[Taxacom] UNESCO Open Science Recommendation

Carlos Alberto Martínez Muñoz biotemail at gmail.com
Fri Mar 6 14:37:18 CST 2020


Hi guys,
This is now a bit too far from taxonomy. Please, let me out of the CC list.
I can read your arguments on the daily digest.
Cheers,

Carlos A. Martínez Muñoz
Zoological Museum, Biodiversity Unit
FI-20014 University of Turku
Finland
ResearchGate profile
<https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carlos_Martinez-Munoz>
Myriapod Morphology and Evolution
<https://www.facebook.com/groups/205802113162102/>




El vie., 6 mar. 2020 a las 22:21, John Grehan (<calabar.john at gmail.com>)
escribió:

> It seems that no matter what choice is made when it comes to money,
> whether what is current, or what is proposed, someone or other is going to
> benefit. I guess its a matter of judgement as to whether the status quo is
> better or worse than some proposed change. Stephen, when you say that
> climate change is a push for wealth transfer, are you saying that climate
> change is a fiction as a certain president says, or that its real, but the
> actions proposed are designed to transfer wealth to certain individuals? If
> the latter, is it better to do nothing at all - in your opinion? Just
> asking for clarification and won't pursue any further as its off the
> taxonomic topic.
>
> While many science publications are fairly easily obtained, the 'fairly'
> is relative. There are still important (for me) publications that are not
> accessible when one does not work for a wealthy institution or is
> personally wealthy enough to pay.
>
> John Grehan
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 3:01 PM Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
>> Yes, John, the OA/OS is by no means the biggest contributor to money
>> wastage, but it is a potential contributor nonetheless. It is yet another
>> example of how "the system" works. The U.S. defence budget is possibly the
>> biggest single contributor to money wastage. However, I have no connections
>> with such things, so science is what I'm concerned about, not politics or
>> military spending. What irks me is that the OA/OS movement closely
>> parallels several other bandwagons currently at play, e.g. (1) climate
>> change, which can be seen as a push for a wealth transfer from the old oil
>> based elite to a new generation of more "ecofriendly" billionaires in
>> waiting; (2) "insect armageddon", which is nothing more than scaremongering
>> with a fiction intended to secure/justify more funding; and, in N.Z., (3)
>> predator eradication. Back to OA/OS, bear in mind that much science is
>> fairly low grade and not of any/much actual benefit to anyone. Sucking
>> public funding to make all that stuff open is pointless. Note also that we
>> already have several ways in which science publications can easily be
>> obtained OA (e.g. ResearchGate, Sci-Hub, BHL, etc.), and a lot can be
>> achieved if scientists respond to PDF requests via email, etc. Note that
>> some literature availably freely on BHL continues to also be for sale at
>> substantial cost from publisher websites!
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>> On Friday, 6 March 2020, 06:56:26 pm UTC, John Grehan <
>> calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Not to mention the quadra zillions spent on political fundraising (at
>> least here in the US). Maybe one year's campaigning would cover all
>> publication costs globally?
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 1:52 PM John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> And lets not forget the zillions spent on war, space exploration etc.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 1:49 PM Stephen Thorpe via Taxacom <
>> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
>>
>>  Donat said "... more money will be diverted for charting and
>> understanding global biodiversity"
>> So it appears that Donat is a good example of one of the priviliged few
>> who wants to make science slightly more convenient for himself and his
>> colleagues, by way of diverting what in the long run will be $trillions
>> away from healthcare, welfare, etc., thereby helping to keep much of the
>> world locked in poverty.
>>     On Friday, 6 March 2020, 08:54:19 am UTC, Donat Agosti <
>> agosti at amnh.org> wrote:
>>
>>   <!--#yiv2806890530 _filtered {} _filtered {}#yiv2806890530
>> #yiv2806890530 a:link, #yiv2806890530 span.yiv2806890530MsoHyperlink
>> {color:#0563C1;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2806890530
>> p.yiv2806890530MsoPlainText, #yiv2806890530 li.yiv2806890530MsoPlainText,
>> #yiv2806890530 div.yiv2806890530MsoPlainText
>> {margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",
>> sans-serif;}#yiv2806890530 span.yiv2806890530PlainTextChar
>> {font-family:"Calibri", sans-serif;}#yiv2806890530
>> .yiv2806890530MsoChpDefault {font-family:"Calibri", sans-serif;} _filtered
>> {}#yiv2806890530 div.yiv2806890530WordSection1 {}-->
>> A comment to open science.
