Does 'open science' support 'open knowledge'? - Research to Action - Research to Action

"Open science, as we learn from Wikipedia, is the umbrella term for the movement to make scientific research, data and dissemination accessible to all levels of an inquiring society, amateur or professional. It encompasses practices such as publishing open research and campaigning for open access, which are generally percieved to make it easier to publish and communicate scientific knowledge and act as a precursor to ‘open knowledge’ that is clearly translated and understood. Its advocates deplore the centuries-old process of the results of private research being reviewed by scientific peers and published, after some time, in academic journals that are often expensive, especially for developing economies, and which are generally only read by other scientists.  Open science on the internet allows for faster dissemination of research findings among a far wider audience without the costs of hard copy that are imposed by the near-monopolistic academic publishing industry ... here are now supposedly about 13,000 scientific journals available in the Open Science Directory  and major organisations are adding to the momentum by joining the open science movement.  Microsoft Research has a policy that allows it to retain a license for research submitted to conferences or publishers in order to post it to a freely accessible online site as well.  The Yale University Open Data Access Project has entered an agreement with Johnson & Johnson that will enable scientists around the world to gain access to the company’s clinical trial data assets and the Harvard Open Access Project fosters the growth of open access to research.  Yet despite the growth and vibrancy of the open science movement, three questions arise; i) are researchers, and the institutions within which they carry out their work, adopting openness as much as would generally be deemed desirable?, ii) is open science any easier to absorb into policy formulation and professional practice than its earlier (closed)counterpart?, and iii) when knowledge is regarded as the understanding of information based on its perceived importance or relevance to a problem area, is openness alone sufficient for science to increase our knowledge? If open science can be shown to lead to better use of the knowledge that research generates then there’s a stronger argument in its support ... In my previous blog, I summarised a literature review of the impact of research on development policy and practice and outlined a range of activities that are deemed to contribute towards research impact that go beyond mere publication of the results.  In a follow up survey, I have asked researchers in my field (Information and Communication Technologies for Development – ICT4D) how they feel about these various aspects of achieving impact with their research ... "