 Welcome, everyone. My name is Lisa Kwevis-Shaw. I'm the Managing Director for the Center for Open Science, and I have the pleasure of welcoming you to the Year of Open Science culminating conference. We have been eagerly anticipating this event after weeks and months of planning and coordinating the program design and development with a range of speakers and the supporting organizations who signed on to endorse and participate in the Year of Open Science. We have nearly 1,300 folks registered for the event and they represent a wide range of research stakeholders, funding agencies, international government organizations, academic institutions, research organizations, researchers, research staff. This is an opportunity to showcase the outcomes, coalition building and ongoing work stemming from the 2023 Year of Open Science. I encourage you to join as many sessions as you can. We designed the program so that you all could have access to a range of topics across research infrastructure, community building, policy, rewards and incentives and everything in between. We intentionally aimed to be as inclusive as a two-day program could afford us the opportunity to do so that you can experience the breadth of Open Science activities that are happening and the issues, opportunities and challenges surrounding these various efforts. So without further ado, let's get our opening plenary underway. I will be moderating today's opening session with Allison Parker, Senior Program Associate from the Wilson Center. Today's panel features leaders of reform across UNESCO, OSTP and NASA to share highlights of initiatives and achievements realized during the Year of Open Science and really to foster discussion about ongoing opportunities and challenges in the global coordination of science reform. So today you're gonna hear from Anna Piercic. She is Program Scientist at UNESCO. You'll also hear from Maryam Zaringhalam at OSTP. She's the Assistant Director for Public Access and Research for the Office of Science and Technology Policy. And Shell Gentiman, Program Scientist for the Office of the Chief Science Data Officer. A little bit about the representation of this speaker group is just, that was done by design. We wanted to hear and have kind of a global and international perspective. This conference is certainly very much situated in the US federal policy landscape as well. And so having the opportunity to hear from Maryam with interagency perspectives is important. And then also having the opportunity to hear from Shell and NASA specific agency that has been really at the forefront of this movement. And we wouldn't be here today actually without the NASA Transform to Open Science program support. So just about the session itself, each presenter was asked to share what their organization set out to do or achieve during the year of Open Science, what challenges and opportunities they saw or continue to see with these initiatives and the ongoing work and then what they're continuing to invest in going forward. The presentations will comprise about the first 30 minutes and then we'll move into a moderated question and answer led by Allison. We also wanna privilege audience questions. So feel free to drop those into the Q&A section in Zoom events here. And following the moderated panel session, we'll have time to take questions from the audience. So as you have them drop them into that Q&A section and we'll get to them as best as we can. So let me turn it over to our first speaker, Anna Piercic who has been central to UNESCO's efforts along with her colleagues, Tiffany Straza and others. Anna will kick things off and share what has happened and where to next within UNESCO's efforts to accelerate the global adoption of Open Science. So take it away, Anna. Great, thank you so much, Lisa. And many thanks for the invitation to this event. It's really amazing to see so many people gathered here. I'm looking through the participants list and I see a lot of familiar names and a lot of names that I don't know which is both great. So thank you so much for having me here and I'll be very pleased to share with you a little bit what has happened maybe not exactly in the past year but a little bit more adoption actually of the UNESCO recommendation on Open Science at the end of 2021. So let me share my PowerPoint presentation. I hope that you can all see it. So before I get into what has been done and where we have some challenges and what we think of doing next, I just wanted to remind everybody a little bit why Open Science is an issue and why we are working on Open Science in UNESCO at the level of the United Nations. Well, first because science is a human right. Everyone has the right to freely share in scientific advancement and its benefits. And this is something that is written in the article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. So Open Science in our view really is a perfect tool to be able to advance this human right science as a human right. Secondly, there is the United Nations agenda for sustainable development with 17 sustainable development goals which basically set up all the different challenges that we have in the world today. And we do realize to be able to achieve these SDGs and to be able in general to overcome global challenges but also local challenges. We need an efficient, equitable, transparent, collaborative, inclusive science which can also lead to innovative and sustainable solutions. So having science isolated from society in a way will not help us with innovative solutions which are necessary today to be able to overcome all of these different challenges that we are facing. And talking about this connection to society which for us is actually the main part one of the main parts of Open Science is because we see and we live in a world where there's a lot of disinformation, misinformation and to build trust in science and to increase the use of science in decision and policymaking and also to fight disinformation and misinformation. We need science that is more participative more connected to societal needs and more accessible to all. So not just in terms of scientific publications that are more accessible to the audience it's also about scientific processes being more transparent and more accessible to citizens more broadly. So at the level of UNESCO what happened is that member states really kind of understood that there is absolute need for kind of a policy framework at the international level because Open Science was kind of starting to pick up in different countries, in different disciplines but there was no international policy or action framework there was no definition, common definition of Open Science there were no principles, there were no action at the international level to kind of guide and provide the norms for Open Science. So after some two years of consultations at the end of 2021, 193 member states of UNESCO at the time adopted this normative instrument the first international standard setting instrument on Open Science. In form of a UNESCO recommendation on Open Science and since then the United States also rejoined UNESCO so also by rejoining UNESCO adopted the Open Science recommendation of UNESCO. So what the recommendation does is that it provides a