>>
>>
>>
>> The situation has changed regarding open access and open science. The EU
>> fully requires open access to anything they fund. No funds are awarded to
>> any institution that will not accept a commitment to open access. Many of
>> our institutions signed up the Bouchout Declaration on Open Biodiversity
>> Knowledge Management and open access is for example a central part of the
>> development ofDiSSCo – the Distributed System of Scientific Collections in
>> Europe.
>>
>>
>>
>> Many of our science agencies signed up on DORA, the San Francisco
>> declaration on alternative metrics, and increasingly even disregard
>> citation indexes to evaluate scientists and proposals.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is very obvious, that open access opens a complete new door to the way
>> we do science. It saves an enormous amount of time to access cited works,
>> literature to specimens. It enables large studies that have not been
>> possible before.
>>
>> It improves our science, because many eyes have suddenly access to the
>> data, data can be analyzed in context, including links to any cited
>> material, that not has been possible.
>>
>> In fact, it should be our ambition and goal that any publication is
>> accessible through PubMed, BHL, BLR or GBIF or a similar global
>> infrastructure, and the data therein is citable, such as figures, taxonomic
>> treatments or materials cited.
>>
>>
>>
>> This data can and is reused, see eg the last published EJT: It is not
>> only accessible as PDF, but in various  formats in theBiodiversity
>> Literature Repository, inTreatmentBank orGBIF. Thetypes are accessible,
>> images are accessible to anybody anywhere at any time in the world. The
>> scientists contribution is immediately accessible through services like
>> theBloodhound tracker, or it can be reused in knowledge systems
>> likeopenbiodiv or Wikidata. And all the access points lead always back to
>> the source publication.
>>
>>
>>
>> The only stumbling block for most of the literature is that we even don't
>> know that a new species has been described, even worse, to a large extent
>> do we not know what we know at all. This is a major reason for an utterly
>> out of data Catalogue of Life, a broken link system from a taxonomic name
>> to the taxonomic treatment, the referenced specimens, sequences, that is
>> the door to the literature better knowledge about the species.
>>
>>
>>
>> Open science in the digital internet era is a huge benefit to our
>> science, allows spreading its knowledge. This is what we want, we need and
>> are obliged to do in the age of drastic disappearing biodiversity.
>>
>>
>>
>> Open science is an advantage to science. It needs to be underpinned with
>> an adequate infrastructure. It needs publishers that can publish in a
>> semantic enhanced way so that the data is immediately reusable. It needs
>> functional services such as IPNI, Zoobank, Catalogue of Life, Biodiversity
>> Literature Repository, BHL, GBIF, or DiSSCo or idigBio or large scale
>> sequencing projects.
>>
>>
>>
>> Open science is exactly what we need. We want to be able to critically
>> review research results, such as what is at the base of the description of
>> a new species: Which specimens, which characters, what kind of sequence or
>> other data. We want to be able to understand the growth of data related to
>> a taxon by making use of the citations of previous literature. Open science
>> and its tools allow this.
>>
>>
>>
>> Open science is not a threat or stupid, it makes your work visible, it
>> raises the profile of taxonomy by allowing linking between specimens,
>> sequences, taxonomic names and research results.
>>
>>
>>
>> Open science will help us to overcome to logjam we have to create a
>> Catalogue of Life with all the automation that is possible, curatorial
>> tools to correct possible errors in the processing. It thus will help us to
>> liberate us out of this incredible awkward situation that we do now know
>> what we know because we have not learned how to publish properly nor deal
>> with the daily increasing number of publication adding the estimated 500
>> Million pages of literature of biodiversity, that, among others,
>> encompasses the entire catalogue of life.
