (4.1);c) aﬀordable access to scien fic publica ons by both readers andauthors (4.2);d) access to adequate computa on and communica on networks[161].
We have suggested pathways to the resolu on of these issues in 8.2:
• for a), work on alterna ve metrics and criteria (recommenda on
2c);• for b), crea on of a framework to deliver seamless services(recommenda on 1a);110 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

••

for c), work na onally and interna onally to devise workable
access (recommenda on 2b)
for d), discussions with NRENS, HPC and Cloud groups about afederated solu on (recommenda on 2d).

Ques on 4: Who are the key players? How is OS governed? How
are the rules, roles and responsibili es determined in the co-crea on
and u liza on of open knowledge? What are the experiences acrossthe 15 SGCI countries?
Key players
If the collec ve convening power of the Councils could be mobilisedin support of a bold and ambi ous strategy, its success would depend
upon a rac ng the commitment and understanding the mo ves of awide range of stakeholders which, because this is such an important
issue, are described in detail in appendix 2 and summarised here ascomprising three groups:a) Policymakers and influencers, primarily governments and theiragencies, dominantly mo vated by concern for innova on anddevelopment; na onal academies and university representa vebodies (e.g. AAU) with mo va ons for excellence in sciencesystems.
b) Prac oners, primarily comprising researchers mo vated byscien fic opportunity; universi es mo vated by reputa on,
funding and a rac veness to staﬀ and students; and private
sector companies mo vated by innova ve capacity, the supply
of innova ve personnel and the crea on of markets for theirproducts.
c) Interna onal supporters, primarily comprising interna onal
funders of research, par cularly in the fields of development
and health; and interna onal scien fic bodies.
A crucial issue for Africa is that a large propor on of funding for
its science originates from outwith the con nent, from charitablebodies and founda ons and from na onal development agencies.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

111

Whilst there are some funders that have sustained predictablepa erns of funding for par cular regions and purposes over long
periods, the overall pa ern of funding does vary considerably in its
geographic and thema c focus. It would be of great benefit if the
Science Gran ng Councils could act as an interface with interna onal
donors and science bodies of community c) above, able collec vely
to express con nental priori es with greater coherence, and if
funders were to act in more coordinated ways in responding to thesepriori es.
Governance
There are several levels and dimensions of governance, which
will vary according to the scope and ambi on of any ini a ve. A
governance approach for an African open science area would be themost ambi ous, and we follow the recommenda on of chapter 5that such an op on should have a coordina ng hub, with na onal,
poten ally specialised nodes, able to ensure a distributed capability.
Eﬀec ve governance of OS requires recogni on of the responsibili es
and contribu ons of the key players described in 8.4.1. We havestressed the eﬃciencies and poten als that would be released
for Africa by developing a collec ve, inter-state approach, which
we presume would require a dialogue between the Councils andGovernments, par cularly if recommenda on 1a were adopted by
the Council for further work.
If recommenda on 1a were to be progressed by the Councils, andbased on experience elsewhere (ch. 5), the following might be an
appropriate structure, reflec ng the diﬀerent but complementaryroles of Governments, the SGCs, technical experts and users:a) An African Open Science Commission at the interface withgovernments and Gran ng Councils to agree on policies andpriori es for open science. It might include representa on fromthe AfCFTA secretariat.
b) An African Open Science Oversight Board, as a Gran ng
112 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Councils’ body, but with membership including key stakeholders(8.3), including high-level representa on from business, andwith responsibility to oversee and propose evolu on of an open
science strategy.
c) Coordina on and overall management of the technical opera onof the system would be in the hands of the coordina ng hub,overseen by a Technical Advisory Board. This would require highlevels of exper se, experience and poli cally-aware judgement.
d) Each na onal node would have its Management Commi ee,
responsible to the hub for the delivery of agreed services, andrepresen ng na onal priori es to the Technical Advisory Board.
If the Councils were to take this route, it is possible that an Oversight
Board could, with the agreement of its current Advisory Council, takeover or merge with the African Open Science Pla orm to give thePla orm the breadth of ins tu onal leadership that it needs, as theopera onal arm of an African open science strategy, bearing in mind
that AOSP is pan-African in spirit, not just sub-Saharan.
Open knowledge crea on
It is important to recognise the need for high-level governanceand coordina on of a shared system. This should not be confusedwith project–level governance which must be adapted to specificcircumstances of the project purpose, including engagement with
communi es in ways that require inclusive issue- and communityspecific governance arrangements (e.g. [162]).
Ques on 5: What are the pros and cons of OS? Is OS increasing
marginaliza on or bridging the divides? How can OS benefit excluded/
vulnerable groups?
Many of the most exci ng ini a ves in open science have been
grass-roots-driven eﬀorts [163], [164]. The data sharing processes
that are at the heart of the modern concept of open science weredeveloped in some disciplines, such as crystallography, linguis cs,
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

113

genomics, when long, standard, data series became available, andthe scien fic benefits of sharing became apparent to their scien sts.
A posi on paper by the Interna onal Union of Crystallography [165]spells out these benefits with clarity and in detail, and contains
a ringing challenge to the scien fic community – “we urge theworldwide community of scien sts, whether publicly or privately
funded, always to have the star ng goal to divulge fully all datacollected or generated in experiments”. A further interven on fromthe same source made the powerful statement that “the science isin the data” [166]. Such grass-roots posi ons, increasingly linked toopen access publishing and forms of societal openness have beentaken up by representa ve science bodies, such as the Royal Societyof London in their 2012 report, Science as an Open Enterprise [37],by intergovernmental bodies such as the G8 [167] and currently bymany funding agencies in na onal science systems.
The fundamental argument for open science is that it is a meansof deploying a collec ve intelligence in understanding nature andsociety, and of using that understanding to address fundamental
issues for human society. Knowledge, science, is a public good,and publicly funded scien sts have a responsibility to contributeby maximising the eﬃciency of discovery through collabora ve
working, communica ng that knowledge in a comprehensible formand engaging with society in seeking its beneficial use.
The countervailing arguments tend to be conserva ve or radical[168]. The conserva ve cri que defends the right of the individual
against the collec ve. This argument was trenchantly stated inan editorial published in the New England Journal of Medicine[169] which described the “emergence of a new class of researchparasites”, which also commented that some of these parasites mightseek to examine whether the original study was correct, a responsethat implicitly but directly conflicts with a fundamental principleof scien fic rigour (ch. 2, p.6). However, this posi on is ra onal at
the level of the individual when the current mode of assessment of
114 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

scien sts is based on publica on in “high impact journal” (roundly
condemned by the San Francisco Declara on) and cita on sta s cs,
which we argue are ill-adapted to the needs of modern science andwhich in eﬀect enshrine the “scien fic paper” as the sole goal ofscience.
The radical cri que [170a] argues that the release of vast trovesof data, papers or research results which, although poten ally
beneficial to science as an enterprise, simply exacerbates the trend
towards the increasing marke za on and corpora za on of sciencethat dispropor onately benefit large corpora ons. Tyfield [170b]
argues that open science opens the door to:• capture of publically-funded research value by commercial
pla orms;• introducing yet more “metrics” of produc vity to “incen vize”
scholars to work harder, and simply replace one form of gameplaying by another;• focussing on system-wide progress of science, ignoring costs andbenefits to individuals, whether scien sts or non-scien sts.
In the African case, we add to these dangers those of the exploita on
of African scien fic resources by be er-funded researchers from theglobal north, and the marginalisa on of African needs in evolving
science-publishing regimes.
These cri ques rightly challenge the developing open science
movement to resist the increasing priva sa on of knowledge, tomaintain or redevelop a “human centred” science and to adapt to
the needs of diﬀerent communi es, whether small or large. We
suggest that commons- or pla orm-based systems (chapter 5) areeﬀec ve ways of doing these things, provided that the scien fic
collec ve voice is a strong one, thereby laying great emphasis on therole of governance, in which users have at least par al ownership orcontrol, rather than simply being passive drones in an “on-demand”
economy.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

115

Overt engagement with society is a crucial element in ensuring thatthe voice of excluded or vulnerable groups are part of the enterprise.
We have no instant solu on here, but suggest that an African
ini a ve could demonstrate how this component of open science
could become a powerful reality.
Recommenda on 1:
Depending on the scale, enthusiasm and commitment to collec ve ac onthat are possible to mobilise by exploi ng their intermediary role, wesuggest that the Councils should consider op ons for ac on as follow:
Op on 1a). Promote crea on of an African open science area designed tooﬀer the range of services and capaci es typical of the open sciencepla orm or commons systems described chapter 5 and with theinten on of yielding the benefits described in 3.3. We note (3.4) the
mely recent crea on of the African Con nental Free Trade Area
(AfCFTA), much of the poten al strength of which lies in the mobility
and collabora on that it will enable. It is precisely these a ributes
that have been shown to be eﬀec ve in s mula ng dynamismin science systems. Such an ac on would be mely and crea ve,
resona ng with the establishment of AfCFTA, and with the poten al
for profound mutually beneficial synergy. It would resonate not only
within Africa, but globally.
Op on 1b). Develop a strategy to coordinate and complement exis ng
open science ac vi es (chapter 6) in sub-Saharan Africa, primarily
concerned to coordinate policies and incen ves as described in 8.3.2
and 8.3.3 below.
Op on 1c). In this scenario, the responsibility for open science policies andincen ves would remain largely with na onal systems, but would
be open to a collec ve, focussed strategy comprising programmes
designed to have major impact on two key areas:• Enhancing computa onal and communica ons (IT) capaci es
by federa on and expansion of exis ng capaci es;• Crea ng major data-intensive programmes on intra-Africanpriori es with the inten on of s mula ng crea ve use ofenhanced IT capaci es and building intra-African virtual cri cal
masses.