common definition and as you will see and you know probably not go into details it goes way beyond open access to scientific data or scientific publications it also kind of includes the whole part of infrastructures engagement with societal actors and goes all the way to kind of building the dialogue with other knowledge systems. All again in this view of building the knowledge that is necessary to provide solutions to common challenges and also to provide benefits and wellbeing for the humanity as a whole. Important part is also that the recommendation also kind of brought up the different values and principles of Open Science. We talk about diversity, inclusiveness, quality, collective benefit, fairness and equity. So kind of situating science in the realm of public good in line with this right to science as a human right. And then also the recommendation spells out a variety of different actions that need to be taken at different levels and by different actors of Open Science. So looking at some of the key achievements since the adoption of the recommendation and many of them actually did coincide with the 2023 year of Open Science. I think as a first thing we see that the Open Science community more broadly both at the science level all the way to decision makers have really embraced recommendation that has this more holistic view of Open Science. It has also embraced the recommendation because I think everybody agrees in the Open Science community that to have Open Science that really works and reaches its potential, it has to be global, it has to be equitable, it has to be accessible really for all independently of where you are or what discipline you are looking at. We've also developed a series of standards, toolkits, checklists to help both member states and various audiences to understand better the recommendation and what the different parts of the recommendations are and also to use it to be able to advance their actions in Open Science. We produced the Open Science Outlook and I will talk about it a little bit later. We've also seen a very positive impact on policy development. And I will here focus on national policies that we've seen developed since the adoption of the recommendation. But of course, there is a series of different institutional policies on Open Science which have also been in place and been put in place in different countries to strengthen the work towards Open Science. So we know that at least 11 countries have adopted more holistic Open Science policies or policy instruments. And when I say more holistic, it's policies that go beyond open access or go beyond open data that kind of have a more holistic view of the different elements of Open Science, including these parts, in particular on engagement of society. We have seen a boom of policy development in terms of Open Science in African countries. Before the recommendation, there were just several of them who had some kind of policy instruments on open access. But since the recommendation was adopted, we have different countries in Africa 10, at least probably even more that are working on Open Science policies or strategies or roadmaps or other policy instruments. We have several countries that have actually opened up their national science technology innovation policies and included the principles of Open Science into those policies. And we see that as a major achievement because that actually tells us that those countries see Open Science as science for their countries. So as we were saying all along, there is no Open Science and science. Eventually, all science should become Open Science and follow the principles of Open Science. And we have a series of regional bodies that are trying also, particularly in Africa, that are trying to develop their strategies for Open Science because countries have seen that because Open Science is open by definition and is prone to sharing in collaboration, having a strategy at the regional level, so among the different countries in the same region is actually very beneficial because they can then also benefit from some synergies and from collaboration that can happen more easily if they have a common strategy on Open Science. And then we've also worked to expand our partnerships and also our different experts that are working with us. What we have seen as a key challenge is really a shift to Open Science is actually a shift in a culture of science. You cannot only work on open access or only work on open data. You really do have to kind of have a holistic view at the entire science system and kind of start doing things in different parts. So you need infrastructures, you need capacities, you need incentives, you need policies, you need funding and you also need monitoring. So you need practical actions and also cultural shifts to be able to really transition towards Open Science. We've also seen that there is absolute need for equitable collaborations and I will keep talking about that throughout my presentation and in the interventions during these next few days because it really is central to Open Science. Equitable collaborations, equity in general is really key for Open Science to fully reach its potential. And then monitoring. Monitoring is extremely important. We see it because there are some incentives, there are some initiatives that are put in place which actually have positive impacts and then some that may have some unintended consequences and we need to be able to monitor Open Science and its practices to make sure that we are just constantly and make sure that we are going in the right direction. So a monitoring effort that we've tried is by providing and compiling this Open Science outlook. It's the first way that at the global scale we looked into the different pillars of Open Science as it is defined in the recommendation and where we kind of stand in different regions and different parts of the world. And we see more in general that Open Science practices really are on the rise. However, access to participation and benefit from Open Science are still very uneven across the world. And we see the gaps that persist along the existing social economic, technological and digital divides. And there is really lack of equity and access to funding skills and different tools which really do prevent Open Science from reaching its full potential. And again, I wanna stress the importance of collective collaborative and coordinated action and investment to accelerate this transition towards a real global and equitable Open Science. Another set of conclusions that we came with from the development of the outlook is that we don't really have a good monitoring system for Open Science. We do not really know how to measure impacts of Open Science, how to measure Open Science more broadly. We do not have a way of measuring Open Science in terms of its values. We can measure in terms of some of the outputs but that really is not enough and that is not gonna give us an idea of if the system is moving in the right direction. So counting is not enough. The current system of rankings do not promote inclusion, equity and openness and really Open Science give us the opportunity to think out of the box, to think differently, to strengthen the focus on values and on people who are