Currently, there is a lack of deeper reflections on how open science could be properly implemented in developing countries such as Brazil: the major discussions on the subject take place on the US-Europe axis, in English and rarely include the humanities. Our aim in this paper is to analyse whether open science is in fact beneficial for any area of knowledge and in any country, and if emerging countries can contemplate all aspects of open science as currently proposed by UNESCO. Our methodology was a literature review (keywords search), evoking the cases of globalisation and internationalisation, as well as existing criticisms of open science itself. As a result, we found that there were or are no real advantages, nor even apparent equal opportunities, between all the countries involved. We conclude that it may be counterproductive to accept the open science terms as they are currently presented by universities in the so-called developed countries without an in-depth discussion that takes into account the geopolitical and socioeconomic realities of each country and area of science, but that it is possible to take advantage of some specific open science ideas to improve research and publications in the Brazilian landscape.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silva et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: