The African Open Science Platform: The Future of Science and Science for the Future

This document presents a draft strategy and makes the scientific case for the African Open Science Platform (AOSP). It is based on an expert group meeting held in Pretoria on 27-28 March 2018. Its purpose is to act as a framework for detailed, work on the creation of the Platform and as a basis for discussion at a stakeholder meeting to be held on 3-4 September 2018, which will lead to a definitive strategy for implementation from 2019. Expert group members at the March meeting were drawn from the following organisations: African Academy of Sciences (AAS), Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA), International Council for Science (ICSU), National Research and Education Networks (NRENS), Research Data Alliance (RDA), South African Department of Science & Technology (DST) and National Research Foundation (NRF), Square Kilometre Array (SKA), UNESCO. The African Open Science Platform The Future of Science and Science for the Future 4 The African Open Science Platform. The Platform’s mission is to put African scientists at the cutting edge of contemporary, data-intensive science as a fundamental resource for a modern society. Its building blocks are: • a federated hardware, communications and software infrastructure, including policies and enabling practices, to support Open Science in the digital era; • a network of excellence in Open Science that supports scientists & other societal actors in accumulating and using modern data resources to maximise scientific, social and economic benefit. These objectives will be realised through seven related strands of activity: Strand 0: Register & portal for African & related international data collections & services. Strand 1: A federated network of computational facilities and services. Strand 2: Software tools & advice on policies & practices of research data management. Strand 3: A Data Science Institute at the cutting edge of data analytics and AI. Strand 4: Priority application programmes: e.g. cities, disease, biosphere, agriculture. Strand 5: A Network for Education & Skills in data & information. Strand 6: A Network for Open Science Access and Dialogue. The document also outlines the proposed governance, membership and management structure of the Platform, the approach to initial funding and the milestones in building up to the launch. The case for Open Science is based on the profound implications for society and for science, of the digital revolution and of the storm of data that it has unleashed and of the pervasive and novel means of communication that it has enabled. No state should fail to recognise this potential or to adapt their national intellectual infrastructure in exploiting benefits and minimising risks. Open Science is a vital enabler in maintaining the rigour and reliability of science; in creatively integrating diverse data resources to address complex modern challenges; in open innovation and in engaging with other societal actors as knowledge partners in tackling shared problems. It is fundamental to realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals. National science systems worldwide are struggling to adapt to this new paradigm. The alternatives are to do so or risk stagnating in a scientific backwater, isolated from creative streams of social, cultural and economic opportunity. Africa should adapt and capitalise on the opportunities, but in its own way, and as a leader not a follower, with broader, more societally-engaged priorities. It should seize the challenge with boldness and resolution

The African Open Science Platform: The Future of Science and Science for the Future

This document presents a draft strategy and makes the scientific case for the African Open Science Platform (AOSP). It is based on an expert group meeting held in Pretoria on 27-28 March 2018. Its purpose is to act as a framework for detailed, work on the creation of the Platform and as a basis for discussion at a stakeholder meeting to be held on 3-4 September 2018, which will lead to a definitive strategy for implementation from 2019. Expert group members at the March meeting were drawn from the following organisations: African Academy of Sciences (AAS), Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA), International Council for Science (ICSU), National Research and Education Networks (NRENS), Research Data Alliance (RDA), South African Department of Science & Technology (DST) and National Research Foundation (NRF), Square Kilometre Array (SKA), UNESCO. The African Open Science Platform The Future of Science and Science for the Future 4 The African Open Science Platform. The Platform’s mission is to put African scientists at the cutting edge of contemporary, data-intensive science as a fundamental resource for a modern society. Its building blocks are: • a federated hardware, communications and software infrastructure, including policies and enabling practices, to support Open Science in the digital era; • a network of excellence in Open Science that supports scientists & other societal actors in accumulating and using modern data resources to maximise scientific, social and economic benefit. These objectives will be realised through seven related strands of activity: Strand 0: Register & portal for African & related international data collections & services. Strand 1: A federated network of computational facilities and services. Strand 2: Software tools & advice on policies & practices of research data management. Strand 3: A Data Science Institute at the cutting edge of data analytics and AI. Strand 4: Priority application programmes: e.g. cities, disease, biosphere, agriculture. Strand 5: A Network for Education & Skills in data & information. Strand 6: A Network for Open Science Access and Dialogue. The document also outlines the proposed governance, membership and management structure of the Platform, the approach to initial funding and the milestones in building up to the launch. The case for Open Science is based on the profound implications for society and for science, of the digital revolution and of the storm of data that it has unleashed and of the pervasive and novel means of communication that it has enabled. No state should fail to recognise this potential or to adapt their national intellectual infrastructure in exploiting benefits and minimising risks. Open Science is a vital enabler in maintaining the rigour and reliability of science; in creatively integrating diverse data resources to address complex modern challenges; in open innovation and in engaging with other societal actors as knowledge partners in tackling shared problems. It is fundamental to realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals. National science systems worldwide are struggling to adapt to this new paradigm. The alternatives are to do so or risk stagnating in a scientific backwater, isolated from creative streams of social, cultural and economic opportunity. Africa should adapt and capitalise on the opportunities, but in its own way, and as a leader not a follower, with broader, more societally-engaged priorities. It should seize the challenge with boldness and resolution

The African Open Science Platform: The Future of Science and Science for the Future

This document presents a draft strategy and makes the scientific case for the African Open Science Platform (AOSP). It is based on an expert group meeting held in Pretoria on 27-28 March 2018. Its purpose is to act as a framework for detailed, work on the creation of the Platform and as a basis for discussion at a stakeholder meeting to be held on 3-4 September 2018, which will lead to a definitive strategy for implementation from 2019. Expert group members at the March meeting were drawn from the following organisations: African Academy of Sciences (AAS), Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), Committee on Data for Science and Technology (CODATA), International Council for Science (ICSU), National Research and Education Networks (NRENS), Research Data Alliance (RDA), South African Department of Science & Technology (DST) and National Research Foundation (NRF), Square Kilometre Array (SKA), UNESCO. The African Open Science Platform The Future of Science and Science for the Future 4 The African Open Science Platform. The Platform’s mission is to put African scientists at the cutting edge of contemporary, data-intensive science as a fundamental resource for a modern society. Its building blocks are: • a federated hardware, communications and software infrastructure, including policies and enabling practices, to support Open Science in the digital era; • a network of excellence in Open Science that supports scientists & other societal actors in accumulating and using modern data resources to maximise scientific, social and economic benefit. These objectives will be realised through seven related strands of activity: Strand 0: Register & portal for African & related international data collections & services. Strand 1: A federated network of computational facilities and services. Strand 2: Software tools & advice on policies & practices of research data management. Strand 3: A Data Science Institute at the cutting edge of data analytics and AI. Strand 4: Priority application programmes: e.g. cities, disease, biosphere, agriculture. Strand 5: A Network for Education & Skills in data & information. Strand 6: A Network for Open Science Access and Dialogue. The document also outlines the proposed governance, membership and management structure of the Platform, the approach to initial funding and the milestones in building up to the launch. The case for Open Science is based on the profound implications for society and for science, of the digital revolution and of the storm of data that it has unleashed and of the pervasive and novel means of communication that it has enabled. No state should fail to recognise this potential or to adapt their national intellectual infrastructure in exploiting benefits and minimising risks. Open Science is a vital enabler in maintaining the rigour and reliability of science; in creatively integrating diverse data resources to address complex modern challenges; in open innovation and in engaging with other societal actors as knowledge partners in tackling shared problems. It is fundamental to realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals. National science systems worldwide are struggling to adapt to this new paradigm. The alternatives are to do so or risk stagnating in a scientific backwater, isolated from creative streams of social, cultural and economic opportunity. Africa should adapt and capitalise on the opportunities, but in its own way, and as a leader not a follower, with broader, more societally-engaged priorities. It should seize the challenge with boldness and resolution

Bioinformatics and the politics of innovation in the life sciences: Science and the state in the United Kingdom, China, and India

The governments of China, India, and the United Kingdom are unanimous in their belief that bioinformatics should supply the link between basic life sciences research and its translation into health benefits for the population and the economy. Yet at the same time, as ambitious states vying for position in the future global bioeconomy they differ considerably in the strategies adopted in pursuit of this goal. At the heart of these differences lies the interaction between epistemic change within the scientific community itself and the apparatus of the state. Drawing on desk-based research and thirty-two interviews with scientists and policy makers in the three countries, this article analyzes the politics that shape this interaction. From this analysis emerges an understanding of the variable capacities of different kinds of states and political systems to work with science in harnessing the potential of new epistemic territories in global life sciences innovation

How Does Citizen Science "Do" Governance? Reflections from the DITOs Project

Citizen science (CS) is increasingly becoming a focal point for public policy to provide data for decision-making and to widen access to science. Yet beyond these two understandings, CS engages with political processes in a number of other ways. To develop a more nuanced understanding of governance in relation to CS, this paper brings together theoretical analysis by social science researchers and reflections from CS practice. It draws on concepts from Science and Technology Studies and political sciences as well as examples from the "Doing-It-Together Science" (DITOs) project. The paper develops a heuristic of how CS feeds into, is affected by, forms part of, and exercises governance. These four governance modes are (1) Source of information for policy-making, (2) object of research policy, (3) policy instrument, and (4) socio-technical governance. Our analysis suggests that these four dimensions represent different conceptions of how science and technology governance takes place that have not yet been articulated in the CS literature. By reflecting on the DITOs project, the paper shows how this heuristic can enrich CS. Benefits include project organisers better communicating their work and impacts. In its conclusion, the paper argues that focusing on the complexity of governance relations opens up new ways of doing CS regarding engagement methodologies and evaluation. The paper recommends foregrounding the broad range of governance impacts of CS and reflecting on them in cooperation between researchers and practitioners

An iterative consensus-building approach to revising a genetics/genomics competency framework for nurse education in the UK.

AIM: To report a review of a genetics education framework using a consensus approach to agree on a contemporary and comprehensive revised framework. BACKGROUND: Advances in genomic health care have been significant since the first genetics education framework for nurses was developed in 2003. These, coupled with developments in policy and international efforts to promote nursing competence in genetics, indicated that review was timely. DESIGN: A structured, iterative, primarily qualitative approach, based on a nominal group technique. METHOD: A meeting convened in 2010 involved stakeholders in UK nursing education, practice and management, including patient representatives (n = 30). A consensus approach was used to solicit participants' views on the individual/family needs identified from real-life stories of people affected by genetic conditions and the nurses' knowledge, skills and attitudes needed to meet those needs. Five groups considered the stories in iterative rounds, reviewing comments from previous groups. Omissions and deficiencies were identified by mapping resulting themes to the original framework. Anonymous voting captured views. Educators at a second meeting developed learning outcomes for the final framework. FINDINGS: Deficiencies in relation to Advocacy, Information management and Ongoing care were identified. All competencies of the original framework were revised, adding an eighth competency to make explicit the need for ongoing care of the individual/family. CONCLUSION: Modifications to the framework reflect individual/family needs and are relevant to the nursing role. The approach promoted engagement in a complex issue and provides a framework to guide nurse education in genetics/genomics; however, nursing leadership is crucial to successful implementation

Age-Related Differences in Susceptibility to Carcinogenesis: A Quantitative Analysis of Empirical Animal Bioassay Data

In revising cancer risk assessment guidelines, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) analyzed animal cancer bioassay data over different periods of life. In this article, we report an improved analysis of these data (supplemented with some chemical carcinogenesis observations not included in the U.S. EPA’s original analysis) and animal bioassay studies of ionizing radiation. We use likelihood methods to avoid excluding cases where no tumors were observed in specific groups. We express dosage for animals of different weights on a metabolically consistent basis (concentration in air or food, or per unit body weight to the three-quarters power). Finally, we use a system of dummy variables to represent exposures during fetal, preweaning, and weaning–60-day postnatal periods, yielding separate estimates of relative sensitivity per day of dosing in these intervals. Central estimate results indicate a 5- to 60-fold increased carcinogenic sensitivity in the birth–weaning period per dose ÷ (body weight(0.75)-day) for mutagenic carcinogens and a somewhat smaller increase—centered about 5-fold—for radiation carcinogenesis per gray. Effects were greater in males than in females. We found a similar increased sensitivity in the fetal period for direct-acting nitrosoureas, but no such increased fetal sensitivity was detected for carcinogens requiring metabolic activation. For the birth–weaning period, we found an increased sensitivity for direct administration to the pups similar to that found for indirect exposure via lactation. Radiation experiments indicated that carcinogenic sensitivity is not constant through the “adult” period, but the dosage delivered in 12- to 21-month-old animals appears a few-fold less effective than the comparable dosage delivered in young adults (90–105 days of age)