doing science and not just the products of science. So there really is need to look into monitoring, look into innovation with regards to the different indicators both qualitative and quantitative and find another way for us to assess Open Science and monitor Open Science. So in terms of what our priorities are for next year and for the years to come, next this year in particular for us is very important because the member states that have adopted the recommendation now have to provide surveys, have to monitor the implementation of the recommendation. And so throughout 2024, we will be helping countries in gathering information to provide us with reports at the beginning of next year on their status of implementation of the recommendation. And I think that is going to give us a lot of new information with regards to best practices, good practices, attempts, failures and challenges that countries encounter in transitioning to Open Science. We'll continue to work on a global monitoring framework for Open Science on policy support, development of different resources and also we will be gathering different actors and I do invite you to follow us and join us in the different international gatherings that we will be organizing this year and then also in the beginning of next year. So with this, I will thank you and I will very much looking forward to the questions and the discussion. Thank you very much. I think I will pass the floor to Maryam now. Maryam, you have the floor, please. Great, thank you so much. All right. Well, I am the assistant director for Public Access and Research Policy at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy or OSTP. And for those of you who may not be familiar, OSTP's mission includes providing science and technology advice to the executive office of the president and working with our federal partners and Congress to create bold visions, wise policies and effective equitable programs for science and technology. Now my work at OSTP centers on advancing the Biden-Harris administration's commitment to providing public access to data, publications and the other important products of the nation's taxpayer supported research and innovation enterprise. You'll go to the next slide, please. And I'd like to ground my remarks as I often do in our U.S. government-wide definition for open science, which was unveiled in January of 2023 to kick off the 2023 year of open science. And this definition was developed through the National Science and Technology Council's subcommittee on open science, which is made up of representatives from agencies across the U.S. government who put their heads together to develop this definition. And we have collectively defined open science as the principle and practice of making research products and processes available to all, while respecting diverse cultures, maintaining security and privacy and fostering collaborations, reproducibility and equity. Now this definition, while it is a sentence, is doing a whole lot of work bringing together a number of the administration's priorities around advancing a vision for science and for research more broadly. So it leads with this commitment to enhancing access to the products and processes of research, which is pretty standard to all of the definitions of open science that we've come across. It's inclusive, noting that these outputs must be made equitably available to all, whether they are researchers, students, policy makers, community advocates, professors, small business owners or members, other members of the broader public. The definition also notes the need for members of this open science enterprise to respect diverse cultures in their pursuit, instilling this sense of curiosity and humility. It also reinforces the need for considerations around security and privacy when making decisions around what can and should be shared broadly. And it ends by looking towards desired outcomes of open science, namely opening up more opportunities for collaborations with diverse communities across all of society, enhancing reproducibility by increasing access to the data and tools underlying research findings and supporting equitable access to those findings as well as outcomes based on them. Now, if we look to this administration's aspirations from curbing greenhouse gas emissions to reducing social inequalities to ending cancer as we know it, all while driving equitable outcomes for all across our nation, bolstering public trust and strengthening our decision-making capacity, these are really complex and multifaceted challenges that require a diverse and collaborative knowledge base. And so advancing open science policies and practices is really critical to realizing these aspirations and delivering on our commitments to ensuring that all of America can participate in, contribute to and benefit from science and technology. Next slide. So with all of that said, realizing the potential for open science requires considerations of all sorts, including around infrastructure, research culture, incentive structures, responsible communications, funding opportunities, community outreach and engagement and more. And so in January of 2023, OSTP launched the Year of Open Science with a slate of commitments and activities across the government to advance a more open science ecosystem. 17 federal agencies and departments officially signed on to join the Year of Open Science, coordinating our efforts through that interagency body of the subcommittee on open science and more agencies joined these conversations around advancing this culture of open science beyond just those 17. Next slide. So you can learn more about a number of projects initiated or strengthened over the course of 2023 across the government on open.science.gov. But I'd like to highlight a few of these activities in the time that we have together. So we've organized the efforts that happened in the Year of Open Science into five overarching themes. Policy developments to advance the practice of open science, infrastructure developments or enhancements to enable that access is in a manner that is equitable and secure. Opportunities for training and capacity development to promote a workforce that can contribute to an advance open research. Opportunities for community engagement to broaden participation in open science and promoting incentives for advancing open research practices so that this important work is recognized and rewarded. Next slide. So the 2023 Year of Open Science came on the heels of OSTP's August 2022 memorandum titled ensuring free, immediate and equitable access to federally funded research. The memo builds on and strengthens public access guidance issued by OSTP in 2013. And the driving principle motivating the updated policy is summed up in the memo itself where we write that American investment in such research is essential to the health, economic prosperity and well-being of the nation. There should be no delay between taxpayers and the returns on their investment in research. And so since the memo was issued, we've been hard at work across the US government coordinating and collaborating with our agency partners around implementation of this memo. Many agencies have publicly posted their plans for updating their public