Open Science improves sharing and reuse of knowledge, increases transparency, and encourages public participation in the research process. While this approach has gained widespread support from researchers and policymakers, the new report, “Equity in Open Science: Case studies of Open Science infrastructures and Open Peer Review”, shows that openness alone does not automatically lead to fairness.
In order to enable a more equitable Open Science ecosystem deliberate choices in how it is designed and supported is required.
Open Science infrastructures: beyond access
The report examines whether key research infrastructures, including repositories, publishing platforms, collaboration tools and linking services, are truly fit for purpose for diverse research communities.
The findings show that the design, governance and accessibility of these infrastructures have a major influence on who can use, contribute to and benefit from Open Science. However, while community-governed infrastructures often align more closely with the needs and values of researchers, they also face challenges related to long-term funding, sustainability and reliance on volunteer labour.
The report also points to significant gaps in infrastructure across countries, regions, disciplines, languages and research formats, which limit meaningful participation.
Increasing attention to infradiversity
To address these challenges, the report makes the case for infradiversity, namely the need for a diverse and interconnected ecosystem of Open Science infrastructures.
Infradiversity supports locally relevant approaches, multilingualism, disciplinary diversity and flexible interoperability. It recognises that equitable infrastructures should do more than provide access: they should strengthen community leadership, public accountability, and a more balanced distribution of power across the research ecosystem.
Rethinking Open Peer Review
Making peer review more open can improve accountability, encourage constructive feedback, and give reviewers greater recognition for their work. However, openness also creates challenges. For example, early-career researchers and scholars from underrepresented groups may be less comfortable openly critiquing the work of more established colleagues, while at the same time much of the reviewing process still depends on unpaid and often invisible labour.
The findings also show that greater openness does not automatically lead to broader participation. Barriers such as unequal access to technology, publication costs, power imbalances and differing career stages continue to shape who is able to participate. New Publish–Review–Curate models offer promising alternatives, but they require continued investment and careful evaluation to ensure they deliver equitable outcomes.
From evidence to action
Drawing on the findings, the report outlines practical recommendations for policymakers, research organisations, funders and infrastructure providers. These include:
- Embedding equity-by-design into Open Science policies and infrastructures;
- Supporting infradiversity through sustainable, community-led and locally relevant infrastructure;
- Encouraging flexible, context-sensitive approaches to Open Peer Review rather than a one-size-fits-all model;
- Recognising and rewarding the labour involved in peer review, editorial work and research curation;
- Investing in ongoing monitoring and research to better understand the equity impacts of Open Science while also sharing good practices across the research community.
Background
This report supports the development of the action “Applying Equity in Open Science” of the European Research Area (ERA) Policy Agenda 2025-2027.
The ERA seeks to align research policies and programmes in order to create a single, borderless market for research, innovation and technology across the EU. The current ERA Policy Agenda includes 11 structural policies and 8 actions, covering a broad range of capacity-building and harmonisation measures.
Within this framework, “Applying Equity in Open Science” aims to promote greater equity in Open Science by identifying barriers and challenges, expanding not-for-profit Open Access across disciplines, strengthening skills and infrastructure capacities, and developing policy approaches that support a more equitable Open Science landscape.