116 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Recommenda on 2:
The Science Gran ng Councils should commission and become involved inexpert reviews of key open science issues as follows:2a) A task group should be created to explore the poten al for convergenceof na onal policies, regula ons and standards for open science, andthe possible role of the SGCs in facilita ng convergence.
2b) The SGCs should s mulate a discussion of how African priori es forscien fic publishing can be achieved, and to ensure that these concerns
contribute to a global review being led by the Interna onal Science
Council.
2c) The SGCs should s mulate a discussion of the impact of metrics forresearch on the research process, and how they might be improved
to sa sfy African priori es. They should ensure that these concerns
contribute to a global review being led by the Interna onal Science
Council.
2d) The SGCs should commission an expert group with the task of iden fying
cost-eﬃcient means of federa ng current computa onal, cloud andcommunica on capabili es, and extending and eﬃciently managing
them. (Poten al funders should be involved in this process, including
the World Bank, which could, for example, be the source of long-termloan finance).
Recommenda on 3: The SGCs should seek to develop structured
rela onships between key players:3a) Ini ate conversa ons with those ac vely involved in open science
processes and strategies, possibly through the African Open Science
Pla orm, to seek maximum synergy and collec ve impact and to
reduce unnecessary duplica on.
3b) The SGCs and other relevant partners should seek to create a forum
together with major funding agencies (possibly build around the
SGCI) to iden fy a more strategic approach in suppor ng sciencein Africa. This would be par cularly important if the SGCs adopted
recommenda on 1a.
3c) If recommenda on 1a were accepted, an approach should be madeby SGCs to governments, for crea on of an inter-governmental
statement or concordat that:• recognizes the vital importance of science in enabling them to
exploit the poten als of the 4th industrial revolu on;• commits them to working together in promo ng Open Science asa vehicle for achieving this;• embeds in policy, and in na onal law if necessary, high-levelagreements (e.g. IP, open data, standards, rules of access forcommon infrastructure) that are necessary as a frame for funding
and for opera onal open science ac vity.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

1178.4 SGCs proposed Call to Ac on Framework
Ac onable items from the recommenda ons are shown below
within the SGCs proposed ac ons framework.
Table 8.1 Ac on Framework
Ac on Items

Ac onInterven ons • Create and exploit opportuni es in the 4th industrial
revolu on.
• Adapt science systems to the new paradigm of open
science.
• Endorse collec ve ac on by SGCs as eﬀec ve & costeﬃcient.
• Collaborate and nego ate with publishers to
implement open access as the default standard.
• Create a comprehensive and transparent system forgathering and sharing informa on on the costs andcondi ons of academic communica on.
• Create a funding mechanism to explore paybacks toopen science.
• Develop a common framework of standards to
Policies
regulate the ethical use of open data.
• Enforce publica on of data and code concurrently
with publica on of concepts based on them.
• Clarify IP protec on.
• Make open data the default standard for all publicly
funded research.
• Establish standards on privacy by design.
• Strengthen intra-African collabora on in OS
ini a ves.
• Review and reform reward systems.
• Develop assessment and evalua on criteria that
promote OS.
• Adopt a posi ve, integrated approach in career
progression systems to remove obstacles to open
science prac ces.
• Raise awareness and promote open science inuniversi es and other knowledge ins tu ons.

• Develop plans for capacity building in data
stewardship and data science.
• Encourage the sharing of exper se that enables
disciplines/ regions to learn from each other.
118 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Incen ves• Champion and lead realignment of funders andresearch organisa ons to cater for both ar cle
processing charges (APC) and subscrip ons charges.
• Support discipline-based founda ons that help flip
subscrip on journals to FAIR open access by providing
funds for APCs.
• Advocate open access prac ces.
• Provide start-up funds for alterna ve open accesspublishing models.
• Encourage FAIR data sharing by valuing data
stewardship and eﬀorts to make data available.

Infrastructures • Support na onal ins tu ons to emplace ins tu onal
data policies that outline roles and responsibili es forresearch data management and data stewardship.
• Make development of Data Management Plans(DMPs) a precondi on for funding.
• Introduce incen ves for FAIR data sharing by valuing
data stewardship and eﬀorts to make data available
and by acknowledging and rewarding those whocompile the data. Require data to be cited according
to interna onal standards. Encourage the sharing ofexper se that enables disciplines/ regions to learn
from each other• Set up and manage local and na onal e-infrastructuresand facilitate researchers in the selec on and use ofservices.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

119

9. References[1] African Technology Policy Studies Network & The Scinnovent
Centre. Concept Note and Terms of Reference for Authors. “Open
Science in Research and Innova on for Development. 2019.
https://atpsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/FINALConcept-Note-and-TOR-for-the-Open-Science-MasterclassPaper.pdf[2]

L. Chan., A.Okuna., R. Hillyer., D. Albornoz., and A. Posada.
(eds) Contextualising Openness. University of O awa Press andInterna onal Development Research Canada,( 354pp). 2019.
h ps://idl-bnc-idrc.dspacedirect.org/handle/10625/58201[3] A. Einstein Quotes. BrainyQuote.com, Brainy Media Inc,
2019.https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/albert_
einstein_100017[4]

M. Hilbert and P. Lopez. The World’s Technological Capacity
to Store, Communicate, and Compute Informa on. Science.
(Vol.332, Issue 6025). 2011. DOI: 10.1126/science.1200970
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/332/6025/60/tabpdf.

[5]

M. Baker, ‘1,500 scien sts li the lid on reproducibility’, Nature,533 (7604), 2016. 452–454. doi: 10.1038/533452a.

[6]

M. D’Ancona. Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How toFight Back. Ebury Press. 2017.

120 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

[7]H. Ledford. Us trust in scien sts is now on par withthe military. Nature, News, 06, August 2019. h ps://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02389-8?utm_
c o nte nt = b u ffe ra 0 8 e 5 & u t m _ m e d i u m = s o c i a l & u t m _source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buﬀer[8]

B.R. Jasny. Lies spread faster than the truth. Science,Vol. 359,Issue (6380), 1114-1115). 2018. h ps://science.
sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1114.8/tab-pdf[9]

T. Hey, S. Tansley, and K. Tolle. The Fourth Paradigm. jim gray on
escience: a transformed scien fic method. Microso Research2009.
h ps://www.immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/EBOOKS/M091000H.pdf[10] M. Gibbons, M. Trow, P. Sco , S. Schwartzman, H. Nowotny and
C. Limoges. The New Produc on of Knowledge: The Dynamics
of Science and Research in Contemporary Socie es. 1995.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225088790_
The_New_Production_of_Knowledge_The_Dynamics_of_
Science_and_Research_in_Contemporary_Socie es[11] H. Nowotny, P. Sco and M. Gibbons. “Mode 2 Revisited: The
New Produc on of Knowledge”, Minerva. 2003. h ps://link.
springer.com/ar cle/10.1023/A:1025505528250[12] STISA 24 STISA 2024 – A guide for Africa to exploit its
opportuni es h p://www.nepad.org/news/s sa-2024-guideafrica-exploit-its-opportuni es[13] Interna onal Science Council Plan, Advancing Science
as A Global Good. 2019-2021 h ps://council.science/
cms/2019/09/Advancing-Science-as-a-Global-Public-Good_
ISC-Ac on-Plan-1.pdf

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa121

[14] UNESCO. (2015). UNESCO Science Report: Towards 2030. 2015.
h ps://en.unesco.org/unesco_science_report[15] M. Hilbert. Technological Informa on inequality as anincessantly moving target: The redistribu on of informa on
and communica on capaci es between 1986 and 2010.
Journal of Associa on for Informa on Science and Technology.
(65.4. 821 – 835) 2014. doi:10.1002/asi.23020. h ps://www.
mar nhilbert.net/technological-informa on-inequality-as-anincessantly-moving-target/[16a] J.P. Tennant, F. Walder, P. Masuzzo, L.B.Collister and C.H.J.
Hartgerink. The academic, economic and societal impactsof Open Access: an evidence based review. 2016. doi:
10.12688/f1000research.8460.3 h ps://f1000research.com/
ar cles/5-632/v3[16b] J.P. Tennant. The academic, economic and societal impactsof Open Access. Blog. Open Science.com 2016. h ps://www.
scienceopen.com/document?vid=2dda4be2-86ef-4183-8be4d2ebd4f59d00[17]