access policies which you can find all in one place on science.gov. Next slide. Robust, accessible and secure infrastructures are incredibly important for ensuring that the research products that we're seeking to make publicly available can actually be discovered, accessed and used by diverse end user communities. Of course, agencies have a longstanding commitment to developing, supporting and strengthening these infrastructures that predates the year of open science. But still there were some really notable efforts that were launched in the last year, including the Department of Energy's persistent identifiers at OSTP resource, which is a really convenient one-stop shop for researchers and agencies to learn more about the persistent identifier services that they provide, as well as to better understand persistent identifiers more generally. The National Science Foundation also invested $12.5 million into their findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable open science research coordination networks or Feros RCN program. The cohort of 10 three-year multi-institutional projects kicked off in 2023 to build and enhance national coordination among the research community, including around things like standards development, big data infrastructures, data system connection, educational opportunities and other pathways for collaboration. Next slide. So accessing using and responsibly contributing to openly available research outputs also requires open science skill building. And so to this end in December and really throughout 2023, NASA was hard at work through their Transform to Open Science program developing their Open Science 101 curriculum, which was released in December of last year. And I'm sure that you will hear more about this in just a moment. But I will say from where I sit, it's been really wonderful seeing communities of practice sprout up within the government and beyond taking this training, discussing what they're learning and putting those learnings into action. 2023 also saw tremendous developments in the National Institute for Standards and Technologies efforts to develop the NIST research data framework, which is a comprehensive resource that maps the research data landscape and provides a dynamic guide for various communities to understand best practices, costs and benefits for research data management and dissemination. And this framework was developed through really extensive community engagement, including a request for information issued last year and a workshop hosted at the National Academies in September. And that input was worked into version 2.0 of the framework, which was released earlier this year. Next slide. So for our policies and practices to really benefit all, engagement had to be central, a central theme for the year, not only engaging with those who have long been members and participating in the Open Science community, but also engaging with communities who may be newer to the Open Science space. And so these activities included continuing long-standing programs like the US Geological Surveys Community for Data Integration, which is the community of practice working to grow knowledge in scientific information management and integration, as well as understanding the needs of those who will become more active in the Open Science space. So over the summer of 2023, OSTP hosted a series of listening sessions on advancing a future of Open Science with the early career researcher community. And you can learn more about some of the key themes and outcomes that emerged from those sessions in this readout of those four listening sessions that's posted on OSTP's website. Next slide. So advancing adoption of Open Science, of course, for players that we recognize and reward those who are leading the way. So in addition to creating funding opportunities and investments in the various activities I touched on earlier, we've thought about how to spotlight the stories and themes that have been leading the way in Open Science for quite some time. So in September of last year, OSTP launched the Year of Open Science Recognition Challenge partnering with a number of agencies to promote the challenge and to judge the submissions that we received. We invited researchers, community scientists, educators, innovators, and other members of the broader public to share stories of how they've advanced equitable Open Science. Next slide. And I'm very excited to share with you all that this morning we've announced five project submissions as champions of Open Science in five categories. These are teams and projects that have used the power of Open Science to work with local communities to address their needs, to promote educational opportunities for all across our nation, to advance solutions to global challenges, to engage new and diverse audiences to drive discovery and innovation, and promote the infrastructures and tools that enable Open Science to move forward. While I don't have time to tell you about these five really wonderful projects, you can learn more about them in a press release that we issued this morning. And we hope that by highlighting the transformative impact of Open Science on society, that these projects can inspire others to share their stories of Open Science and to contribute to this movement as the US government continues from a year of Open Science into a future for Open Science and Research. So next slide. So this is just a snapshot of what we've done across the government throughout 2023. We're really excited to continue to build on our government-wide commitments to advancing the infrastructures, capacity and engagement to realize this more open, equitable and secure research enterprise as we move from 2023 and into this future for Open Science. And so with that, I thank you for your attention and I will pass it over to my colleague, Shell Genteman from NASA, who will be taking the stage. Hello everyone and thank you. I'm here from NASA to talk about the open road ahead. I'm an IPA and I sit at the office of the Chief Science Data Officer at NASA. And I'm really excited to see all of the work being done across the federal agencies. In 2024, NASA is working to make the impossible possible and inspired by President John F. Kennedy and Ayanna Elizabeth Johnson and Catherine Wilkinson's book, All We Can Save. There are space telescopes that peer into the farthest reaches of space to new lunar missions and none of this is possible without teamwork, which is why improving how we work together is essential to advancing science and technology. And this is why we are choosing to rapidly advance the adoption of Open Science. We are asking scientists to change, not because it is easy, but because it is hard because this goal making science open will benefit humanity, will benefit science and will lead to new discoveries because this challenge is one we're willing to accept, one we're unwilling to postpone and one we intend to win because science, science is for everyone. And we need every solution and every solver. And as the saying goes, to change everything, we need everyone. And what this moment calls for is a mosaic of voices, the full spectrum of ideas and insights for how we can turn things around. At NASA, we are working to, we're joining