数据与计算发展前沿 ›› 2024, Vol. 6 ›› Issue (5): 46-56.

CSTR: 32002.14.jfdc.CN10-1649/TP.2024.05.005

doi: 10.11871/jfdc.issn.2096-742X.2024.05.005

• • 上一篇    下一篇

开放科学监测体系国际经验及启示

赵静宜*(),陈昕,周园春   

  1. 中国科学院计算机网络信息中心，北京 100083
  • 收稿日期:2023-08-23 出版日期:2024-10-20 发布日期:2024-10-21
  • 通讯作者: * 赵静宜（E-mail: jyzhao@cnic.cn）
  • 作者简介:赵静宜，中国科学院计算机网络信息中心，工程师，硕士，研究方向为：科学数据管理、数据安全。
    本文主要承担收集和处理数据，撰写论文初稿。
    Zhao Jingyi, holding a Master’s degree is an engineer at the Computer Network Information Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Her research interests include Scientific Data Management and Data Security.
    In this paper, she is mainly responsi ble for collecting and processing data and drafting the initial manuscript.
    E-mail: jyzhao@cnic.cn
  • 基金资助:
    中国科学院“十四五”网信专项(CAS-WX2022GC-02);中国科学院“十四五”网信专项(CAS-WX2022SDC-ZZX);中国科学院科学传播专项(zhzc0903)

International Experience and Enlightenment of Open Science Monitor

ZHAO Jingyi*(),CHEN Xin,ZHOU Yuanchun   

  1. Computer Network Information Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100083, China
  • Received:2023-08-23 Online:2024-10-20 Published:2024-10-21

RichHTML

11

PDF

159

摘要：

【目的】随着开放科学政策、实践深入推进，开放科学监测体系作为反馈机制在开放科学治理体系中越来越重要。【方法】本文以主导模式、监测指标和监测实施为分析框架，通过网络调研、文献调研等方法对欧盟委员会的Open Science Monitor、开放获取基础设施OpenAIRE的OpenAIRE Monitor、美国科学公共图书馆（PLOS）的Open Science Indicators进行系统分析。【结果】总体上，不同主导模式下，监测体系的内在逻辑和资源体系差异较大，不同监测体系的监测指标和组织实施各具特色，但都非常关注开放获取政策落实和FAIR原则的实施，不同监测体系的结果能够在不同层次、不同程度上反映开放科学目标的实现情况。【结论】建议借鉴国外开放科学监测体系的实践，统筹协调开放科学政策，以基础性平台建设为抓手，加快推进多层次开放科学监测体系建设以及国际合作，为持续推进开放科学实践贡献中国方案。

关键词: 开放科学, 监测, 指标体系

Abstract:

[Objective] As open science policies and practices continue to advance, the open science monitoring system, serving as a feedback mechanism, occupies a significant position within the Open Science governance system. [Methods] This article uses leading models, monitoring indicators, and monitoring implementation as an analytical framework. By means of methods such as online surveys and literature search, the status of European Commission Open Science Monitor, OpenAIRE Monitor, and the Public Library of Science (PLOS) Open Science Indicators are systematically analyzed. [Results] Due to difference in leading models, the intrinsic logic and resources that support the monitoring systems vary considerably. The monitoring indicators and implementation of the different monitoring systems are distinctive, but all pay close attention to the implementation of open access policies and the FAIR principles. The analyzed results of different monitoring systems reflect the attainment of open science objectives in various levels and degrees. [Conclusions] It is recommended that we should learn lessons from the practices of foreign Open Science monitor systems, coordinate open science policies comprehensively, utilize foundational platform construction as a leverage point, and accelerate the construction of a multi-level open science monitoring system and international cooperation, thereby contributing Chinese solutions to the practice of open science.

Key words: Open Science, monitor, indicator system