Mapping the Future of Open Science (OS): The Complex Landscape of OS Initiatives

• September 17, 2025

The transformation of scientific research towards open practices represents one of the most significant shifts in academic culture of our time. The Open Universal Science (OPUS) project, a three-year project funded under the Horizon Europe Programme has systematically mapped and analysed the evolving landscape of open science initiatives across Europe and beyond. This web article explores the project’s extensive findings, revealing how open science principles are becoming increasingly intertwined with the ongoing reform of research assessment systems.

Understanding OPUS

The OPUS project, officially titled “Open Universal Science,” ran from September 2022 to August 2025 with a clear mission: to contribute to a more inclusive, transparent, and impactful system for open science and research assessment. The project’s fundamental purpose was to move beyond traditional reliance on metrics such as journal impact factors and instead promote systems that reward open practices, enhance reproducibility, and ensure research becomes more accessible and relevant to society.

At its core, OPUS sought to bridge the gap between open science advocacy and practical implementation. The project recognised that whilst the principles of open science had gained widespread acceptance, there remained significant challenges in translating these principles into concrete rewards and incentives within research institutions and funding organisations. This challenge formed the backbone of the project’s comprehensive landscaping exercise, which aimed to identify, analyse, and connect the various stakeholders, initiatives, and frameworks operating in this space.

The project’s strategic approach was built around several key work packages, with Deliverable 1.3 representing an updated state-of-the-art analysis that built upon earlier foundational work. This deliverable served multiple purposes: documenting the evolution of the open science landscape since the project’s inception, identifying new developments and emerging trends, and providing practical input for subsequent project activities.

The Landscaping Methodology: A Systematic Approach to Mapping Open Science

OPUS employed a rigorous and systematic methodology to map the complex landscape of open science initiatives. The project’s approach was multi-faceted, focusing on four key areas: framework projects funded by European programmes, individual experts working in open science, networks and organisations promoting open science practices, and specific schemes designed to incentivise open science adoption.

The initial landscaping exercise, completed in Deliverable 1.1, established the foundation for ongoing analysis. This involved extensive desk research, direct contact with project coordinators and network leaders, and careful analysis of project deliverables and publications. The methodology was particularly thorough in its approach to project selection, focusing on initiatives funded through Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe programmes that demonstrated direct relevance to open science and research assessment reform.

For the updated analysis presented in Deliverable 1.3, the project adopted a dual approach. First, it tracked the progress and outputs of previously identified projects, analysing new deliverables and developments. Second, it identified and analysed new projects funded since the original landscaping exercise. This approach ensured that the analysis remained current and comprehensive, capturing the dynamic nature of the open science ecosystem.

Framework Projects: The Building Blocks of Open Science Infrastructure

The OPUS landscaping exercise identified and analysed a substantial number of framework projects, each contributing unique elements to the broader open science ecosystem. These projects can be broadly categorised into several thematic areas, each addressing different aspects of the open science challenge.

Widening Participation and Strengthening the European Research Area

The PathOS Project (Open Science Impact Pathways) represents a crucial initiative in quantifying and understanding the impact of open science practices. This project has produced significant outputs including comprehensive scoping reviews of models, evidence, correlations, and causalities in open science impact. PathOS has developed a handbook of open science indicators and created methodologies for reproducibility indicators, providing essential tools for measuring the effectiveness of open science practices. The project’s work on case studies for evaluation of open science impact has been particularly valuable in demonstrating real-world applications of open science principles.

The WorldFAIR Project (Global cooperation on FAIR data policy and practice) focuses on the critical area of data management and sharing. This initiative has produced demonstrations of FAIR data exchange with independent partners and has worked extensively on cross-national social sciences survey FAIR implementation case studies. The project’s policy briefs have provided valuable insights for policymakers seeking to implement FAIR data principles at national and international levels.

The DIAMAS Project (Developing Institutional open Access publishing Models to Advance Scholarly communication) addresses the crucial area of open access publishing infrastructure. This project has conducted comprehensive landscape analyses of Institutional Publishing Service Providers (IPSPs) across Europe, developing taxonomies and best practices for institutional publishing. The project’s work on the Extensible Quality Standard in Institutional Publishing (EQSIP) represents a significant contribution to ensuring quality in institutional publishing services.

The IANUS Project (INspiring and ANchoring TrUst in Science) tackles the fundamental issue of societal trust in science and research. Through comprehensive analysis of research and policy landscapes, IANUS has produced digital handouts with best practices and recommendations for aligning research efforts with societal needs and concerns. The project’s policy briefs for policy recommendations provide practical guidance for enhancing public trust in scientific endeavours.