with 16 other federal agencies for the year of Open Science. And NASA also has designated 2023 as a year of Open Science. Throughout this year, we worked to energize and uplift Open Science across the community. So what did we really accomplish? The link to my talk is going to be put into chat, I believe, because it's filled with different links about what we've done. Our strategy to advance Open Science, it had four core areas of focus, increasing visibility, creating new resources, working to change the incentives to align with our values and really starting to change the ecosystem that we all do science in. We worked on articles and announcements. We had an Open Science video. We had Open Science on the NASA website. We had a number of different articles published in all different types of publications. We also worked with global experts to develop NASA's introduction to Open Science, which has best practices, tools and practical skills for anyone who wants to learn how to do Open Science. It's called Open Science 101. And you can complete that online independently, but there's also summer schools and cohorts that were online cohorts that were supporting as well. For incentives, if you complete this introduction to Open Science, you actually get a NASA Open Science digital badge. It's linked to your orchid. It shows up on your LinkedIn or your social media. It shows up on your orchid profile. And we've been working with the White House, as Miriam just talked about, for high-profile prices and challenges to recognize all of the amazing Open Science activities that are going on. And we're also supporting Open Science activities, Open Science software, data visualization, tools to do Open Science, at about five and a half million dollars per year. We have a new NASA Scientific Information Policy, SPD 41A, which has many requirements that align with Open Science activities. We're asking the proposals to NASA include an Open Science and Data Management Plan. We already had a workshop with university leaders on modernizing evaluation criteria, recognizing that we aren't just doing Open Science at NASA. We sit within an international, we sit within an academic, all of our partners where science is being done. So we all have to think about how do we advance Open Science together? I've asked to think about challenges and opportunities. And these are some of the things that as I go out into the community, we sort of face and we see every day. And the first is really the culture, each strategy for breakfast and a closed culture of not sharing data, of retaining a competitive advantage or a perceived competitive advantage is really hard to overcome, especially when incentives are not always aligned with values. So as researchers are looking for the rewards, whether it's funding, whether it's career advancement, when those don't recognize Open Science activities, they don't recognize the value of reproducible and transparent science. It's difficult to ask them to do science in this new way. We also know that as we move towards Open Science, we need to be very, very careful and strategic and ensure that our designs advance equitable participation in science. We also face this point of view that we hear about a lot, that Open Science is yet another unfunded mandate. And I always try to switch because from my point of view, and up until two years ago, when I joined NASA, I was a research scientist on soft money. I did Open Science because, oh my gosh, look at how faster and better my science is. Look at how many more people I'm collaborating with. Look at how much larger the impact is because there are more people participating. So we try to talk about it's not just a cost, but also there are a lot of benefits. Data is easier to get, science is more reproducible, and it's easier to build on other results. And that makes your science faster. So yes, there are some parts that you'll have to do additional work, but then more people will be able to build on your results and you'll have more visibility. So we try to have that conversation a lot. With opportunities, there is this incredible momentum around Open Science. It really does feel like the world is changing. And I think that we all should try to lean into that because these opportunities don't come along every day. The partnerships that we're building across the federal agencies internationally and within the United States with academic organizations, I think are all helping to advance Open Science and they really offer maybe also with philanthropic organizations a way to work together. There's opportunities, as Anna mentioned, for measuring the impacts and really designing that strategy for what is working, what is not working, when do we need to pivot, how is it advancing equitable participation, and really developing those metrics so that they're not just like our old metrics where they only recognized citations and publications, but recognizing the full breadth of the scientific process. And that goes into recognizing the value of data and code as well. And the new ways that we're all sharing results, it feels like there are so many opportunities to share scientific research online that we really, I would love to see the research community lean into that new way to share results. And the global transformation, I think this is a huge opportunity. It's not just an open future, but it's a more equitable open future. At NASA, we have continued investments to enable Open Science. And each of these activities helps move towards enabling Open Science for NASA. There are three primary activities within the Office of the Chief Science Data Officer to enable Open Science. The first is data and compute services, looking to develop core services for scientific discovery. So core data and computing services that recognize how things have really changed with the advent of cloud computing. Next are the data science and AI, so implementing innovative data science tools with a focus on inclusion and expanding the accessibility of scientific information. And the open science implementation, which includes the Transform to Open Science project, the policy development, education incentives, and advocacy. So we're looking across all these different activities, building together to enable Open Science, to enable breakthroughs. And specifically, I want to call out the awards and the funding, what will NASA fund? These are just some of the areas that NASA funds, but these are ones that have open science applications. And again, there's links in the PDF that has been uploaded to the chat. We fund workshops and conferences, open source tools, frameworks and libraries, machine learning tools, citizen science, innovative new ways to support open science and supplements for open science and cloud computing. And I like to ask at every talk that I give and to every community, and many of you are already doing open science, we all know that there are things that we could be doing better or things that we could be working on to improve. So the future is open. So what's one thing that you can do right now to be more open about your science? And I have one suggestion, which is to take NASA's Open Science 101. If you do so, you get this beautiful gold NASA Open Science badge and it will show up on your LinkedIn and in your social media. You get a certificate from NASA and you can sign up here. Thank you. Wonderful. Thanks to all three of you. Thank you, Shell. Thank you, Anna and thank you, Maryam. First of all, I just want to acknowledge that we just had wonderful overviews and really rich. It's hard probably to present everything in a 10 minute slot, but just to acknowledge that we also had two announcements here, right? So we did hear from Anna about the General Assembly's approval of the National Survey to begin to really monitor open science at the national level, which is very, very exciting. And so I'm sure there will be more to come on that, but it sounded as though the reports would be due sometime in 2025. So if there's time, we can certainly discuss that, but I know that was hot off the press in terms of approval. So that's wonderful to hear. And then I love that Maryam, you announced the Year of Open Science Recognition Challenge winners. So we did drop that press release in the chat for everyone to go take a look at the winners as well. So just to acknowledge those two things, we're gonna transition into the moderated question and answer, and I will turn it over to my colleague, Allison Parker to do that. And then I will continue to monitor the Q&A in the chat. And as there's time towards the end of the session, we'll also open it up to share those questions as well. Thanks, Lisa. Thanks so much to all of our panelists for really your presentations and for your ability and capacity to be sort of insightful and reflective about this year and what it means for Open Science and where we're going. I think we'll continue along those themes and sort of stay pretty high level and ask you to reflect a bit more on what you've learned from the Year of Open Science and sort of what we can bring forward as a community. And so I'll start with one question about sort of the messages about Open Science that ties into Anna, you mentioned the values and principles of Open Science and then Shell, you mentioned the opportunities. So in all of your discussions with national and international policymakers, what have you found about messages about Open Science that resonate the most? Like what are the one or two things that people seem to really hear and sort of continue the conversation around Open Science? I'll call on you so that we don't have any confusion but let's start with Maryam. Sure. So I think that one thing that really resonates is that I think as Anna mentioned, this idea of science is really belonging to everybody and Open Science has this opportunity to think about how we approach science so that we are thinking about it not just sharing an openness at the end of the research life cycle but creating opportunities for on-ramps and bridges and engagement throughout the research life cycle so that we are really involving communities across the country and the world in this process of doing science and research. And I think when we think about it in that way as opening up who can participate in this really vital enterprise, I think that that really resonates with at least thinking about at the policy level and thinking about sort of like broadly who are the communities that we are trying to reach and who are the communities that we serve in the US government, it's people within across the country and I think in these international contexts we're really around to the world. We could segue to Anna, what do you think? Yeah, I completely agree. We do see though a bit of a difference also in what resonates more with maybe countries in the South and countries in the North. I think in the South really the hope is that Open Science would help in bridging the gaps in science technology innovation, digital gaps, et cetera, through more equitable science, more access to science, more access to knowledge, et cetera. In the North, I think what resonates maybe a little bit more is to kind of increase the efficiency of science and to kind of benefit from complementarities and to kind of avoid the duplication. And in a way, it's also the economic benefits that result from that, that are also quite interesting to some policymakers. Then when we get to institutional level, it's a bit different because it really depends on the institution, on the discipline, on it varies a lot. But I think what people have seen in general for the institution is that diversity, inclusion, equity, equality, this is something that they definitely have to embed in their institution to have talent, to just attract talent, to maintain talent. So that's really something I think that resonates more and more because particularly young people want to join places that are collaborative, they're open, that are transparent, they're more connected to what's happening, they're more dynamic. So yeah, really depending on who you kind of talk to, there are different facets of the benefits of open science that you can promote more. And luckily there are so many that you can really kind of tailor your message to the person you're talking to. Yeah, absolutely, Xiao. I completely agree with what Miriam and Ana just said and I'm gonna go to a different audience, which is the general public, since I think they've covered policymakers and the early career, so well, when we talk to the general public, something that really resonates with people is when we talk about cancer and when we talk about COVID. And almost every one of us has had someone in their lives with cancer and at some point has gone online to look for clinical trials or to look for cancer research and encountered paywalls. And been unable, you see these federally funded studies and this federally funded research and you have someone that you love in jeopardy and you can't help them. And that is something that inability to access information really resonates as a real life experience for many people. And then we talk about how during COVID, the paywalls were suspended and the way that research was able to advance more rapidly. And it was a direct result of not only a huge federal investment, but also just the access to information and people remember being able to find that information. And then this experience of seeing and participating and being feeling part of it versus something hidden resonates, we find a lot with the public. Definitely, that's fascinating. Jumping now to barriers and challenges which you all touched on in each of your remarks. Again, asking you to sort of pick one. What do you see as moving on from the year of open science into our future of open sciences? As Maryam mentioned, what do you see as the biggest barrier to implementation or the biggest challenge? And I think this can be sort of a call to action for this community that's gathered today and how can we all sort of coalesce around a few of the main barriers that we're seeing coming out of this major year of action. So let's start, Michelle, why don't we go back to you this time to kick us off and then we'll ask Anna and Maryam from there. I think one of the biggest barriers that we encounter is that the people who have the platforms, the people who have the privilege and the people who have the loudest voices, who want to protect that privilege are often very vocal