Keywords
Innovation
Bibliometric analysis
Open data
Intellectual property
How to Cite
Abstract
Recent work suggests that open science can improve different scientific disciplines, as well as the diffusion of knowledge and the efficiency of the innovation system. However, open science practices have not yet been fully adopted. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between open science and innovation through a bibliometric review on this topic. A growth of 28,5 % per year and a predominance of European countries in productivity on the subject was observed between 2013 and 2022. Furthermore, after the evaluation of productivity, it was observed that 91,8 % of the authors (1 401) have participated in only one publication. Finally, the topics with the most development and relevance are interoperability, open source and open hardware, data sharing, intellectual property, and science policy. The present study shows a growing, but still incipient interest in the relationship between open science and innovation, with a focus in recent years on the study of topics related to education (higher education, educational innovation), responsible research, social innovation, co-creation and artificial intelligence.
References
Aria, Massimo, y Corrado Cuccurullo. 2017. «Bibliometrix : An R-Tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis». Journal of Informetrics 11 (4): 959-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007.
Bliss, Tj, T. Jared Robinson, John Hilton, y David A. Wiley. 2013. «An OER COUP: College Teacher and Student Perceptions of Open Educational Resources». Journal of Interactive Media in Education 2013 (1): 4. https://doi.org/10.5334/2013-04.
Brüggemann, Julia, Paolo Crosetto, Lukas Meub, y Kilian Bizer. 2015. «Intellectual Property Rights Hinder Sequential Innovation -- Experimental Evidence». SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2545950.
Budroni, Paolo, Jean Claude-Burgelman, y Michel Schouppe. 2019. «Architectures of Knowledge: The European Open Science Cloud». ABI Technik 39 (2): 130-41. https://doi.org/10.1515/abitech-2019-2006.
Castellanos, F. Xavier, Adriana Di Martino, R. Cameron Craddock, Ashesh D. Mehta, y Michael P. Milham. 2013. «Clinical Applications of the Functional Connectome». NeuroImage 80 (octubre): 527-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.083.
Czarnitzki, Dirk, Christoph Grimpe, y Maikel Pellens. 2014. «Access to Research Inputs: Open Science Versus the Entrepreneurial University». SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2411925.
Ebersberger, Bernd, Carter Bloch, Sverre J. Herstad, y Els Van De Velde. 2012. «OPEN INNOVATION PRACTICES AND THEIR EFFECT ON INNOVATION PERFORMANCE». International Journal of Innovation and Technolog y Management 09 (06): 1250040. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021987701250040X.
Erickson, Kristofer. 2018. «Can Creative Firms Thrive without Copyright? Value Generation and Capture from Private-Collective Innovation». Business Horizons 61 (5): 699-709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.04.005.
Fell, Michael J. 2019. «The Economic Impacts of Open Science: A Rapid Evidence Assessment». Publications 7 (3): 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7030046.
Fernández Pinto, Manuela. 2020. «Open Science for private Interests? How the Logic of Open Science Contributes to the Commercialization of Research». Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics 5 (noviembre): 588331. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2020.588331.
Frankenhuis, Willem E., y Daniel Nettle. 2018. «Open Science Is Liberating and Can Foster Creativity». Perspectives on Psychological Science 13 (4): 439-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691618767878.
Gold, E. Richard. 2021. «The Fall of the Innovation Empire and Its Possible Rise through Open Science». Research Policy 50 (5): 104226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104226.
Heradio, Ruben, Luis de la Torre, Daniel Galan, Francisco Javier Cabrerizo, Enrique Herrera-Viedma, y Sebastian Dormido. 2016. «Virtual and Remote Labs in Education: A Bibliometric Analysis». Computers & Education 98 (julio): 14-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.010.
Heredia, Ana. 2022. «A tradition of open, academy-owned, and non-profit research infrastructure in Latin America». Editado por Bonnie Lawlor. Information Services & Use 42 (3-4): 447-52. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-220177.
Heuritsch, Julia. 2020. «Knowledge Utilization and Open Science Policies: Noble aims that ensure quality research or Ordering discoveries like a pizza?»https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2005.14021.
Himanen, Lauri, Amber Geurts, Adam Stuart Foster, y Patrick Rinke. 2019. «Data- Driven Materials Science: Status, Challenges, and Perspectives». Advanced Science 6 (21): 1900808. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.201900808.
Inauen, Matthias, y Andrea Schenker –Wicki. 2011. «The Impact of Outside– in Open Innovation on Innovation Performance». Editado por Sven Carlsson. European Journal of Innovation Management 14 (4): 496-520. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601061111174934.
Invernizzi, Noela. 2020. «Hacia una recomendación de la UNESCO sobre la ciencia abierta. Crear un consenso mundial sobre la ciencia abierta». Consulta Regional Virtual sobre la Recomendación de la UNESCO en Ciencia Abierta. UNESCO. https://es.unesco.org/sites/default/files/comentarios_sobre_ciencia_abierta_noela_invernizzi.pdf.
Jong, Simcha, y Kremena Slavova. 2014. «When Publications Lead to Products: The Open Science Conundrum in New Product Development». Research Policy 43 (4): 645-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.12.009.
Kittrie, Elizabeth, Audie A. Atienza, Robert Kiley, David Carr, Aki MacFarlane, Vinay Pai, Jennifer Couch, et al. 2017. «Developing International Open Science Collaborations: Funder Reflections on the Open Science Prize». PLOS Biolog y 15 (8): e2002617. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2002617.
Krogh, Georg von, y Eric von Hippel. 2006. «The Promise of Research on Open Source Software». Management Science 52 (7): 975-83. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0560.
LeBel, Etienne P., Lorne Campbell, y Timothy J. Loving. 2017. «Benefits of Open and High-Powered Research Outweigh Costs.» Journal of Personality and Social Psycholog y 113 (2): 230-43. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000049.
Loukil, Kamilia. 2020. «Intellectual Property Rights, Human Capital and Innovation in Emerging and Developing Countries». Journal of Social Economics Research 7 (1): 35-41. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.35.2020.71.35.41.
Markowitz, David Matthew, Hyunjin Song, y Samuel Hardman Taylor. 2021. «Tracing the Adoption and Effects of Open Science in Communication Research». Preprint. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/dsf67.
McKiernan, Erin C, Philip E Bourne, C Titus Brown, Stuart Buck, Amye Kenall, Jennifer Lin, Damon McDougall, et al. 2016. «How Open Science Helps Researchers Succeed ». ELife 5 (julio): e16800. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16800.
Mirowski, Philip. 2018. «The Future(s) of Open Science». Social Studies of Science 48 (2): 171-203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312718772086.
Mueller, Shane T., y Brian J. Piper. 2014. «The Psychology Experiment Building Language (PEBL) and PEBL Test Battery». Journal of Neuroscience Methods 222 (enero): 250-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2013.10.024.
Murray, Fiona, y Scott Stern. 2007. «Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientific Knowledge?» Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 63 (4): 648-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2006.05.017.
Nicholas, David, Cherifa Boukacem-Zeghmouri, Abdullah Abrizah, Blanca Rodríguez-Bravo, Jie Xu, Marzena –wigo–, Anthony Watkinson, y Eti Herman. 2020. «Open science from the standpoint of the new wave of researchers: Views from the scholarly frontline1». Editado por Bonnie Lawlor. Information Services & Use 39 (4): 369-74. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-190069.
Otsu, Kaori, y Joan Masó. 2023. «Open Science as the new normal, Citizen Science as the new component of research infrastructure». Other. oral. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-172.
Ramírez-Montoya, María-Soledad, y Francisco-José García-Peñalvo. 2018. «Co-creation and open innovation: Systematic literature review». Comunicar 26 (54): 09-18. https://doi.org/10.3916/C54-2018-01.
Scheliga, Kaja, y Sascha Friesike. 2014. «Putting open science into practice: A social dilemma? » First Monday, 19 (9) agosto. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v19i9.5381.
Schumpeter, Joseph, y Ursula Backhaus. 2003. «The Theory of Economic Development». En Joseph Alois Schumpeter, editado por Jürgen Backhaus, 1:61-116. The European Heritage in Economics and the Social Sciences. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48082-4_3.
Seabold, Skipper, y Josef Perktold. 2010. «Statsmodels: Econometric and Statistical Modeling with Python». En 9th Python in Science Conference 92-96. Austin, Texas. https://doi.org/10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-011.