J. S. Ahinon and J. Havemann. Open Science in Africa.
2018h ps://elephan nthelab.org/open-science-in-africa/[18] World Bank. Open Data for economic growth. 2014. h p://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/131621468154792082/
Open-data-for-economic-growth[19] European Commission. Crea ng Value through Open Data.
Capgemini. 2015. h ps://www.europeandataportal.eu/sites/
default/files/edp_crea ng_value_through_open_data_0.pdf[20] Capgemini. New European Data Portal is a key step in seizing amul -billion euro poten al of Open Data. 2019. h ps://www.
122 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

capgemini.com/news/new-european-data-portal-is-a-keystep-in-seizing-mul -billion-euro-poten al-of-open-data/[21] Union Commission. Cost of not having FAIR research data: Cost
benefit analysis for FAIR Research data. PWC. 2018. h ps://
op.europa.eu/en/publica on-detail/-/publica on/d375368c1a0a-11e9-8d04-01aa75ed71a1[22] Nowotny Helga, Peter Sco and Michael Gibbons (2003) “Mode2 Revisited: The New Produc on of Knowledge”, Minerva.
[23] African Union. NEPAD h ps://edu-au.org/strategies/s sa-2024[24] J. S. Ahinon and J. Havemann. Open Science in Africa. 2018.
h ps://elephan nthelab.org/open-science-in-africa/[25] Roche, D. G., Kruuk, L. E. B., Lanfear, R. & Binning, S. A. Public
Data Archiving in Ecology and Evolu on: How Well Are We
Doing? PLOS Biol. 13, e1002295. 2015.
[26] S. Higgins. The influen al Digital Cura on Centre model ofthe data life cycle. 2008. h p://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/
cura on-lifecycle-model.
[27] The Royal Society. Science as an Open Enterprise. 2012.
h ps://royalsociety.org/topics.../science...enterprise/report/[28] M.D. Wilkinson., et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scien fic
data management and stewardship. 2016. Sci. Data 3:160018
doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18[29] The Royal Society. Exploi ng data revolu on is key to scien fic
and economic progress. 2012. h ps://royalsociety.org/
news/2012/science-open-enterprise/Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa123[30] Force11. Guiding Principles for Findable, Accessible,
Interoperable and Re-usable Data Publishing Version B1.0
h ps://www.force11.org/node/6062[31] Scien fic Data. The Fair Guiding Principles for scien fic data
management and stewardship. Sci data. V.3. 2016. h ps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ar cles/PMC4792175/[32] Figshare. Store, share, discover research.
com

h ps://figshare.

[33] Dryad. For your research data. h ps://datadryad.org[34] M.D. Wilkinson., et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scien fic
data management and stewardship. 2016. Sci. Data 3:160018
doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18[35] A. Pienta. “LEADS Database Iden fies At-Risk Legacy Studies.”
ICPSR Bulle n 27(1). 2006.
[36] W.G. Dewald, J.G. Thursby, and R.G. Anderson. “Replica on in
empirical economics: The journal of money, credit and banking
project.” American Economic Review. (76/4:587-603). 1986.
[37] Altman, M., J. Gill, and M.P. McDonald. (2003). Numericalissues in sta s cal compu ng for the social scien st. John
Wiley & Sons.
[38] D.S. Hamermesh. “Viewpoint: Replica on in Economics,”
Canadian Journal of Economics. 2007.
[39] T.H. Vines, A.Y.K. Albert, R.L. Andrew, F. D barre, D.G. Bock, M.T.
Franklin, K.J. Gilbert, J-S Moore, S. Renaut and D.J. Rennison“The Availability of Research Data Declines Rapidly with Ar cle
Age” Current Biology (24/1: 94 – 97). 2014.

124 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

[40] Force11. Joint Dclara on of Data Cita on Principles – Final.
h ps://www.force11.org/datacita onprinciples[41] DataCite h ps://datacite.org[42] DataCite Schema Schema. DataCite Metadata Schema 4.3. (16August) 2019. h ps://doi.org/10.14454/7xq3-zf69.
[43] D. McDonald and U.Kelly. Value and Benefits of Text Mining. Jisc
Reports. 2012https://www.jisc.ac.uk/reports/value-and-benefits-of-textmining[44] The Budapest Open Access Ini a ve
h ps://www.budapestopenaccessini a ve.org/read[45] Giga Science (BioMed Central BioMed Central, h p://gigascience.
biomedcentral.com[46] Scien fic Data. Nature Publishing Group, h p://www.nature.
com/sdata/[47] Data in Brief, Elsevier, h p://www.journals.elsevier.com/datain-brief/[48] OECD. Making Open Science a Reality. OECD Science, Technology
and Industry. Policy Papers No.25. 2015. h p://dx.doi.
org/10.1787/5jrs2f963zs1-en h ps://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/
docserver/5jrs2f963zs1-en.pdf?expires=1571939511&id=id&a
ccname=guest&checksum=9C72B09E1BD539949C8A80AECEC2
8F00 .
[49] S. Jamil. Study on Open Science: Impact, Implica ons and Policy
Op ons. Luxembourg: European Commision. 2015. h ps://doi.
org/10.2777/237283
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

125[50] B. Fecher, S. Friesike and M. Hebing. What Drives Academic Data
Sharing? Plos One. 2015. h ps://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar cle?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118053[51] E. Carvalho, A. Ba lana, J. Simkins and R. Pietrobon. Ethicaland legal constraints on data sharing between countries in
mul na onal epidemiological studies in Europe report from ajoint workshop of the European League Against Rheuma sm
standing commi ee on epidemiology with the "AutoCure''
project. Research Gate. 2008
PubMed. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2007.080598[52] M.W. Carroll. Sharing Research Data and Intellectual Property
Law: A Primer. 2015 doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002235[53] African Union, Economic Commission for Africa, African
Development Bank and United Na ons Development
Programme. 2017. Africa Sustainable Development Report Tracking Progress on Agenda 2063 and Sustainable Development
Goals[54] United Development Programme. Goal 9: Industry, Innova on
and Infrastructure. h ps://www.undp.org/content/undp/
en/home/sustainable-development-goals/goal-9-industryinnova on-and-infrastructure.html[55] ITU News. New ITU sta s cs shore more than half the world isnow using the Internet. August. 2019. h ps://news.itu.int/itusta s cs-leaving-no-one-oﬄine/[56]J.Tennant. ‘Transforma ve’ open publishing deals are only
entrenching commercial power. 2019. h ps://world.edu/
transformative-open-access-publishing-deals-are-onlyentrenching-commercial-power/

126 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

[57] J.Tennant. ‘Transforma ve’ open publishing deals are only
entrenching commercial power. 2019. h ps://world.edu/
transformative-open-access-publishing-deals-are-onlyentrenching-commercial-power/[58] DORA. San Francisco declara on of May 13, 2013. h ps://crln.
acrl.org/index.php/crlnews/ar cle/view/9104/9996[59] Alberts, Bruce (May 17, 2013). "Impact Factor D i s t o r t i o n s " .
Science. 340 (6134): 787. doi:10.1126/science.1240319. PMID
23687012).
[60] A. Posada, G. Chen. Inequality in Knowledge Produc on: The
Integra on of Academic Infrastructure by Big Publishers. ELPUB
2018, Jun 2018, Toronto, Canada. ﬀ10.4000/proceedings.
elpub.2018.30ﬀ. al-01816707f.
[61a] Working Group 3. Researcher Recogni on and Recording
Na onl Pla orm Open Science. h ps://www.openscience.nl/
files/openscience/2019-02/notitie-erkennen-en-waarderenvan-onderzoekers_en-gb.pdf[61b]Working Group 3. Researcher Recogni on and Recording
Na onl Pla orm Open Science. h ps://www.openscience.nl/
files/openscience/2019-02/notitie-erkennen-en-waarderenvan-onderzoekers_en-gb.pdf[62] Making the Choice: Open Access vs Tradi onal Journals. AJE
Scholar.https://www.aje.com/arc/making-the-choice-openaccess-vs-tradi onal-journals/[63] Lexi Rubow, Rachel Shn Brinna Schofield and Samuelson Law(2015). Understanding Open Access.
https://authorsalliance.org/wpcontent/uploads/Documents/
Guides/Authors%20Alliance%20-%20Understanding%20
Open%20Access.pdf
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

127[64] J. P. Tennant., et.al. Ten Myths around scholarly publishing.
ResearchGate. 2019.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-ten-mythsdiscussed-in-this-ar cle_fig1_331656205[65] Lexi Rubow, Rachel Shn Brinna Schofield and Samuelson Law(2015). Understanding Open Access.
https://authorsalliance.org/wpcontent/uploads/Documents/
Guides/Authors%20Alliance%20-%20Understanding%20
Open%20Access.pdf[65b] Posada, A., and Chen, G. 2018. Inequality in Knowledge
Produc on: The Integra on of Academic Infrastructure by
Big Publishers. ELPUB 2018, Toronto, Canada. ﬀ10.4000/
proceedings.elpub.2018.30ﬀ. al-01816707f).
[66] Lexi Rubow, Rachel Shn Brinna Schofield and Samuelson Law(2015). Understanding Open Access.
https://authorsalliance.org/wpcontent/uploads/Documents/
Guides/Authors%20Alliance%20-%20Understanding%20
Open%20Access.pdf[66b] Boon, S. 2017. 21st Century Science Overload. Canadian
Science Publishing - Blog. h t t p : / / b l o g . c d n s c i e n c e p u b .
com/21st-century-science-overload/[67] J. P. Tennant., et.al. Ten Myths around scholarly publishing.
ResearchGate. 2019.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-ten-mythsdiscussed-in-this-ar cle_fig1_331656205[68] J.E. S glitz and J.K. Rosengard. Economics of the Public Sector.
Academia.
2015.
h ps://www.academia.edu/37552359/
Economics_of_the_Public_Sector_-_Joseph_E._S glitz
128 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

[69] Science Europe. Plan S. Making Full and Immediate Open Accessa reality. Principles and Implementa on. h ps://www.coali on-s.
org/principles-and-implementa on/[70] Science Europe. Plan S. Making Full and Immediate Open Accessa reality. Principles and Implementa on. h ps://www.coali on-s.
org/principles-and-implementa on/[71] Poynder2019.h ps://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impact of social
sciences/2019/03/06/plan-s-and-the-global-south-what-docountries-in-the-global-south-stand-to-gain-from-signing-up-toeuropes-open-access-strategy/[72] H. Debat, and D. Babini. Plan S in La n America: A precau onary
note. Peer J Preprints7:e27834v2h ps://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.
preprints.27834v2[73] Open Science. Publish-and-Read agreements (PARs) 2018.
h ps://openscience.com/tag/publish-and-read-agreement/[74] Egyp an Knowledge Bank (KBE). 2016
h p://www.sis.gov.eg/sec on/496/4576?lang=en-us[75]Ranking Web of Repositories.
webometrics.info/en/node/30

2019.

h p://repositories.

[76]https://www.coalition-s.org/coalition-s-welcomes-its-firstafrican-memberand-receives-strong-support-from-theafrican-academy-of-sciences/).
[77]Interna onal Science Council. Blog Interview with DominiqueBabini. 2019.
https://council.science/current/blog/plan-s-and-open-accessinterview-with-dominique-babini

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

129[78] Interna onal Science Council Plan, Advancing Science as A
Global Good. 2019-2021 h ps://council.science/cms/2019/09/
Advancing-Science-as-a-Global-Public-Good_ISC-Ac on-Plan-1.
pdf[79] M. Kende. Promo ng the African Internet Economy (Nov) 2017.
https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2017/africainternet-economy/[80] Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf). Mapping the current
landscape of Open Science/Open Data ini a ves in Africa: dra
report (Online). 2019. DOI [to be added[81] Why is AJOL needed? h ps://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajol/
pages/views/about-AJOL-African-Journals-Online[82] M. Banks. Journal editors share their views on the future of open
access publishing. Professor Sanchez-Azofeifa of the Universityof Alberta, Canada. 2019. h ps://physicsworld.com/a/journaleditors-share-their-views-on-the-future-of-open-accesspublishing/[83]STISA 2024 – A guide for Africa to exploit its opportuni es
h p://www.nepad.org/news/s sa-2024-guide-africa-exploit-itsopportuni es[84] T. Gura. "Ci zen science: amateur experts". Nature. 496 (7444:
259–261.). 2013. doi:10.1038/nj7444-259a. PMID 23586092[85] E. Hand. "Ci zen science: People power". Nature. 466 (7307:
685–687) . 2010. doi:10.1038/466685a. PMID 20686547.
[86] C. Doyle; R. David; Y.Li; M. Luczak-Roesch; D. Anderson; C.M
Pearson. Using the Web for Science in the Classroom: Online
Ci zen Science Par cipa on in Teaching and Learning. 30 June
2019. doi:10.1145/3292522.3326022. ISBN 978-1-4503-6202130 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

[87] iNaturalist Connect with nature. h ps://www.inaturalist.org[88] eBird. Discover a new world of birding. h ps://www.ebird.org[89] Zooniverse. People Powered Research. h ps://www.zooniverse.
org.
[90] Tropical Biology Associa on-led “Ci zen Science in Africa”
programme.
http://www.tropical-biology.org/specialist-course/citizenscience-africa-making-work-conserva on/[91] ELIXIR h ps://elixir-europe.org[92] H3A BioNet. h ps://www.h3abionet.org[93] N. Mulder., et al. H3ABioNet, a sustainable pan-Africanbioinforma cs network for human heredity and health in Africa.
Genome Research, (26/2, 271-277). 1916. doi: 10.1101/
gr.196295.115[94] Genome Research h ps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ar cles/
PMC4728379/#MULDERGR196295C18[95] The World Bank / World Development Indicators, Last update on
10/07/2019 h ps://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.
ZS?loca ons=ZG&most_recent_value_desc=false&view=map[96] Na onal Ins tutes of Health (NIH) Common Fund.
h ps://commonfund.nih.gov[97] A. Ghouila, G.H.Siwo, J.B.D, En ellner, S. Panji, K.A. Bu onSimons , S.Z. Davis, F.M. Fadlelmola, The DREAM of Malaria
Hackathon Par cipants. In Ferdig M.T and Mulder N. Hackathons
as a means of accelera ng scien fic discoveries and knowledge
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

131

transfer. Genome Research. 2018. h ps://genome.cshlp.org/
content/28/5/759.long[98]EU budget 2014-2020. Programmes’ Performance Overview.
h ps://ec.europa.eu/budget/library/biblio/documents/2019/
Programmes_performance_overview.pdf[98b] TrustAfrica Annual Report 2015.
www.trustafrica.org › component › item › 3271-annualreport-2015[99] AU STISA 2024, AU Agenda 63. h p://www.nepad.org/news/
s sa-2024-guide-africa-exploit-its-opportuni es[100]E. Opiyo. Why Internet Use is low in Africa. 2016. h ps://www.
scidev.net/global/icts/news/internet-africa-local-content.html[101]Forcepoint.https://www.forcepoint.com>cyber-edu>datasecurity[102] S. Fonn, L.P. Ayiro, P.Co on, A. Habib, P. M.F. Mbithi, A. Mtenje,
B. Nawangwe, E.O. Ogunbodede, I. Olayinka, F. Golooba-Mutebi,
A. Ezeh. Reposi oning Africa in global knowledge research. 2017.
h ps://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/ar cle/PIIS01406736(18)31068-7/fulltext[103]World Bank. A Decade of Development in sub-Saharan African
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathema cs Research.
Washington DC: World Bank Group, 2014. h p://documents.
worldbank.org/curated/en/237371468204551128/A-decadeof-development-in-sub-Saharan-African-science-technologyengineering-and-mathema cs-research[104]J. Mouton, J. Gaillard and M. van Lill. Func ons of Science
Gran ng Councils. In Sub-Saharan Africa. In Knowledge
132 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Produc on and Contradictory Func ons in Higher Educa on. N.
Cloete, P. Maassen and T. Bailey. African Minds Higher Educa on
Dynamics Series (Vol. 1). 2015. h p://horizon.documenta on.
ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/divers15-08/010065145.pdf[105] UNESCO Science Report 2015, Towards 2030. h ps://en.unesco.
org/unesco_science_report[106]UNESCO Science Report 2015, Towards 2030 h ps://en.unesco.
org/unesco_science_report[107Trust Africa. Post 2015 Dakar African Higher Educa on Summit
Webinar Series - TrustAfrica. 2015. h p://www.trustafrica.
org/Fr/les-ressources2/actualites/item/3331-post-2015-dakarafrican-higher-educa on-summit-webinar-series[108] UNESCO Science Report 2015, Towards 2030 h t t p s : / /en.unesco.org/unesco_science_report[109]J. Mouton, J. Gaillard and M. van Lill. Func ons of Science
Gran ng Councils. In Sub-Saharan Africa. In Knowledge
Produc on and Contradictory Func ons in Higher Educa on. N.
Cloete, P. Maassen and T. Bailey. African Minds Higher Educa on
Dynamics Series (Vol. 1). 2015. h p://horizon.documenta on.
ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/divers15-08/010065145.pdf[110] h ps://www.AIMS.ac.za[111] Next Einstein Forum. h ps://nef.org[112] GBIF – Global Biodiversity Informa on Facility. h ps://www.
gbif.org[113] DATA FIRST. h ps://www.datafirst.uct.ac.za
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa133

[114]African Academy of Sciences. AAS Open Research. Immediate
and Transparent Publishing. 2019. h ps://aasopenresearch.org[115] The Square kilometer Array. h ps://www.ska.ac.za[116] OCSDNET – Open and Collabora ve Science in Development
Network. h ps://ocsdnet.org[117]R. Kahn., and F. Mann. Developing Research Partnerships.
Journal of Social Issues, (8/3, pp.4-10). 2010.
[118] Digital Economy 4 Africa. h ps://olc.worldbank.org/content/
digital-economy-africa[119] Na onal Research Founda on- NRF.
h p://www.nrf.ac.za/media-room/news/statement-open-accessresearch-publications-national-research-foundation-nrffundedFunded Research,[120] SABEN – South Africa Broadband Educa on Network. h p://www.saben.ac.za[121] Kenya Educa on Network. h ps://schools.kenet.or.ke/[122] IDDO. Infec ous Diseases Data Observatory 2019. h ps://www.iddo.org[123] Data analy cs. h p://www.dataanaly cs.org.uk[124] Data Science Africa 2019. h ps://www.datascienceafrica.org[125] CODATA-RDA Data Schools Ini a ve. 2019.
h p://africanopenscience.org.za/?p=1157)(h ps://www.rdalliance.org/applica on-deadline-10-may-aosp school-researchdata-science-and-codata-rda-data-schools-ini a ve).
134 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