>>
>>
>>
>> Funding for open science does not compete with our taxonomic research
>> funds. Rather the opposite, if we can show that what vibrant and relevant
>> field we work in, more money will be diverted for charting and
>> understanding global biodiversity.
>>
>>
>>
>> For the first time since Linnaeus, we have the chance to be able to build
>> a system that provides access to all the knowledge we haven, similar to the
>> Systema Naturae at his time.
>>
>>
>>
>> Open science also means collaboration, and this is happening at grand
>> scale, not least because our community can compete against science projects
>> from other domains and attract funding, because we are devoted to open
>> access, make our data accessible to anybody anywhere at anytime.
>>
>>
>>
>> Finally, it increases dramatically access from any place where
>> biodiversity disappears the fastest: Any student, scientist or
>> conservationist has access too, not just we in the North.
>>
>>
>>
>> Together we are now building an incredible infrastructure – our
>> infrastructure owned by the scientists, run by scientists for the
>> scientists. An open infrastructure to anybody to preserve the worlds
>> biodiversity to create innovations that through taxes enabling the science
>> foundations or philanthropic Funds  spend money on its development, with an
>> emphasis on generating new and recovering existing knowledge about our
>> biodiversity. An infrastructure that allows to document and give credit to
>> each of the scientists contribution.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Donat
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> On Behalf Of KD
>> Dijkstra via Taxacom
>> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 11:10 AM
>> To: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
>> Cc: Taxa com <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>; Carlos Alberto Martínez Muñoz
>> <biotemail at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] UNESCO Open Science Recommendation
>>
>>
>>
>> EXTERNAL SENDER
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> I think no genuine scientist opposes “open science”. But people are right
>> to be skeptical if “science” embraces “openness” after pushing for
>> “closedness” for decades. More means to share knowledge are great, but only
>> make sense if the field isn’t designed to be fundamentally competitive. If
>> institutes need large grants to stay afloat and “high ranking” papers are
>> the ticket to getting them, peer review of manuscripts and applications
>> will continue to be an exercise in tearing each other down, for example. So
>> it’s hard to have truly “open science” as long as impact factors determine
>> everything, or as long as research consortia are consistently favored over
>> individual brilliance.
>>
>>
>>
>> Personally, I feel more “open” scientists aren’t always encouraged.
>>
>> Taxonomy and natural history are very public sciences, benefitting
>> non-academics directly and disproportionately. The fundamental problem
>> there is that funders (and indeed most scientists) don’t appreciate the
>> difference between information (i.e. units of hard data) and expertise
>> (that fuzzy familiarity with a topic). Organizations and institutes, for
>> example, happily invest in infrastructure to collate species records,
>> because from there it seems to work by itself. They invest much less in
>> improving or even stimulating those data, e.g. with taxonomic works like
>> field guides that increase the quality of what comes in, or by creating
>> capacity to vet those data. And why would they? Quantitatively the
>> infrastructure is already successful, with data rushing in, and only a few
>> specialists can judge the actual quality, most of whom are so passionate
>> they’ll do it (almost) for free.
>>
>>
>>
>> So the second problem is that we can’t dream of “open science” as long as
>> lucrative research that keeps scientists ensconced in their “ivory towers”
>>
>> is favored. Genomics and big data analysis, for example, may be very
>> relevant scientifically, or even benefit mankind as a whole, but for the
>> average individual it’s not especially engaging or enlightening. If we want
>> science to be “open”, we must invest in those that are already close to the
>> public.