The VERITY Project (“deVEloping scientific Research with ethIcs and integrity”) focuses specifically on the ethical dimensions of open science. Through extensive literature reviews on public trust in science and analysis of strategies and tools to tackle societal mistrust, VERITY has contributed significantly to understanding the relationship between research integrity and open science practices.

Research Infrastructure and EOSC Development

The Skills4EOSC Project represents a comprehensive approach to building digital skills for the European Open Science Cloud. This project has developed extensive training materials, including curricula for data stewards, recognition frameworks for trainers, and learning paths for various scientific communities. The project’s work on FAIR-by-design training resources and its development of competence centre support materials demonstrate practical approaches to building open science capacity.

The GraspOS Project (next Generation Research Assessment to Promote Open Science) directly addresses the intersection of open science and research assessment. Through landscape analyses of open science-aware research assessment approaches and infrastructure architecture development, GraspOS has provided crucial insights into how assessment systems can better recognise and reward open science practices.

The FAIRCORE4EOSC Project focuses on core components supporting FAIR data principles within EOSC. The project’s development of compliance assessment toolkits provides practical tools for institutions seeking to implement FAIR data principles effectively.

The FAIR-IMPACT Project (Expanding FAIR Solutions across EOSC) works on enabling discovery and interoperability of federated research objects. Through targeted landscape analyses and development of metrics for automated FAIR assessment, this project provides essential infrastructure for scaling FAIR practices across scientific communities.

Networks and Organisations: The Collaborative Foundation

The OPUS analysis identified numerous networks and organisations that serve as crucial nodes in the open science ecosystem. These entities provide coordination, advocacy, and practical support for open science implementation.

International and Global Networks

UNESCO’s Working Group on the Open Science Monitoring Framework represents perhaps the most significant global initiative in open science coordination. Following the adoption of the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science in November 2021, this working group has continued to develop frameworks for monitoring open science implementation globally. The group’s work on draft principles for open science monitoring, which underwent global consultation in 2024, represents a significant step towards establishing common approaches to measuring open science progress.

The Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) has emerged as a central force in research assessment reform. Since its establishment, CoARA has grown significantly, with member organisations developing and implementing action plans based on core commitments to reform research assessment practices. The coalition’s work on the Blueprint for Open, Connected, and Responsible Research Assessment provides a comprehensive framework for institutions seeking to transform their assessment practices.

European Networks and Initiatives

Science Europe’s Open Science Working Group continues to serve as a crucial voice in European open science policy. The organisation’s dual focus on open science and research assessment reform, coordinated through their Research Culture working group, demonstrates the interconnected nature of these areas. Their 2024 report on “Strategic Approaches to and Research Assessment of Open Science” provides valuable insights into how European funding and performing organisations are navigating the transition to open science-aware assessment practices.

The European University Association (EUA) Working Group on Science 2.0 and Open Science has maintained its commitment to supporting open science through the development of comprehensive policy frameworks. The EUA Open Science Agenda 2025 identifies three key priority areas: universal and perpetual open access to scholarly outputs, FAIR research data, and institutional approaches to research assessment, clearly demonstrating the integrated approach needed for effective open science implementation.

The EOSC Association’s Research Careers, Recognition and Credit Task Force addresses one of the most challenging aspects of open science implementation: ensuring that researchers are properly recognised and rewarded for open science practices. Their publications, including position papers on EOSC as an enabler of research assessment reform, provide crucial insights into how infrastructure development can support cultural change in research assessment.

Specialised Networks and Working Groups

The Guild Research Careers & Assessment Working Group brings together senior representatives from leading European universities to discuss career and assessment frameworks. Their open letters and statements on European Commission policy initiatives demonstrate active engagement with policy development processes.

CERN’s Open Science Working Group, whilst formally dissolved in 2023 following completion of its mandate to establish a CERN Open Science Policy, represents an important model for institutional open science governance. CERN’s early signing of the CoARA agreement and development of an institutional action plan demonstrates how major research organisations can lead by example in assessment reform.

OpenAIRE and National Open Access Desks continue to provide crucial infrastructure and support for open science implementation across Europe. OpenAIRE’s action plan supporting CoARA principles and their comprehensive strategy for 2023-2025 demonstrate sustained commitment to advancing research assessment practices aligned with open science values.

Schemes and Initiatives: Practical Implementation Tools

The OPUS analysis also identified various schemes and initiatives designed to provide practical tools and frameworks for implementing open science practices. These range from policy frameworks to technical standards and assessment tools.

The Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information represents a significant commitment by research organisations to transform how research information is produced and used. With 163 signatories representing universities, funding organisations, and infrastructure providers, this declaration commits organisations to making openness of research information the default, working with systems that support open research information, and collaborating to achieve the transition from closed to open research information systems.