[126a] University of Rwanda. African Centre of Excellence in Data
Science. h p://aceds.ur.ac.rw[126b] University of Cape Town. Sta s cal Sciences. h p://www.
stats.uct.ac.za/stats/study/postgrad/masters/data-science.
[126c] University of the Western Cape. h ps://www.uwc.
ac.za/Facul es/NS/News/Pages/Launch-of-the-DataScience-programme.aspx .
[127] Principa. h ps://insights.principa.co.za/where-to-learnessen al-data-science- skills- online[128] Integrated digi zed Biocollec ons. h ps://www.idigbio.
org/content/idigbio-and-data-carpentry-go-africa.
[129] So ware Carpentry. h ps://so ware-carpentry.org/lessons/[130] So ware Carpentry Instructor Training. h ps://so warecarpentry.org/blog/2018/03/Carpentries-InstructorTraining.html[131

Carpentry Connect Johannesburg 2018. h ps://carpentryconnectza.org[132] Data Carpentry Ethiopia. h ps://www.len lcurtain.com/
posts/data-carpentry-ethiopia/[133] E. Chiware, and D. Becker. Research trends andcollabora ons by applied science researchers in South
African universi es of technology: 2007–2017. The Journalof Academic Librarianship, (44/4, pp.468-476). 2018. h p://hdl.handle.net/11189/7099[134] Directory of Open Access Journals. DOAJ. h ps://doaj.org
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

135[135]

African Journal Online. AJOL. h ps://www.ajol.info[136] Interna onal Telecommunica on Union.
[137] Interna onal Network for Government Scien fic Advice(INGSA-Africa chapter)
www.ingsa.org/chapters/ingsa-africa[138] Interna onal Science Council/ Leading Integrated
Research for Agenda 2030 (LIRA) h ps://council. science/
what-we- do/ funding-programmes/leading-integratedresearch-for-agenda-2030-in-africa[139] Open Data 4 Development. h ps://www.od4d.net[140] J. M. Wafula. Africa Open Science Policy Framework (2019).
In Press[141] L. Nordling. Africa’s fight for equality. Nature. (News, 05
May, 2015). 2015.
[142] Interna onal Data Charter- Principles. h ps://
opendatacharter.net/principles/[143] Registrary of Open Access Repository Mandates andPolicies. ROARMAP. h p://roarmap.eprints.org[144] Hackmann, H. and Boulton, G. (2015). Science for asustainable and just world: a new framework for global
science policy?. UNESCO Science Report: 2015 Towards
2030.
[145] The World Academy of Science TWAS. Open Data
in a Big Data World. h ps://twas.org/sites/default/files/
open-data-in-big-data-world_short_en.pdf
136 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

[146] FORUS. Promising Approaches to Financing Developmentin the 21st Century. Research Report. May 2019. h p://www.forus-interna onal.org/en[147] M.P. Jisc. An Open Access to scien fic informa on:
facilita ng knowledge transfer and technological innova on
from the academic to the private sector.Pasteur4OA.
2015. h p://www.pasteur4oa.eu/sites/pasteur4oa/files/
resource/Brief_OA%20and%20knowledge%20transfer%20
to%20the%20private%20sector.pdf[148] S.E. Ali-Khan, L. W. Harries and E.R. GoldMo va ng par cipa on in open science by examining
researcher incen ves. eLIFE.2017;6:E29310. 2017. doi:
10.7554/eLife.29319[149] W. Koehrsen. Towards Data Science. Unintended
Consequences and Goodhart’s Law. Fe. 24. 2018. h ps://
towardsdatascience.com/unintended-consequences-andgoodharts-law-68d60a94705c[150] C. Goodhart. "Problems of Monetary Management: The
U.K. Experience". In Courakis, Anthony S. (ed.). Infla on,
Depression, and Economic Policy in the West. pp. 111–146.
1981.
[151] Reports – MLE Open Science – Altmetrics and Rewards.
2018. h ps://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/policy-supportfacility/mle-open-science-altmetrics-and-rewards[152] J. Mwelwa. Africa Open Science Capacity building and skills
development Framework (2019). In Press.
[153]

J. Mwelwa., I,. Smith and P. Molutsi. Advancing African
Open Science through a network for Educa on and Skills.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

1372018. h ps://www.jointmindsconsult.com/wp-content/
uploads/2017/01/MWELWA-AND-SMITH-2008.pdf[154] A.Okune. Decolonising Scholarly Data and Publishing
Infrastructures. University of California. Irvine.
2018. h ps://ocsdnet.org/decolonizing-scholarly-dataand-publishing-infrastructures/[155] J. Mwelwa, J. and B. Spencer. A bilingual (Bemba/English)
teaching resource: Realising agency from below throughteaching materials designed to challenge the hegemony ofEnglish. Language Ma ers, (44/3, pp. 51-68). 2013. h ps://doi.org/10.1080/10228195.2013.840011
156

Interna onal Science Council. Star ng again with scien fic
publishing. Q and A with Alex Freeman. Blog. 2019.
h ps://council.science/current/blog/star ng-again-withscien fic-publishing-qa-with-alex-freeman[157] Interna onal Science Council Plan, Advancing
Science as A Global Good. 2019-2021 h ps://council.
science/cms/2019/09/Advancing-Science-as-a-GlobalPublic-Good_ISC-Ac on-Plan-1.pdf[158] New Incen ves and Rewards for be er and OpenScience: ‘The Dean’s Perspec ve’
h ps://www.
intensivistendagen.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/FrankMiedema-Science-in-transi on.pdf[159] Interna onal Science Council Plan, Advancing Science
as A Global Good. 2019-2021 h ps://council.science/
cms/2019/09/Advancing-Science-as-a-Global-Public-Good_
ISC-Ac on-Plan-1.pdf[160] Elsevier and Ipsos MORI Research Futures–
Drivers and Scenarios for the next decade. Full
138 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Report. 2019 h ps:// www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_
file/0011/847955/Research_Futures_full_report_Feb2019.pdf[161]OECD. Making Open Science a Reality. OECD Science,
Technology and Industry. Policy Papers No.25. 2015. h p://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jrs2f963zs1-en h ps://www.oecd-ilibrary.
org/docserver/5jrs2f963zs1-en.pdf?expires=1571939511&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=9C72B09E1BD539949C8A80AECE
C28F00 .
[162]C. Neylon. Governing Open Science; an introduc on. 2019. In
Chan, L., Okuna, A., Hillyer, R., Albornoz, D. and Posada, A. (eds)2019. Contextualising Openness. University of O awa Pressand Interna onal Development Research Canada, 125-132.
2019.
[163]N.D. Bowman and J.R.Keene. A Layered Framework forconsidering Open Science Prac ces. 2018. h ps://www.
tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08824096.2018.1513273[164]Wiley Researchers. What Does Open Science Require?
Cultural Change. Interview of Henriikka Mustajoki, Head ofDevelopment at the Federa on of Finnish Learned Socie es by
Chris Graf – Director, Research integrity and Publishing at Wiley.
h ps://www.wiley.com/network/researchers/licensing-andopen-access/what-does-open-science-require-cultural-change[165]M.L. Hackert., L. Van Meerfelt., J.R. Helliwell, J.R., and B.
MaMahon. 2016. Crystallography and Open Data in a Big Data
World. Interna onal Union of Crystallography. 2015.
[166] J.R. Helliwell.,J. McMahon.,J.M Guss., and L.M.J. KroonBa enburg. The Science is in the data, Interna onal Unionof Crystallograpy Journal (4/6, 714-722). 2017. (doi: 10.1107/
S2052252517013690)
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa139

[167]

G8 Open Data Charterh ps://opendatacharter.net › g8-open-data-charter[168]

A. Lancaster. Open Science and its Discontents. RoninIns tute: Reinven ng Academia. 28 June, 2016. h p://roninins tute.org/open-science-and-its-discontents/1383/[169] D.L. Longo,and J.M. Drazen. Data Sharing. The New England
Journal of Medicine. (374, 276-277).2016. h ps://www.
nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe1516564[170a] D. Tyfield.Transi on to Science 2.0: “Remoralizing” theEconomy of Science. Economic Aspects of Science,(7/1).2013.
h ps://spontaneousgenera ons.library.utoronto.ca/index.
php/SpontaneousGenera ons/ar cle/view/19664[170b] D. Tyfield.Transi on to Science 2.0: “Remoralizing” theEconomy of Science. Economic Aspects of Science,(7/1).2013.
h ps://spontaneousgenera ons.library.utoronto.ca/index.
php/SpontaneousGenera ons/ar cle/view/19664[171]

