新质生产力视域下的开放科学发展与治理

Open Science Development and Governance from the Perspective of New Quality Productive Forces

作为具有重要战略意义的全球科技发展新趋势,开放科学倡导科学知识生产过程中的自由、开放、合作、共享,极大地提高了科学知识生产的效率与质量,与新质生产力的培育发展逻辑不谋而合,将是孕育新质生产力以抢占科学中心与创新高地的关键,也是世界各国争相角逐的全新赛场。中国近年来在开放科学方面取得跨越式进步,必须看到仍然存在的问题与不足,因此探讨开放科学对促进新质生产力形成和发展的具体作用并分析适合中国的开放科学治理模式。通过文献调研与比较分析方法,梳理和明确开放科学推动科研范式产生质变的重要意义,选取欧盟“地平线计划”、美国开放科学中心(COS)与中国OSID开放科学计划等实践为代表性案例,从规划政策、技能培训、评价体系与投入格局等方面对比不同开放科学模式的差异。透过科学治理视角发现,欧盟发展开放科学兼具宏观顶层设计与微观评价体系改革,从政策规划入手搭建起包括技能培训、评价体系与投入格局在内的完整开放科学发展网络,官方主导的统一性与各国共赢的协调性特征突出;COS强调多元投入与广泛参与的开放格局,以其OSF平台为核心依托形成一整套开放科学推广与实践模式;OSID以国家公益计划的方式先行尝试,有着良好的政策支持力度与期刊参与度,但存在布局完整性低与市场灵活性差等不足。在比较国际上不同开放科学发展模式的基础上,提出中国可通过加强科技规划、培养专业人才、完善评价体系和优化资助结构等途径构建中国式开放科学治理体系,以科技创新助力新质生产力形成。

As a new trend in global science and technology development with important strategic significance,open science advocates freedom,openness,cooperation and sharing in the process of scientific knowledge production,which greatly improves the efficiency and quality of scientific knowledge production.It coincides with the logic of cultivating and developing new quality productive forces and will be the key to nurturing new quality productivity to seize scientific centers and innovation heights.It is also a new arena for countries around the world to compete.China has made great progress in open science in recent years,but we must see the problems and shortcomings that still exist.Therefore,this paper explores the specific role of open science in promoting the formation and development of new quality productive forces and analyzes the open science governance model suitable for China.Through literature research and comparative analysis methods,the paper sorts out and clarifies the important significance of open science in promoting qualitative changes in scientific research paradigms,selects the Horizon 2020 of European Union,the Center for Open Science(COS)of America,and the Open Science Identity(OSID)of China as representative cases,and compares the differences between different open science models in terms of planning policies,skills training,evaluation systems and investment patterns.From the perspective of scientific governance,it is found that the EU's development of open science combines macro-top-level design and micro-evaluation system reform,starting from policy planning,it has built a complete open science development network including skill training,evaluation system,and investment pattern,with prominent characteristics of official-led unity and win-win coordination among countries;COS emphasizes an open pattern of diversified investment and extensive participation,and forms a complete set of open science promotion and practice models with its OSF platform as the core;OSID has tried it first in the form of a national public welfare plan,with good policy support and journal participation,but there are shortcomings such as low layout integrity and poor market flexibility.Based on the comparison of different open science development models in the world,it is proposed that China can build a Chinese-style open science governance system through strengthening scientific and technological planning,cultivating professional talents,improving the evaluation system and optimizing the funding structure,to help the formation of new quality productive forces through scientific and technological innovation.