The Open Science Monitoring Initiative (OSMI) provides a coordinated approach to monitoring open science implementation globally. Through working groups covering various aspects of open science monitoring, from scoping needs to technical specifications, OSMI is developing shared resources and infrastructure for analysing scholarly outputs and building capacity for open science monitoring.

The OPUS Expert Group: A Global Community of Practice

One of OPUS’s most significant achievements was the establishment and growth of a comprehensive expert group that provides insights into the global open science community. Starting with 46 participants at the time of Deliverable 1.1, the expert group grew to 142 members by the project’s conclusion, representing a diverse and highly experienced community of open science practitioners.

Geographic and Institutional Diversity

The expert group demonstrates remarkable global reach, with participants representing 36 different countries. While 61% of participants work in EU member states, covering 16 different countries, the group also includes substantial representation from the UK, Netherlands, and countries across other continents. This geographic diversity ensures that the group’s insights reflect varied institutional contexts and policy environments.

The institutional composition of the expert group is heavily weighted towards public research-performing organisations, which represent 70% of participants. This concentration reflects the primary focus on institutional change within universities and research institutes, though the group also includes representatives from funding organisations, government bodies, and service providers.

Expertise and Experience Levels

The expert group demonstrates exceptionally high levels of expertise, with 66% of researcher participants classified as either R3 (Established Researcher) or R4 (Leading Researcher) levels. This senior representation ensures that the group’s insights are grounded in substantial experience and institutional influence.

Perhaps most significantly, the group shows remarkable depth of experience in open science, with only 17% having worked in the field for fewer than two years, while 29% have over ten years of experience. This distribution indicates that the expert group represents not just early adopters but seasoned practitioners who have witnessed and shaped the evolution of open science practices over time.

Specialisation Areas and Research Assessment

The specialisation patterns within the expert group reveal important insights about the open science community. Open access to publications remains the most common specialisation, selected by 86 participants, followed by FAIR data management and open data management. However, it is noteworthy that very few participants selected research assessment reform as their primary specialisation, despite this being a central focus of the OPUS project. This finding suggests that research assessment reform remains a specialised area that requires dedicated expertise and attention.

The expert group served multiple functions throughout the project, including providing feedback on project developments, participating in stakeholder workshops, and contributing to consultations on the OPUS Research Assessment Framework. Their continued engagement demonstrates the value of building and maintaining expert communities around open science initiatives.

The Interconnection Between Open Science and Research Assessment Reform

One of OPUS’s most significant contributions lies in documenting and analysing the increasingly close relationship between open science advancement and research assessment reform. This relationship operates on multiple levels and represents a fundamental shift in how research value is conceptualised and measured.

Policy Integration

At the policy level, European initiatives consistently link open science and research assessment reform as complementary objectives. The European Research Area Policy Agenda for 2025-2027 explicitly identifies both open science and research assessment reform as structural policies requiring long-term commitment. This integration reflects recognition that sustainable open science implementation requires fundamental changes to how researchers and institutions are evaluated and rewarded.

The Council Recommendation on research careers similarly emphasises the need for assessment reforms that ensure quality and equality while supporting open science practices. This policy alignment creates a framework where open science implementation and assessment reform can reinforce each other rather than operating as separate initiatives.

Institutional Implementation Challenges

OPUS’s analysis reveals that whilst policy support for linking open science and assessment reform is strong, institutional implementation remains challenging. The varying approaches documented across European University Alliances demonstrate that institutions interpret and implement these connections differently, often reflecting different organisational cultures, resource allocations, and strategic priorities.

The CoARA action plans provide valuable insights into how institutions are attempting to operationalise these connections. These plans reveal diverse approaches to embedding open science considerations in assessment procedures, from developing new criteria for open science activities to implementing qualitative assessment methods that can better capture open science contributions.

Technical and Infrastructure Dimensions

The relationship between open science and assessment reform also operates at technical and infrastructure levels. Projects like GraspOS demonstrate how new technical infrastructure can support assessment practices that better recognise open science contributions. Similarly, initiatives like OpenAIRE provide essential infrastructure for making research outputs discoverable and assessable in ways that support both open science goals and improved assessment practices.

The development of new metrics and indicators, documented through projects like PathOS, provides tools that can support assessment systems in recognising and rewarding open science practices. However, OPUS’s analysis also reveals ongoing challenges in developing metrics that genuinely capture the value of open science contributions without creating new forms of gaming or inappropriate quantification.

Implications for Current and Future Projects

The OPUS deliverable provides valuable insights and resources that can inform both current and future projects working at the intersection of open science and research assessment. These implications operate across multiple dimensions and stakeholder groups.