about wanting to not advance open science. And that is something that we see a lot of and we try to, I think that the solution is to really embrace the diverse early career community that are our champions and to elevate their voices and to try and shift some of that privilege to them because they really are the future. And we all can get, there are also amazing advocates who are in positions of power, but sometimes you hear a lot of, well, it's an unfunded mandate or you're asking this, being able to tell the stories of all these successes and show the diverse participation in open science is the more that we can elevate that, I think what we'll start to address that barrier that we constantly run into, which is power and privilege. Ana? Yes, I absolutely agree. I mean, what we see, it really is trying to kind of break the culture of close that we have in the science systems around the world. And that is indeed connected to power and privilege that are connected to that closeness, right? So this kind of democratization of science that has to happen is the biggest opportunity we have, but also the biggest challenge moving forward. And I agree with Shell that we need voices, we need to make people understand what open science is, what it is not also. I think there's a lot of confusion and some of this confusion is put out there by people who are reluctant to embrace open science. So they kind of, while people are confused, it's easy then to just sell all kinds of different things. So I think making sure that we are very clear about what we mean by open science, when open is not open, when open can be restricted, what are the rules of the community to guide sharing of data, sharing of knowledge, collaborations, et cetera. Open science can happen in so many different ways. And I think we kind of have to also start getting out of our open science community into those communities that are not open yet. And even if it's harder to talk to them, it's really to try to get the messages across these other communities as well. So if there is a big conference on climate change, I think open science people have to be in that conference as well. Conference on biodiversity and other things, we have to be there and talk about the importance of open practices in their domains. I think that's how we're gonna reach a bigger audience and then maybe have the movement grow even more. Maryam. Sure. So I think kind of building on some of the discussion around early career researchers, I'll say about capacity building and sort of retooling or having time and space and support to learn how to really embrace and meaningfully adopt these open science practices is I think an opportunity, both an opportunity and a challenge. And so that is one of the things that we really heard during the course of our listening sessions with the early career researcher community as well as with communities that support early career researchers, librarians, data curators and so on. And so I think finding one of the great things about NASA's Open Science 101 curriculum is that it is openly available, that it is an opportunity to sort of build communities of practice around that, but making sure that that time is also recognized and honored by people overseeing the work of early career researchers. It's something that we've heard is really important that they just need time to learn these things. And then there's also been just like really great efforts across agencies, including NIH has been sharing exemplars or good examples of data management and sharing plans to create opportunities for other researchers in the biomedical research space kind of learn how are people approaching this and how are they thinking about data management and sharing throughout the research lifecycle. The same thing with NIST's research data framework. There are these tools that are becoming available, these resources that are becoming available and making sure that we're giving the time and space for those to be adopted is something that, we have these tools more and more and now it's just like getting them into the hands of people in ways that are meaningful to them. Absolutely. So Lisa, I'll ask one more question maybe then we can transition to audience questions. So please keep continuing to add those to the Q and A. Everybody out there. So it's clear from at least from my observations about the year of open science and all the activities that have happened that it's really relied on collaboration and coalitions and sort of interagency relationships and relationships between nation states and national governments. And this also made me think of Shell's comment about culture and how essential and central that is to progressing this movement. So starting with Miriam and then Anna and Shell and please answer for your respective scale. Like for Miriam, it's clear that your interagency relationships are key whereas Anna thinking more about nation states and international governments. What have you learned about working across agencies or across nations, across different sectors and level of government? Yeah, so I'll say from the sort of interagency perspective we really have benefited from a robust infrastructure of interagency collaboration and coordination for the last decade. So that subcommittee on open science that I had mentioned which is where we coordinated the year of open science activities is a group that has existed in some form for at least the last decade. And so we've really been able to leverage these existing partnerships and collaborations and just relationships between people who have been leading in the open science space for quite some time and thinking about sort of what... So even though 2023 was the first year of open science, there's all of these ways that we've been coordinating. And the year of open science gave us this opportunity to sort of bring more communities into what that coordination looks like. And so it's been really great to have panels or conferences like this where we get to sit on a panel and talk about the ways that we've already been working together on things like infrastructure or adopting best practices around capacity building or best practices around data management and sharing kind of messaging and communication. So it's been for me coming into this role just really wonderful to see those strong relationships and collaborations both across agencies and also with the communities that we work with across the research enterprise really get to shine a spotlight on those, you know, bombs over the years. And now, do you want to jump in? Yeah, I think even from kind of the international perspective, I think what is important to have these platforms for dialogue where in our case, countries can talk to each other and talk about the challenges but talk also about opportunities, look into potential matchmaking or something like that. So I think providing these platforms and these fora whether it's intergovernmental like at UNESCO or it is at international conferences, I think it's really is important and I hope we're gonna have much more of that going forward. But also what we've seen is again at the international level is the need to rethink a little bit scientific collaborations across nations. So there has been a lot