>>
>>
>>
>> Summarizing, seeing “open science” as mainly an infrastructural challenge
>> in the current academic climate has two main drawbacks. Firstly, the risk
>> of any investment being captured by established interests is great, as
>> Stephen put forward. Secondly, it detracts from the actual solution, which
>> is to invest in “open scientists”, including communicative specialists with
>> accessible interests.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers, KD
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________
>>
>> *KD (Klaas-Douwe) B Dijkstra*
>>
>> See my new website! kddijkstra.nl
>>
>> key appearances and publications
>>
>> <
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fview%2Fkddijkstra%2Fhome&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434831676&sdata=Xk90OHG90KwhkTlzd1cgw0HLOzO4wRTEKkCrNORHPTo%3D&reserved=0
>> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fview%2Fkddijkstra%2Fhome&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434831676&sdata=Xk90OHG90KwhkTlzd1cgw0HLOzO4wRTEKkCrNORHPTo%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>>
>> my work <
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fview%2Fkddijkstra%2Fhome%2Fmy-work&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434831676&sdata=xUGhafOaixnrc3PzGveqcOiOhF1Yxb9TkY9Aj%2B82Mh8%3D&reserved=0
>> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fview%2Fkddijkstra%2Fhome%2Fmy-work&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434831676&sdata=xUGhafOaixnrc3PzGveqcOiOhF1Yxb9TkY9Aj%2B82Mh8%3D&reserved=0>>
>> and my species <
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fview%2Fkddijkstra%2Fhome%2Fmy-species&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=zB4ichCqdZNRAt5cyJlD8BGH5MI1PvagXlK2Sn0Bvhw%3D&reserved=0
>> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fview%2Fkddijkstra%2Fhome%2Fmy-species&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=zB4ichCqdZNRAt5cyJlD8BGH5MI1PvagXlK2Sn0Bvhw%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>>
>> African Dragonflies and Damselflies Online <
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faddo.adu.org.za%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=beqs3x6Vsx6ch0TxYPL3D%2BRcHqOsinj8M7U%2BfQ7pg5M%3D&reserved=0
>> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Faddo.adu.org.za%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=beqs3x6Vsx6ch0TxYPL3D%2BRcHqOsinj8M7U%2BfQ7pg5M%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 01:03, Stephen Thorpe via Taxacom <
>> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >  Carlos,I am calm, I'm just saying it as it is. What you describe is
>>
>> > an idealistic vision of how things might pan out, but I strongly
>>
>> > suspect that the way things actually pan out will be determined by the
>> power of the $.
>>
>> > Publishers aren't going to give up their current profit margins
>>
>> > without a fight, and if they can negotiate a mutually profitable deal
>>
>> > with publicly funded research institutions to secure a bigger share of
>>
>> > the public purse, then that is by far the most likely outcome. There
>>
>> > is already a lot of "spin", putting this in terms of "public good",
>>
>> > i.e. "free" access by the public to publicly funded research, when it
>>
>> > is nothing of the sort!Cheers, Stephen
>>
>> >     On Wednesday, 4 March 2020, 09:37:08 pm UTC, Carlos Alberto
>>
>> > Martínez Muñoz <biotemail at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >  Hi Stephen,What you have not understood is that:1) by shifting from
>>
>> > for-profit OA private publishing to non-profit OA academic publishing
>>
>> > we could cut OA expenses down by up to 1/3 of the current expenses
>>
>> > and2) use those funds to actually produce more OA research or to
>>
>> > maintain the actual level while investing more on platform
>>
>> > development.Calm down, drink some ice tea and read my emails again.
>>
>> > You will see that I already explained 1 and 2. Of course that no
>>
>> > technology can help us against greed. That's why we have to fight it,
>>
>> > no matter if it comes from private publishers, from institutions or
>> from unscrupulous scientists or managerial staff.
>>
>> > Cheers,Carlos
>>
>> > Carlos A. Martínez MuñozZoological Museum, Biodiversity UnitFI-20014
>>
>> > University of TurkuFinlandResearchGate profileMyriapod Morphology and
>>
>> > Evolution
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > El mié., 4 mar. 2020 a las 22:16, Stephen Thorpe (<
>>
>> > stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>) escribió:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >  "In the context of pressing planetary and socio-economic challenges,"
>>
>> > diverting $billions of public funds into OA/OS initiatives, so as to
>>
>> > boost the profits of research institutions working with public money,
>>
>> > is clearly one of the biggest con jobs of the 21st Century. It has to
>>
>> > result in
>>
>> > either: (1) less research being done with the same amount of public
>>
>> > funding; or(2) more public funding being diverted to science to
>>
>> > maintain the same level of research, funding which cannot therefore be
>>
>> > spent on "pressing planetary and socio-economic challenges".