For Project Coordinators and Research Teams

Project coordinators can use the OPUS landscape analysis to identify potential collaborators, understand the broader ecosystem of initiatives, and position their work within established frameworks. The detailed project descriptions and analysis of outputs provide practical insights into what has worked well and where challenges remain.

The expert group database represents a valuable resource for projects seeking experienced advisors or partners. The geographic and expertise diversity of this group makes it particularly valuable for projects requiring international perspectives or specialised knowledge in specific open science domains.

For Funding Organisations

Funding organisations can use the OPUS analysis to understand the maturation of the open science field and identify areas where continued investment is needed. The documentation of project outputs and their impacts provides evidence for the value of sustained funding in this area.

The analysis of networks and organisations also reveals the importance of supporting coordination and community-building activities alongside specific research projects. The growth and impact of initiatives like CoARA demonstrate how relatively modest investments in coordination can generate significant multiplier effects across the research system.

For Institutions Implementing Assessment Reform

Perhaps most importantly, the OPUS deliverable provides practical resources for institutions seeking to implement assessment reforms that better recognise open science contributions. The detailed analysis of CoARA action plans, institutional case studies, and best practices offers concrete examples that institutions can adapt to their specific contexts.

The documentation of challenges and solutions across different institutional types and national contexts helps institutions understand both the opportunities and potential pitfalls of assessment reform initiatives. This knowledge can inform more effective change management strategies and help institutions avoid common implementation difficulties.

For Policy Makers

Policy makers can use the OPUS analysis to understand the current state of open science implementation and identify areas where policy intervention could be most effective. The documentation of both successes and challenges provides evidence for policy decisions about resource allocation and regulatory frameworks.

The international scope of the analysis also provides insights into how different policy approaches are working across various national contexts, offering lessons for policy makers seeking to learn from international experience.

Future Directions and Sustainability

The OPUS project’s comprehensive mapping reveals both the remarkable progress achieved in open science implementation and the significant challenges that remain. The analysis suggests several key areas where continued attention and investment will be crucial.

One of the key challenges identified through the OPUS analysis is sustaining momentum for open science implementation beyond project funding periods. Many of the initiatives documented show impressive outputs and impacts during their funded phases, but questions remain about long-term sustainability and continued development.

The growth of networks like CoARA suggests that creating sustainable governance structures and community-driven initiatives may be more effective for long-term impact than relying solely on time-limited projects. The OPUS analysis supports investment in community-building and coordination activities as complements to specific research and development projects.

Scaling Successful Approaches

The OPUS documentation of successful approaches provides a foundation for scaling effective practices across broader communities. However, the analysis also reveals the importance of adaptation and contextualisation rather than simple replication. Different institutional types, disciplinary communities, and national contexts require different approaches to implementing open science and assessment reform.

Addressing Remaining Gaps

Despite the comprehensive coverage achieved through European funding programmes, the OPUS analysis identifies several areas where significant gaps remain. These include limited attention to certain disciplinary communities, insufficient integration of industry perspectives, and ongoing challenges in developing assessment approaches that effectively recognise collaborative and interdisciplinary contributions.

A Foundation for Transformation

The OPUS project’s landscaping exercise represents far more than a catalogue of initiatives and organisations. It provides a detailed map of an ecosystem in transformation, documenting both the remarkable progress achieved and the challenges that remain in building more open, inclusive, and effective systems for research assessment and reward.

The project’s findings demonstrate that the integration of open science principles into research assessment is not merely a policy aspiration but an active area of innovation and implementation across Europe and beyond. From major institutional commitments through CoARA to technical infrastructure development through EOSC initiatives, the foundations for transformation are being systematically constructed.

Perhaps most significantly, the OPUS analysis reveals that this transformation is being driven by a committed and experienced community of practitioners, as evidenced by the expert group’s composition and engagement. This community provides both the expertise and the institutional connections necessary to sustain change beyond individual project funding periods.

For current and future projects working in this space, the OPUS deliverable provides both a comprehensive resource and a challenge. The resource lies in the detailed documentation of what has been achieved, who is involved, and how different approaches have succeeded or struggled. The challenge lies in building upon this foundation to address the remaining gaps and ensure that the promise of open science transformation is fully realised across the research system.

The close links between open science and research assessment reform, documented throughout the OPUS analysis, suggest that sustainable progress requires integrated approaches that address both cultural change and practical implementation challenges. Projects that recognise and build upon these interconnections are more likely to achieve lasting impact than those that treat open science and assessment reform as separate domains.

As the research landscape continues to evolve, the OPUS project’s mapping provides an essential baseline for understanding progress and identifying priorities for continued development. The project’s legacy lies not just in its documentation of the current state but in its demonstration of the collaborative, systematic approach needed to support continued transformation of research practices and values.