Plan Ceibal – Uruguay. h ps://www.ceibal.edu.uy/en/
ins tucional[172] Bri sh Academy and Royal Society. 2017. Data management
and use: Governance in the 21st century.
h ps://royalsociety.org/~/media/policy/projects/datagovernance/data-management-governance.pdf[173] h p://p3g2.org

140 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

10. Appendices10.1: The Report Team
Geoﬀrey Boulton is Regius Professor of Geology Emeritus in the
University of Edinburgh, UK, and a former Vice Principal. He is a
Fellow of the Royal Society and the Royal Society of Edinburgh,
Scotland’s na onal academy. He is a member of the Governing
Board of the Interna onal Science Council and a memberof the AOSP Advisory Council. He recently stepped down as
President of CODATA, where he was a champion of Open Data
and Open Science. He has been a member of the UK Prime
Minister’s Council for Science and Technology and Chair of theRoyal Society’s Science Policy Centre. He has chaired relevant
influen al reports, for the Royal Society (Science as an OpenEnterprise) and for Science Interna onal (Open Data in a Big
Data World), which received over 120 endorsements from major
science bodies worldwide.
Cheikh Loucoubar is a mathema cian with PhD in sta s cal gene cs
at the Ins tut Pasteur de Dakar, heading the biosta s cs,
bioinforma cs and modelling group. He teaches sta s cal
gene cs, biosta s cs and R sta s cal so ware in masterprograms at the University Gaston Berger of Saint Louisand University Cheikh Anta Diop of Dakar. He researches on
sta s cal methods and tools for family-based gene cs ofinfec ous diseases. His team focuses on applied mathema cs forbiomedical research, programming, database systems and web
applica on development. He his Co-Pi in H3ABioNet (Human
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

141

Health and Heredity in Africa, The Bioinforma c Network)
running the Dakar Node.
Joseph Mwelwa is PhD- and senior partner at Joint Minds Consult,a research, educa on and training ins tute he founded toprovide capacity development and support in educa onal
research, policy, curriculum development, training, knowledge
development and management and, post graduate student
support in sub-Saharan Africa. He has been a member of theAfrican Open Science Pla orm Technical Advisory Board where
he developed a report on capacity building and co-authored
the Joint Minds Consult posi on paper that guided Botswana
towards an Open Science and Open Data Strategy. He has also
conducted workshops on developing na onal discourse on
Open Science and Open Data strategies in South Africa, Ghana
and Ethiopia using Botswana as a case study.
Joseph Muliaro Wafula holds a PhD, is Associate Professor ofcompu ng at JKUAT, founder Director of the ICT Centreof Excellence and Open Data (iCEOD) and a cyber security
expert and data engineer. His recent works include review of
the Global Biodiversity Informa on Facility’s ac vi es andaccomplishments; development of an African Policy Framework
and Policy Roadmap for open Science and open data; and aperforming skills audit and strategy development to fill the gaps
in Northern Corridor Integrated Project (Kenya, Rwanda, South
Sudan, and Uganda). He is a member of CODATA Interna onal
and of the editorial board of the Data Science Journal. He is thelead Author of the African Open Science Policy Framework- A
guide for African States on Open Science Policies and Prac ces.
Nicholas Ozor holds a B. Agric. (Nig., First Class Honours); MSc,
Agricultural Administra on (Nig., Dis nc on) Ph.D, Interna onal
& Rural Development and Agricultural Extension (Reading,
UK & Nigeria respec vely) and is the Execu ve Director of
142 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

the African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS). He wasformerly a Senior lecturer in the Department of Agricultural
Extension, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Dr Ozor leads many
interna onally funded research projects bordering on science,technology and innova on (STI). He is a member of many
professional organiza ons and has published over 100 ar cles
in reputable interna onal journals, book chapters, and othermul media. Dr Ozor has raised over US$ 50 million in grants
to support development work in Africa. He sits on the Board ofmany interna onal bodies including UNESCO.
Maurice Bolo holds a PhD in Science, Technology and Innova on
Policy and over 15 years’ work experience. A Visi ng Research
Fellow in the Department of Policy and Prac ce (DPP) of theOpen University (UK) and a Research Associate at the InnogenIns tute (Edinburgh, Scotland), Dr. Bolo has a vast interna onal
consultancy experience.
10.2 Key Stakeholders
This appendix summarises the various groups in Africa that have a
stake in the opera on of science systems, iden fies their mo va ons
and interests and whether and how they might need to be engaged
with an open science ini a ve.
10.2.1 Policymaker and policy influencersa) Na onal governments. A two-fold case should be made tona onal governments, based on the inevitability of confron ng
the impera ves of digital science as a key to the 4th industrial
revolu on and the economic and social benefits it oﬀers; and thepoten al impact on science to be derived from a collabora ve,
intra-African open science ini a ve. There is a strong argumentthat the developmental goals that are crucial to Africa’s future
will depend upon the evolu on of a bold and vigorous African
science community, in which the diversity of Africa becomes aOpen Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

143

strength rather than a weakness. The willingness of governments
to permit na onal Science Gran ng Councils to coordinate theirac vi es and funding with common purpose is one that would
need to be tested. Such a case would require a cost-benefit
analysis, where the capacity of governments, strengthened by
ac ng in concert. An approach the World Bank for loan financefor vital infrastructure and for planning support could be aconsiderable asset. In addi on, governments may be required topass or amend legisla on as a na onal frame for open science,
whilst the Gran ng Councils may need to make regula ons orcreate policies to create the environment within which open
science can flourish on such ma ers as privacy, intellectual
property, access to services, publishing etc.
b) Academies. Na onal academies and Africa-wide academies (theAfrican Academy of Sciences and the Network of African Science
Academies) play influen al roles in represen ng and influencing
science at na onal and interna onal levels and have a highinterna onal profile. The Science Gran ng Councils’ engagementwith relevant academies would be important in developing
a common, consensual approach that might be important in
influencing na onal governments and interna onal donors.
c) Public Sector data holders. Much of the data held by public
sector and na onal sta s cs bodies is also of great value to theresearch community, and its contribu on to understanding,par cularly of social phenomena (e.g. resilient ci es, disaster
risk, precision medicine, agriculture etc), is substan al. It would
be helpful in exploring the accessibility for research of suchdata if the Councils’ could fund a survey of data holdings, ofaccessibility, of legal use and the policies of African governments
about such data. The availability and use of such data could be ofgreat value in solu ons-oriented work on SDGs.

144 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

10.2.2 Prac onersa) Universi es. There are three key related issues:•
They need to be persuaded of the long-term benefits of astrategy that would be likely to strongly perturb pa ernsof ins tu onal and personal funding, and of the policies
and incen ves that influence their behaviour. Many of thenorms and habits of academic researchers are challenged
by open science principles, although recent years haveseen substan al changes of a tude as the open science
movement has gained momentum. An important role for theCouncils would be to convene and lead delibera ve dialogue
with scien sts and their ins tu ons with the objec ve of
evolving a commi ed, shared purpose. If successful, it would
be a strong success factor.
•

Universi es may be, or may develop into important nodes ofac vity in open science. For example, they may be centres
for high performance compu ng, data science analy c andAI skills, cloud facili es and significant databases. An open
science ini a ve would need to engage with and rely onsuch facili es. If the Councils were to act in a planning andcoordina ng role, they would need to work with universi es
in discussing how this might best be done.

•

Universi es are the obvious loca ons for much of the higher
educa on and training that is required in data science andtechnology. It is important to recognize that the purpose ofthis is not solely to train specialists for the science system,
but also to create a pipeline of skills for public and private
sector roles. For longer term sustainability of skills andknowledge development, innova ons in the school systemfrom primary through secondary level, with incremental
studies on data science and technology required by open
science. (See recommenda ons in the UK system and Plan
Ceibal – Uruguay) [171].
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

145

•

Again, the Council’s could play a role in mapping intraAfrican
capaci es, working with expert groups (University
Centres-CODATA-RDA-WDS) in defining the curriculum andpoten ally seeking support from interna onal donors inbuilding up the manpower poten als at na onal level. Thereis of course a major manpower-planning role to be taken up
by na onal governments.

b) The Private Sector. The private business sector is a major
beneficiary of the digital technologies that are the drivers of the
4th industrial revolu on. Its major concerns are access to theskills described in this report and to the solu ons and approaches
that open science is designed to deliver. The perspec ve ofprivate sector, as a driver of na onal economies, is therefore
an important considera on in developing an open scienceini a ve. In the event of an SCGI ini a ve, there should be early
engagement with private data sector as described below:• Public data acquired by the private sector. The drama callyincreasing role of the private sector in the world of data is
striking. The acquisi on of the copyright to publicly fundeddata by scien fic publishers, and their business model, isa major development of considerable concern given theprecedent of their excessive profits from journal publishing.
It is important that this process is understood in rela onto the extent that it aﬀects ownership and access to data
in Africa. As we have already commented, the paucity of
African data holdings, which, if not corrected, is a serious
barrier to entry into a data-intensive world.
• Commercial science publishers
We have already commented on this issue (4.2) and expressed
our concern about a business model for subscrip on of openaccess journals. The ISC is launching a project on scien fic
publishing. It is important that African representa ves takepart in it.
146 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

• Private data in private hands
It is not necessarily true that the public/private interface
is impermeable to data flow across it. There are several
business sectors where a crea ve and produc ve flow ofdata and ideas across the public/private boundary takes
place. Given the importance of innova on for Africa, bothin social and economic terms, it is important to examine thisinterface in ways that establish where processes are subop mal, governed by rules that inhibit benefit. This could
be one of a series of small research projects that would beof great value in determining how to maximize scien fic,social and economic benefit from Africa’s data resources andiden fying where blockages to benefit occur.
• Compu ng and network technology companies
Commercial equipment service providers are important in
the provision of exis ng infrastructural components and will
be important in further developments involving hardware
systems. “Cloud” systems connected by large bandwidth
Wide Area Networks (WANs), are important in hos ng
so ware systems that enable data analysis and in providing
access to massive data collec ons. Private companies suchas Microso , Amazon, Mozilla and Google are poten al
partners in providing required e-infrastructure services,though care will be needed to avoid becoming dependent on
any par cular service provider whose business model may
diverge from what is needed. It is crucial to be an “intelligent
consumer” that understands the technical issues suﬃciently
deeply to be able to engage with commercial providers
in iden fying op mal solu ons, rather than the mostprofitable solu on for the supplier. A collec ve approachto commercial suppliers can be highly advantageous in costeﬀec ve procurement.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

147

10.2.3 Interna onal supporters
These have long played an important role in suppor ng thedevelopment of African scien sts. They may support the developmentof individuals through scholarships and fellowships, o en held in thefunder’s country, and through funding research projects including
projects involving joint work between African scien sts and thosefrom the funder’s country. They may focus on specific fields ofresearch or they may be prepared to give support across a wide rangeof disciplines, but they overwhelmingly fund science (natural, social,
medical or engineering). They may fund ins tu onal developments
by suppor ng the development of university research and by
developing and improving processes within na onal or pan-African
academies or Science Gran ng Councils. Principal groups include:• Governmental and Intergovernmental agencies. The World Bank
has a major project in Africa that supports ac vi es rela ng
to the digital economy. Governmental agencies that havepoten al to support science system development include theInterna onal Development Research Centre (IDRC - Canada);
French Development Agency (AfD), Swedish Interna onal
Development Coopera on Agency (Sida), Department forInterna onal Development (DFID - UK), and Norwegian Agency
for Development Coopera on (NORAD).
• Private Founda ons and chari es. These generally concentrateon specific areas, frequently in health and medicine. They include
the Wellcome Trust, the Gatsby Founda on and the Interna onal
Founda on for Science.
• Na onal academies. Na onal academies that support science andscien sts in Africa, par cularly early career scien sts in include
the Royal Society (UK), the Na onal Academies of Science (US),the Japan Society for the Promo on of Science and most recently
the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
• Interna onal scien fic bodies. There are a number of interna onal
bodies that are representa ve of the global scien fic community,
and though they are not generally sources of major funding,they have valuable capaci es that could readily be leveraged in
148 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

support of an African open science ini a ve if the Councils choseto promote it. They include:•
UNESCO is the United Na ons agency with responsibility for
scien fic aﬀairs and is the voice of science in interna onal
governance. It has considerable convening power that it uses
to promote scien fic developments that it deems to be ofinterna onal significance, a standing that it would certainly
recognize in a SGCI ini a ve on open science, an area that
UNESCO is considering for a formal recommenda on.
•

The Interna onal Science Council (ISC) is the senior
representa ve body for interna onal science, encompassing
the natural and social sciences. It promotes and sponsors
major programmes for interna onal science and collaborates
widely with major interna onal bodies such as the UN,
UNESCO and the WMO. It is currently developing several
programmes that would be of high relevance to open
science in Africa: on data integra on for interdisciplinaryscience, on global data governance and on open pla orms,
and which also supports the African Open Science Pla orm(AOSP). ISC members include many na onal academies andinterna onal disciplinary and interdisciplinary bodies, someof which currently support science in Africa.

•

Interna onal data bodies: The ISC Commi ee on Data
(CODATA) is a quasi-autonomous member organiza on thatconvenes great exper se in open data, the fron ers of data
science, capacity building and data policies and prac ce. It
is currently ac ve in Africa, where it also supports AOSP.
The ISC World Data System (WDS) is primarily concernedwith the crucial issue of scien fic databases, their crea on,
management and service opera on. It allocates the
CoreTrustSeal benchmark for databases. The Research Data
Alliance (RDA) is an interna onal consor um of individual
members that focuses on the crucial issue of data integra on
for individual domains of science.
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

149

10.3 The Ques onnaire to Science Gran ng Councils
10.3.1 The circulated ques onnaireQues onnaire: Open Science in Research and Development in
Africa.
This ques onnaire is part of a study commissioned by the African
Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) working in partnershipwith The Scinnovent Centre under the Science Gran ng Councils
Ini a ve (SGCI). The SGCs Ini a ve is jointly funded by the United
Kingdom’s Department for Interna onal Development (DFID),
Canada’s Interna onal Development Research Centre (IDRC), South
Africa’s Na onal Research Founda on (NRF) and the Swedish
Interna onal Coopera on (Sida) with a mandate to strengthen thecapaci es of Science Gran ng Councils in sub-Saharan Africa in orderto support research and evidence- based policies that will contributeto economic and social development. In the era of the Internet,
open science, open publishing and open data frame humanity’s
thinking about science and the poten al it holds for development
and innova on. The aim of this study is to develop an framework for
opera onalizing open science in the 15 SGCI member countries.
PurposeThe ques onnaire seeks to collect expert views on the poten al of anopen science ini a ve as a means of enhancing the work of African
Science Gran ng Councils in driving innova on and development.
The results will be used to produce (1) a report that will inform thedebate on Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development
to be held at the annual forum of the Councils in Dar es Salaam on 1115 November 2019, and policy briefs to inform further debates andopera onaliza on of open science for development and innova on
in SGCI member countries in Africa. As an expert in research andinnova on in your country and beyond, we would appreciate yourbrief input into the report by responding to a number of ques ons.
The me window for the report is very short, and we apologise for
150 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

the short no ce for this request, but we would be most grateful if you
would collaborate. All responses will be anonymised in the analysis
and project reports. You will however be included in the distribu on
lists for final project outputs in the first quarter of 2019.
First however, we briefly describe the hypothesis that is being
inves gated by the report and then list the ques ons that we would
like to you to respond to.
Hypothesis: the benefits of open science to Africaa) The fourth industrial revolu on is powered by the tools of thedigital revolu on.
These tools a general-purpose technology that con nuallytransforms itself, progressively penetra ng new domains, boos ng
produc vity across all sectors and industries because of theircost eﬀec veness. They are globally pervasive, with profoundeconomic and social implica ons that fundamentally disrupt preexis ng norms. They have created the so-called 4th industrial
revolu on, the impacts of which are shown in the diagram. Africa
must adapt to exploit the poten al of this revolu on.
Revolu onising, economies, socie es, lives
Banking
Insurance
Educa onHealthThe Digital Revolu on
Digital Science& Technology

Agriculture

General Purpose
Technology

Infrastructure
Human Capacity
Analy cs
Research

Tourism

4th Industrial
Revolu on

Media

Industry

PublicServices

Commerce
Smart
Ci es

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

151b) A collabora ve “Open Science” area would be an eﬃcient
response to this challenge
Enhancing intra-African collabora on (STISA2024) through an open
science ini a ve that s mulates and enables data-sharing, open
access to scien fic results and federated, shared infrastructure
would be a powerful means of harnessing the technologies ofthe digital revolu on to invigorate and release the poten als ofAfrican science, to s mulate innova on and crea vity, and to
dynamise economic and social development. It would create:i. eﬃciencies of scale in planning, procurement and provision;ii. scaling-up through collabora on and shared capaci es;
iii. s mula ng crea vity through interac on of diverse groups;
iv. amplifying impact through common purpose and voice;v. building consor a and collabora ons with a greater cri cal
mass;
vi. support from a shared capacity in cu ng-edge data science.
The ques onsa) Do you agree, in principle, with the above hypothesis?
b) Has your country experienced open science at a na onal level?
c) If yes, what has been your country experience?
d) What are the principle barriers to achieving a collabora ve open
science area ?
e) Are the barriers surmountable?
f) If yes, explain how?
g) Is there a mood, amongst poli cians and science leaders, toconsider and commit to intra-African collabora on on the scalerequired?
h) What role could the SGCs play in fostering a collabora ve open
science area among the 15 SGCI member countries?
i) What role would you play as an SGCI member country in acollabora ve open science area?
j) What would be the pros and cons of a 15 SGCI collabora ve open
science area?

