Measuring the Impact of Open Science: Uncertainties Amid the EU’s Competitiveness and Defence Agenda

An increasing number of initiatives are being launched at both national and European levels to monitor the implementation of open science. However, there is still limited evidence on whether open science practices are delivering the anticipated benefits.

This is one of the key insights from PathOS, a Horizon Europe project that seeks to develop methods for measuring the academic, economic, and social impact of open science. The PathOS partners have published a handbook outlining a range of indicators to measure the impact of open science, including some that cannot yet be monitored due to insufficient data. One of the key challenges the project sought to address is the difficulty of establishing causality. For instance, while an open-source tool may demonstrate strong uptake by industry, this success cannot automatically be attributed to its open nature.

While Europe remains committed to the principles of open science, it is not yet clear how the growing emphasis on economic competitiveness and funding for sensitive technologies with military potential may affect these ambitions. In the past, European research institutions approached open science in a “very naïve” way, offering unrestricted access not only to publications but also to data and software. However, in today’s context of artificial intelligence and heightened security risks, clearer limits are needed.

Universities therefore require robust structures to manage digital rights. Access to data does not necessarily need to be fully open but should be transparent. Horizon Europe follows the principle of “as open as possible, as closed as necessary.” For example, research results may be kept closed if they are intended for commercial exploitation. While researchers are not obliged to publish their results, if they choose to do so, these must be made available in open access.