Shen, Chien-wen, y Jung-tsung Ho. 2020. «Technology-Enhanced Learning in Higher Education: A Bibliometric Analysis with Latent Semantic Approach». Computers in Human Behavior 104 (marzo): 106177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106177.
Song, Hyunjin, David Matthew Markowitz, y Samuel Hardman Taylor. 2021. «Trusting on the Shoulders of Open Giants? Open Science Increases Trust in Science for the Public and Academics». Preprint. Open Science Framework. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/g328c.
Song, Yu, Xieling Chen, Tianyong Hao, Zhinan Liu, y Zixin Lan. 2019. «Exploring Two Decades of Research on Classroom Dialogue by Using Bibliometric Analysis». Computers & Education 137 (agosto): 12-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.002.
Stracke, Christian M. 2020. «Open Science and Radical Solutions for Diversity, Equity and Quality in Research: A Literature Review of Different Research Schools, Philosophies and Frameworks and Their Potential Impact on Science and Education». En Radical Solutions and Open Science, editado por Daniel Burgos, 17-37. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology. Singapore: Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4276-3_2.
Stracke, Christian M., Daniel Burgos, Gema Santos-Hermosa, Aras Bozkurt, Ramesh Chander Sharma, Cécile Swiatek Cassafieres, Andreia Inamorato dos Santos, et al. 2022. «Responding to the Initial Challenge of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of International Responses and Impact in School and Higher Education». Sustainability 14 (3): 1876. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031876.
Tello Gamarra, Jorge, Ricardo Machado Leo, Ariane Mello Silva Avila, y Jonatas Wendland. 2018. «Innovation Studies in Latin America: A Bibliometric Analysis». Journal of Technolog y Management & Innovation 13 (4): 24-36. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242018000400024.
Torres de Oliveira, Rui, Martie-Louise Verreynne, Sandra Figueira, Marta Indulska, y John Steen. 2020. «How Do Institutional Innovation Systems Affect Open Innovation?» Journal of Small Business Management 60 (6): 1404-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2020.1775466.
Vicente-Saez, Ruben, y Clara Martinez-Fuentes. 2018. «Open Science Now: A Systematic Literature Review for an Integrated Definition». Journal of Business Research 88 (julio): 428-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.043.
Vlokhoven, Has van. 2019. «The Effect of Open Access on Research Quality». Journal of Informetrics 13 (2): 751-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.04.001.
Watson, Mick. 2015. «When Will ‘Open Science’ Become Simply ‘Science’?» Genome Biolog y 16 (1): 101. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2.
Woelfle, Michael, Piero Olliaro, y Matthew H. Todd. 2011. «Open Science Is a Research Accelerator». Nature Chemistry 3 (10): 745-48.https://doi.org/10.1038/nchem.1149.
Authors:
- They must sent the publication authorization letter to Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información.
- They can share the submission with the scientific community in the following ways:
- As teaching support material
- As the basis for lectures in academic conferences
- Self-archiving in academic repositories.
- Dissemination in academic networks.
- Posting to author’s blogs and personal websites
These allowances shall remain in effect as long as the conditions of use of the contents of the journal are duly observed pursuant to the Creative Commons:Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 license that it holds. DOI links for download the full text of published papers are provided for the last three uses.
Self-archiving policy
For self-archiving, authors must comply with the following
a) Acknowledge the copyright held by the journal Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información.
b) Establish a link to the original version of the paper on the journal page, using, for example, the DOI.
c) Disseminate the final version published in the journal.
Licensing of contents
The journal Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información allows access and use of its contents pursuant to the Creative Commons license: Attribution- Non-commercial-NoDerivatives 4.0.
Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información by Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional License.
Creado a partir de la obra en http://rev-ib.unam.mx/ib.
This means that contents can only be read and shared as long as the authorship of the work is acknowledged and cited. The work shall not be exploited for commercial ends nor shall it been modified.
Limitation of liability
The journal is not liable for academic fraud or plagiarism committed by authors, nor for the intellectual criteria they employ. Similarly, the journal shall not be liable for the services offered through third party hyperlinks contained in papers submitted by authors.
In support of this position, the journal provides the Author’s Duties notice at the following link: Responsibilities of authors.
The director or editor of the journal shall notify authors in the event it migrates the contents of the journal’s official website to a distinct IP or domain.