152 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Priori es
What, in order of priority, are the key issues that would need to bepriori sed in a collaborative open science area?
Use a scale of 1 – 10. 1 being the highest, 10 being the lowest• Wide area networks,• Open science policies• Incen ves for researchers• Capacity building• Cloud compu ng,• High Performance Compu ng (HPC)• Mul -na onal mission-led programmes (e.g. STISA2024),• Ins tu onal commitments (e.g. universi es),• Commitment of external funders etc].
• Collabora on among the 15 SGCI member countries
Respondents details Bio details
Name …………………....…........ (Op onal)
Organisa on:
Government/Policy makerPosi on in organisa on:
R & D organisa on
Years in organiza on:
Academic Ins tu on
Country:
Funding Ins tu on
Category:x

Na onal Science Council
Con nental/Global Agency
Other (Please specify)

10.3.2 Respondents
Responses were sought from 15 and returned from 13 SGCI members
and one from the Sudan Bank for Development. The respondents
were: Kenya, Burundi, Uganda, Tanzania, Côte d’Ivoire, Botswana,
Ghana, Zambia, Mozambique, Sudan, Sierra Leon, Malawi andNamibia.

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

15310.3.3 Responses to ques ons
Table 10.1 below summarises our evalua on of the detailed responses
in rela on to four fundamental issues: barriers to open science;possible roles for SGCs; merits of an open science collabora on;
demerits of an open science collabora on. The full responses areavailable in an XL file, and are available on request.
Table 10.1. Summary of responses to key ques ons

Uganda, Tanzania, Côte d’Ivore, Botswana, Ghana, Zambia, Mozambique,
Sudan, Sierra Leon, Malawi and Namimbia
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Open science
policies

Capacitybuilding

Collabor ation
amongt he 15
SGCI member
countries

Wide area
networ ks

Institutional Incentives for
High
Cloud
Multi-national Commitmentcommitments researchers Perf or mance computing miss ion-led of extern al(e.g.
Computingpr ogrammes
funders
universities)

Figure 10.1. Average ranking of open science priori es.

Figure 10.2. Ranking of priori es by individual countries

154 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Principle barriers to achieving collabora ve open science in Africa:•
African states at diﬀerent levels of development•
Lack of poli cal commitment among member states•Open science is a new paradigm and not yet fully understood•Researchers are anxious about their career prospects and how open
science would aﬀect this. They are concerned about the ownership ofresults, technologies generated, and the importance of prime authorship•
Lack of adequate capaci es both human and ICT infrastructure•
Fear of loss of Intellectual Property•
Funders, universi es and research ins tu ons pressure researchers topublish in high impact factor journals, which are o en not open-accessjournals•
Few research databases and journals based in Africa•
Lack of policies at na onal and ins tu onal level for coordina ng
research•
Lack of awareness among policy makers of open science•
Lack of open science culture among researchers that needs to be
inculcated•Lack of enabling environment eg policies, regula ons and infrastructure,human capaci es•
Absence of mechanisms to eﬀec vely drive/achieve collabora ve open
science•Country specific frameworks that are s ll tradi onal may poten ally
aﬀect opera onaliza on of an open science area
Roles suggested for SGCs in fostering collabora ve open science:•
Facilitator•
lobbying for policy reform•
resource mobiliza on•
crea ng awareness•facilitate discussions on restructuring and promo on of open scienceamong researchers•
coordina ng implementa on of open science ini a ves•
oﬀer visibility of na onal science councils•
suppor ng exis ng systems and policy environments to embrace open
science•facilita ng development of appropriate frameworks to drive open
science
Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

155

SGCIs iden fied the following roles they could play in support of open
science in Africa:•
Advocacy for a na onal open science policy•
S mulate open science support amongst stakeholders•
Fund both research projects involving pro-open science researchers•
Support open science sensi za on forums•
Reform policies to accommodate the inevitable changes due to open
science•
Factor in principles of open science in na onal and co-funding grants
ini a ves•
Conduct workshops that create awareness about open science benefits
and IP•S mulate and fund joint research and ensure that the results are
published in open access to enable reach and access by all stakeholders•
Coordinate and facilitate all open science ac vi es•
Lobby Government to embrace open science
Merits of a 15 SGCI collabora ve open science area:•
Sharing of resources and experiences.
•
Higher probability of innova on•
Wide dissemina on•
Speedy publica on•
Easy access to science research in developing countries•
Free access to scien fic knowledge•
Enable the results of research and innova on to be disseminated more
rapidly and widely thus contribu ng to knowledge economy.
•
Speaking with one voice in facilita ng transforma on towards open
science e.g. developing common open science policies•
Maximizing scien fic output u liza on•
Providing a pla orm for cost eﬀec veness through resource, capacityand experience sharing and exchange

156 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Demerits of a 15 SGCI collabora ve open science area:•
Member countries are at diﬀerent levels in terms of readiness,
technological capaci es and governing policies•
Lack of mutual trust•
Expensive for researchers•
Quality concerns•
Financial issue for journals•
Gaps in human, infrastructure and financial resources•High costs of internet•
Poor last mile connec vity in most ins tu ons•
Inadequate availability locally generated research results•
Diﬀerent levels of NRENs capabili es•
Researchers seek to publish in journals with a high impact factor which
open access journals do not have.
•
There is poten al disagreements on the principles and prac ces
related to open science and access to informa on•
Lack of confiden ality

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

157

Some ATPS Research Paper Series•

New Approaches for Funding Research and Innova on in Africa, [Julius
Mugwagwa, Geoﬀrey Banda, Nicholas Ozor, Maurice Bolo, and Ruth
Oriama] ATPS Research Paper No. 30•

Towards Eﬀec ve Public-Private Partnerships in Research and Innova on,
A Perspec ve for African Science Gran ng Councils, [Banji OyeleranOyenyinka, Bertha Vallejo, Shru Vasudev] ATPS Research Paper No. 29•

A Review of the Kenyan Policy Environment for Oﬀ-grid Solar PY, [Kevin
Urama, Nicholas Ozor and Edith Kirumba], ATPS RESEARCH PAPER No.28•

Design and Analysis of a 1MW Grid-Connected Solar PV System in Ghana,[Ebenezer Nyarko Kumi, Abeeku Brew-Hammond], ATPS RESEARCH PAPER
No. 27•

Farmers’ Response and their Adapta on Strategies to Climate Change
in Mafeteng District, Lesotho, Farmers’ Response and their Adapta on
Strategies to Climate Change in Mafeteng District, Lesotho, [Sekaleli T.S.T,
Sebusi K.] ATPS Research Paper No. 26•

The The Ra onale and Capacity of Pastoral Community Innova ve
Adapta on to Climate Change in Ethiopia, [Tibebu Solomon], ATPS Research
Paper No. 25•

Contribu on of Informa on and Communica on Technologies (ICTs) in
Climate Change Awareness in Seke and Murewa Districts of Zimbabwe,(Shakespear Mudombi, Mammo Muchie), ATPS RESEARCH PAPER No. 24•

Vulnerability and adapta on strategies to climate variability and change of
the Bos-taurus dairy genotypes under diverse produc on environments in
Kenya. [Kiplangat Ngeno, Bockline O. Bebe], ATPS RESEARCH PAPER No. 23

158 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

•Indigenous Rain Water Harves ng Prac ces for Climate Adapta on andFood Security in Dry Areas: The Case of Bahi District, [Deusdedit Kibassa],
ATPS Research Paper No. 22•

Influencing Na onal Legisla on, Policies, Strategies and Programmes to
Ensure Appropriate Protec on and Benefit Sharing of Tradi onal Herbal
Medicinal Knowledge (THMK) with and by Tradi onal Herbalists in Uganda,[Wanakwakwa J., Munabi C., Lwanga H., Muhumuza J., Gateese T.], ATPSRESEARCH PAPER No. 21•

Analysis of Tradi onal Healers in Lesotho: Implica ons on Intellectual
Property Systems, By Pitso Masupha, Lefa Thamae and Mofihli Phaqane.
ATPS Research Paper Series No. 20•Intellectual Property, Tradi onal Knowledge, Access Benefit Sharing Policy
Environment in Eight Countries in Eastern and Southern Africa: Swaziland,
Kenya, Lesotho, Mozambique, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Ethiopia, By
Joseph M. Wekundah. ATPS Research Paper Series No. 19•

Assessment of Possible Intellectual Property Protec on Op ons of
Tradi onal Knowledge System in Ethiopia: Special Reference in Herbal
Medicine for Livestock, By Tibebu Solomon. ATPS Research Paper SeriesNo. 18•

Na onal Policies and Legal Frameworks Governing Tradi onal Knowledge
and Eﬀec ve Intellectual Property Systems in Southern and Eastern Africa:
The Case of Tradi onal Healers in Tanzania, By Georges S. Shemdoe (PhD)and Loy Mhando. ATPS Research Paper Series No. 17•

Assessment of the impacts and Adap ve Capacity of the Machobane
Farming System to Climate Change in Lesotho, By Sissay B. Mekbib, Adesola
O. Olaleye, Motlatsi N. Mokhothu, Masia Johane, Spirit B. Tilai and Taddese
Wondimu. ATPS Research Paper Series No. 16•

Farmers’ Percep ons of Climate Change and Adapta on Strategies inNorthern Nigeria: An Empirical Assessment, By Dr. Blessing Kaletapwa
Farauta, Chukwudumebi Le cia Egbule, Dr. Yusuf Lawan Idrisa and Dr.
Victoria, Chinwe Agu. ATPS Research Paper Series No. 15

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

159

160 Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

Open Science in Research and Innova on for Development in sub-Saharan Africa

161