>>
>> > Witness the subterfuges used by the wealthy half (third, quarter?) of
>>
>> > humanity to further their own interests at the expense of the
>>
>> > interests of "the outgroup"...
>>
>> > Stephen
>>
>> >     On Wednesday, 4 March 2020, 10:41:59 am UTC, Carlos Alberto
>>
>> > Martínez Muñoz via Taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >  Dear Taxacomers,
>>
>> > Please note that the questionnaire for inputs into the development of
>>
>> > the UNESCO Open Science Recommendation is available online here (
>>
>> >
>>
>> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.u
>>
>> > nesco.org%2Fnews%2Funesco-launches-global-consultation-develop-standar
>>
>> > d-setting-instrument-open-science&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org
>>
>> > %7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76
>>
>> > %7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=cN6Ir6h4lUzA9M5lEZEFw259gxnMUX
>>
>> > 997QBTAK%2FADXI%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> > )
>>
>> > and here (
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.surveymonkey.com%2Fr%2FN958HFW&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=IAbnu7tcTYeikL%2FuLLUBrASK5uTPE6QYyyVWhCza3XI%3D&reserved=0
>> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.surveymonkey.com%2Fr%2FN958HFW&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=IAbnu7tcTYeikL%2FuLLUBrASK5uTPE6QYyyVWhCza3XI%3D&reserved=0>
>> ).
>>
>> >
>>
>> > In the context of pressing planetary and socio-economic challenges,
>>
>> > sustainable and innovative solutions must be supported by an
>>
>> > efficient, transparent and vibrant scientific effort - not only
>>
>> > stemming from the scientific community, but from the whole society.
>>
>> > Open Science embodies the need to transform and democratize the entire
>>
>> > scientific process to ensure that science truly drives and enables the
>>
>> > achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for the
>> benefits of all.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Driven by unprecedented advances in our digital world, the transition
>>
>> > to Open Science allows scientific information, data and outputs to be
>>
>> > more widely accessible (Open Access) and more reliably harnessed (Open
>>
>> > Data) with the active engagement of all relevant stakeholders (Open to
>> Society).
>>
>> > However, in the fragmented scientific and policy environment, a global
>>
>> > understanding of the meaning, opportunities and challenges of Open
>>
>> > Science is still missing.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > UNESCO, as the United Nations Agency with a mandate for Science, is
>>
>> > the legitimate global organization enabled to build a coherent vision
>>
>> > of Open Science and a shared set of overarching principles and shared
>>
>> > values. That is why, at the 40th session of UNESCO’s General
>>
>> > Conference, 193 Member States tasked the Organization with the
>>
>> > development of an international standard-setting instrument on Open
>>
>> > Science in the form of a UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science will be prepared through a
>>
>> > regionally balanced, multistakeholder, inclusive and transparent
>> consultation process.
>>
>> > This process is guided by an Open Science Advisory Committee and is
>>
>> > expected to lead to the adoption of the Recommendation by UNESCO
>>
>> > Member States in 2021.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > As UNESCO launches its consultation process on Open Science, an online
>>
>> > survey is designed to conduct inputs from all the regions and the
>>
>> > interested stakeholders, about aspects, benefits and challenges of
>>
>> > Open Science across the globe.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > All Open Science stakeholders, including scientists and scientific
>>
>> > institutes, science publishers, science policy makers etc., are
>>
>> > encouraged to participate and  to share their insights trough a global
>>
>> > survey
>>
>> > <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww
>>
>> > .surveymonkey.com%2Fr%2FN958HFW&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=IAbnu7tcTYeikL%2FuLLUBrASK5uTPE6QYyyVWhCza3XI%3D&reserved=0>.
>> In addition, you can help the collection of a broader perspective on Open
>> Science by sharing this survey among your network.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > The questionnaire is also available for download <
>>
>> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.u
>>
>> > nesco.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fquestionnaire_unesco_open_scienc
>>
>> > e.pdf&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c
>>
>> > 0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C63718999843484166
>>
>> > 7&sdata=%2FOWxUxyxJnrZYO1F2%2Fh62TIkqZNAyIrY%2FEq205S1hlo%3D&r
>>
>> > eserved=0
>>
>> > >.
