Skip to main content
News > Blog > In my opinion, there are primarily two scientific cultures in the world.

In my opinion, there are primarily two scientific cultures in the world.

In my opinion, there are primarily two scientific cultures in the world.

The first is locking down intellectual progress with patents and paywalled journals in economically developed countries.

The second culture is represented by economically developing countries. In these societies silos of knowledge are rarer, in part, because the countries may have limited resources to institute the in-depth intellectual property legal systems.  Further, researchers and students in these societies may even be cut out from journals due to a lack of funding, so their current understanding of scientific progress may not be as current as in the other culture, creating a knowledge divide.

With two separate knowledge systems which are even in conflict, is there a system that can engage both cultures into a unified global scientific community?

From my position, a unified system should further the dissemination of knowledge around the world and even serve as an economic development engine to the economically developing countries.

A promise of “Open Science” could be such a unification.

This is not to say the silo system in the economically developed countries needs to go away.  Rather, there is room for a hybrid model – one with open sourced intellectual properties that do not make it into markets in economically developed countries.

There is approximately $4 trillion worth of orphan intellectual properties (IP) sitting dormant  (Hovis, April 2014).  Some because there was not enough funding to continue its prosecution.  Some is orphan because there was not a licensee qualified to pursue the IP.  And of course the IP may not have been seen as important or valuable to the market and is not maintained.

However, one person’s trash can be another’s treasure.

When orphan IP is opened and provides the opportunity for interdisciplinary interaction, unique applications and research may be evolve that was never envisioned by the inventor(s).

By bringing the scientific community together around orphan IP, research could be moved forward in a collaborative way, while stimulating economic development.

What are your thoughts?

We Believe

Open Therapeutics crowdsources orphan and dormant therapeutic intellectual properties (IP) to scientists around the world. The goal is advancing research that ordinarily has not generated a public value or been recognized. This approach particularly helps underserved scientists to collaborate with their more financially capable colleagues.

How open science helps researchers succeed:

Open access, open data, open source, and other open scholarship practices are growing in popularity and necessity. However, widespread adoption of these practices has not yet been achieved. One reason is that researchers are uncertain about how sharing their work will affect their careers.

The review of the literature demonstrates that open science is associated with increases in citations, media attention, potential collaborators, job opportunities, and funding opportunities. These findings are evidence that open science practices bring significant benefits to researchers relative to more traditional closed practices.

Secured By miniOrange