Reimagining Scholarly Communication in the Era of Open Science
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66635/dy7ntj76Keywords:
Open Science, Scholarly Communication, Open Access, Research Infrastructure, Research Ecosystem, Academic Libraries, Research Data SharingAbstract
Significant changes have been observed in the conventional scholarly communication system, driven by the rapid evolution of digital technologies and the expansion of global research collaborations. In recent years, the concept of open science has been identified as a revolutionary approach transforming the conventional scholarly communication system. This study aims to examine the impact of open science on the conventional scholarly communication system through emerging conceptual frameworks, digital research infrastructures, and interlinked research systems. This study is conducted using a conceptual review approach, synthesizing scholarly publications, policy documents, and recent discussions on emerging open science practices. The findings of the study revealed the increased significance of digital research infrastructures such as institutional repositories, research data repositories, preprints, and global scholarly databases in promoting the open dissemination of knowledge. Despite the significant developments in the conventional scholarly communication system, several challenges were identified regarding the sustainability of open science infrastructures and the availability of open science resources. This study concluded that the future of the conventional scholarly communication system depends on establishing an integrated system comprising policy frameworks, research infrastructures, and interlinked research systems.
References
1.Abdin, A. Y., Nasim, M. J., Ney, Y., & Jacob, C. (2021). The pioneering role of sci in post publication public peer review (P4r). Publications, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010013
2.Bartling, S., & Friesike, S. (2014a). Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing. In Coresource 4. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8
3.Bartling, S., & Friesike, S. (2014b). Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing. In Coresource 4. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8
4.Beltramo, A., Henrysson, M., & Usher, W. (2026). Open science practices for better NDCs: Supporting transparent and accountable climate mitigation action. PLOS Climate, 5(2 February). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000839
5.BOAI. (n.d.). Budapest Open Access Initiative. Retrieved May 5, 2026, from https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/
6.Bowman, N. D., & Keene, J. R. (2018). A layered framework for considering open science practices. In Communication Research Reports (Vol. 35, Number 4, pp. 363–372). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2018.1513273
7.Bulock, C. (2023). Public Access to Federally Funded Research. Serials Review, 49(1–2), 51–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2023.2174399
8.Cassella, M. (2024). Beyond transformative agreements. Library strategies towards Open Science. JLIS.It, 15(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.36253/jlis.it-592
9.Cudennec, C., Sud, M., & Boulton, G. (2022). Governing Open Science. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 67(16), 2359–2362. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2022.2086462
10.De Oliveira, R. S., & Ballestero, M. (2026). The “Open Science” promise vs the Author-pays reality. The Hidden Costs of Open Access: Equity, Quality, and Trust. Archives of Pediatric Neurosurgery, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.46900/apn.v8i1.349
11.Eisfeld-Reschke, J., Herb, U., & Wenzlaff, K. (2014). Research Funding in Open Science. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing (pp. 237–253). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_16
12.Fecher, B., & Friesike, S. (2014a). Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing (pp. 17–47). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2
13.Fecher, B., & Friesike, S. (2014b). Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing (pp. 17–47). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2
14.FICCI. (2024). Research ecosystem within Indian higher-education sector: strategic pillars of reform across academic and industry research.
15.Gerber, A. (2014). Science Caught Flat-Footed: How Academia Struggles with Open Science Communication. In Coresource 4 (pp. 73–80). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_4
16.Hacohen, M., Levy, A., Kaiser, H., Green Snyder, L. A., Amatya, A., Gundersen, B. B., Spiro, J. E., & Dinstein, I. (2026). An open science resource for accelerating scalable digital health research in autism and other neurodevelopmental conditions. Nature Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-025-02146-3
17.Hagger, M. S. (2022). Developing an open science ‘mindset.’ In Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine (Vol. 10, Number 1, pp. 1–21). Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2021.2012474
18.Hauben, R., Hauben, J., Zorn, W., Chon, K., & Ekeland, A. (2007). The Origin and Early Development of the Internet and of the Netizen: Their Impact on Science and Society. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-47650-6_4
19.McKenna, J. (2024). Open Science Infrastructure. MDPI. https://blog.mdpi.com/2024/12/03/open-science-infrastructure/
20.Musen, M. A., O’Connor, M. J., Hardi, J., & Martínez-Romero, M. (2026). Knowledge Engineering for Open Science: Building and Deploying Knowledge Bases for Metadata Standards. AI Magazine, 47(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/aaai.70048
21.Pandey, S. C., & Pattnaik, P. N. (2015). University Research Ecosystem: A Conceptual Understanding. Review of Economic and Business Studies, 8(1), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1515/rebs-2016-0021
22.Peter Suber. (2012). Open Access. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://direct.mit.edu/books/book-pdf/2416874/book_9780262301732.pdf
23.Phogat, P., Rab, S., & Wan, M. (2025). Science communication in the digital age: Trends, gaps, and interdisciplinary opportunities. In Information Services and Use (Vol. 45, Numbers 1-2 Special Issue: NISOPlus2024, pp. 148–163). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1177/18758789251342896
24.Puschmann, C. (2014). (Micro)Blogging Science? Notes on Potentials and Constraints of New Forms of Scholarly Communication. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing (pp. 89–106). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_6
25.Redkina, N. S. (2024). Impact of Open Science Infrastructure on the Development of the World Information Resources Market. Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 51(2), 161–172. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0147688224700096
26.Redkina, N. S., & Ryabova, I. I. (2025). Open Science Trends in Library Information and Analytical Products. Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 52(3), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0147688225700212
27.Savona, R., Modena, A., Alessi, L., Alberini, C. M., Baussano, I., Guerra, R., Pecorelli, S., Rasi, G., Siviero, P. D., Dellaportas, P., Khozin, S., & Stein, R. M. (2025). Towards a framework for a new research ecosystem. In Humanities and Social Sciences Communications (Vol. 12, Number 1). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05281-1
28.Soliman, M., Sarstedt, M., Adler, S. J., Siegfried, D., Genschow, O., & Imschloss, M. (2025). A Tale of Open Science: Emergence of a New Normal. Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41471-025-00218-5
29.Stojanovski, J. (2022). Open Science Infrastructure as a key component of Open Science. Septentrio Conference Series, (1). https://doi.org/10.7557/5.6777
30.Wang, Y., Fan, J., Bao, Z., Zhang, S., Liu, L., Yang, M., & Church, G. M. (2026). Cryptographic open science: enabling secure and incentivized biomedical data sharing with web 3.0 technologies to overcome the open science dilemma. Frontiers in Blockchain, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2025.1631217
31.Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, Ij. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., Blomberg, N., Boiten, J. W., da Silva Santos, L. B., Bourne, P. E., Bouwman, J., Brookes, A. J., Clark, T., Crosas, M., Dillo, I., Dumon, O., Edmunds, S., Evelo, C. T., Finkers, R., … Mons, B. (2016). Comment: The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data, 3. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18