>>
>> > It can be filled offline and sent to us by email at:
>>
>> > openscience at unesco.org
>>
>> > (link sends e-mail) <openscience at unesco.org>.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > I wonder if some day we will pair the Codes of Nomenclature with Open
>>
>> > Science and mandate that all new names and nomenclatural acts, to be
>>
>> > available, have to be published open access. Names form the basis of
>>
>> > our biodiversity informatics services and they shouldn't continue to
>>
>> > be born in paywalled publications. We are the keepers of scientific
>>
>> > names and taxon descriptions. We should strive for them to be
>> accessible.
>>
>> > Regards,
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Carlos A. Martínez Muñoz
>>
>> > Zoological Museum, Biodiversity Unit
>>
>> > FI-20014 University of Turku
>>
>> > Finland
>>
>> > ResearchGate profile
>>
>> > <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww
>>
>> > .researchgate.net%2Fprofile%2FCarlos_Martinez-Munoz&data=02%7C01%7
>>
>> > Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b949
>>
>> > 6883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C0%7C637189998434841667&sdata=K%2Fpt95trzT
>>
>> > %2Fz%2FWl7hPFtoEs9jmzYLxZhpnGV%2BhwCIuc%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> > Myriapod Morphology and Evolution
>>
>> > <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww
>>
>> > .facebook.com%2Fgroups%2F205802113162102%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%
>>
>> > 40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb3
>>
>> > 4586974b76%7C0%7C0%7C637189998434841667&sdata=t3KMR1wbvPWdyclrVhei
>>
>> > ni62TkIV%2Fr5ITH2w1teDL9Q%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> > _______________________________________________
>>
>> > Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>
>> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>>
>> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailm
>>
>> > an.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=02%7C0
>>
>> > 1%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b
>>
>> > 9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=xgkRK%2BA
>>
>> > jWMM4BbYYaac8pNx7UChClUVlNezA%2FiNrEpk%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>
>> > taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>
>> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>
>> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxac
>>
>> > om.markmail.org&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1
>>
>> > c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C6371899
>>
>> > 98434841667&sdata=sa2wf%2B6JBAC7n9%2B3hl9hmEPPhlMRF%2F0kN%2FC2aKb%
>>
>> > 2Bjk8%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years,
>> 1987-2020.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >
>>
>> > _______________________________________________
>>
>> > Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>
>> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>>
>> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailm
>>
>> > an.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=02%7C0
>>
>> > 1%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b
>>
>> > 9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=xgkRK%2BA
>>
>> > jWMM4BbYYaac8pNx7UChClUVlNezA%2FiNrEpk%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>
>> > taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>
>> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>
>> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxac
>>
>> > om.markmail.org&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1
>>
>> > c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C6371899
>>
>> > 98434841667&sdata=sa2wf%2B6JBAC7n9%2B3hl9hmEPPhlMRF%2F0kN%2FC2aKb%
>>
>> > 2Bjk8%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years,
>> 1987-2020.
>>
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>>
>>
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu For
>> list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=xgkRK%2BAjWMM4BbYYaac8pNx7UChClUVlNezA%2FiNrEpk%3D&reserved=0
>> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434841667&sdata=xgkRK%2BAjWMM4BbYYaac8pNx7UChClUVlNezA%2FiNrEpk%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu The Taxacom email archive back to 1992
>> can be searched at:
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434851662&sdata=1jNPztCvkGp1ktzBKl1UphGtXKF%2F23kF17QAllS%2B4iQ%3D&reserved=0
>> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org&data=02%7C01%7Cagosti%40amnh.org%7Cd0229ac2f1234c1c857308d7c0ed746b%7Cbe0003e8c6b9496883aeb34586974b76%7C0%7C1%7C637189998434851662&sdata=1jNPztCvkGp1ktzBKl1UphGtXKF%2F23kF17QAllS%2B4iQ%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.
>>
>>


More information about the Taxacom mailing list