of asymmetries in how these collaborations happen. There has been a lot of somebody has something and they just got to give it to the other one whether that other one wants it or not in a way and to the extent not always very equitable. So I think we also have to seriously rethink what STI science technology innovation collaborations at the international level in the open science context mean and then start to implement them in that way. And how do we make them more equitable and more learning and exchanges from all sides and all ends, particularly when it comes to open science, different countries have different perspectives and different things that can bring into a partnership, into a collaboration. And I think we have to really make sure that these partnerships and collaborations really work and are equitable as they should be. So something to think about, we will be organizing a meeting in December in South Africa to look into this equity in partnerships a little bit. So I will invite all of you to join as well because I think we need some new principles, just thinking about how these partnerships should actually look like today in the open science context. Shell, are there things you'd like to add? Just to add that one of the roles that we've played at NASA as we're working with all these other federal agencies and we've really seen part of our role as being able to recognize and elevate the work that's been done by open science advocates over the last couple of decades. We've had, and to provide that, this sort of a channel of their lessons learned, their feedback to federal agencies, just as a conversation. And we've had that also, so we've had a community panel with representatives from open science organizations and open science projects that have really been doing this for a long time so that as we are moving into this field, we really make sure to include them, recognize them and also learn from them. And we're also working with academic institutions so that we don't want this to be a top down initiative because it really is a bottoms up initiative. And so as federal agencies and large international groups and governments start having more policies around open science, we wanna make sure that there's that channel for the conversation of the people who are on the ground, the people who are doing the research and the organizations that have been active in this area, especially around elevating researchers from underserved communities have a voice. Thank you. So, Lisa, I'll go ahead and turn it over to you. I see there's been a lot of great questions. A lot of activity, thank you. Thank you for those responses and the thoughtful questions as well, Alison. I'm gonna start with two kind of directed or specific questions that are in the Q and A section and then pull out to a couple of broader ones and then we will end at about 20 minutes or so after the hour. So this will go fast, but the first question is from Ivy Christensen and it's for Shell specifically. So Ivy says that as a member of the aerospace community, I'd love to know how the private aerospace industry can better embrace open science principles with the balance of ITAR restrictions. And the reason I asked this question is a very pointed and specific question, but there's a lot of threads around public and private industry and the exchange there, some of the natural things you can think of in terms of IP rewards, incentives for remaining closed, right, or other issues. And so I wonder if you could touch on that, maybe also just maybe what you're seeing in terms of private industry. I wanna be very, very clear that we do not want anyone sharing ITAR restricted information and saying that it's an open science. Open science is also about security and security for both ITAR, for personal information, for health information, for any sort of sensitive information, openness. And this is part of what we spend in the open science, the introduction to open science. We actually spend quite a bit of time talking about this because openness has to be thoughtful and openness has to be intentional. So if there are security restrictions, please do not share that information. If there are sensitive personal information around healthcare, please do not share that information, there's ways to anonymize that data set. So when we ask people to be open, it's with those caveats, we want it to be secure. And we have this question a lot around IP, that you can patent your ideas and that is one way to control how you share it. We encourage people to think about the trade-offs between being closed and being open. So there are certainly some things that people will want to keep closed for a competitive edge, but for federally funded research, for taxpayer dollars that is going towards research, we want those to be open because we value the advancing of science, we value the breakthrough discoveries that are gonna come from that. And we want federally funded research to be open. And Maryam might have more to say on this, I would think. Sure, I can just chime in and say that, I think for a long time, there's been this paradigm of openness and security as being an opposition, but we see them as going hand in hand, but if you want that open science is responsible science is secure science. And so part of the motivations for our requirements around data management and sharing, for example, is that you should be thinking about these decisions, these important security, ethical considerations at the start of your research project before you go into generating data and really think collaboratively about what are the best ways that we can share this information or not share? And so thinking about it on a spectrum, I think is much more meaningful and responsible and intentional way of doing research. So, yes. Thank you. Thanks, Shell. Thanks, Maryam. And I know I won't speak on your behalf, Anna, but I know obviously the recommendation on open science repeats several times as open as possible as closed as necessary, right? And so it's finding the symbiotic relationship and being responsible with that. So thank you. A question from Sarah Whalen at Wiley and this is for you, Maryam. Will OSTP release any additional guidance this coming year to help agencies navigate some of the more difficult topics and kind of questions related to the Nelson memo implementation. So data management, reasonable costs, any agency communication plans to external audiences? So I know there's been a lot of follow-up obviously and you mentioned agencies are releasing, request for information and really putting those implementation plans together. What can we expect in terms of additional guidance, if any? So since the release of the 2022 public access memo, we have been working really, really closely with all of the agency public access leads leading up to their submission of their updated public access plans, some of which have been publicly posted, have gone out for public comment, have been kind of engaged in listening tours across their agencies and so on since August of 2022. And really even before then, we've long been working together around implementation of the 2013 public access memo and that 2022 memo is a continuation and strengthening of that. And so we have been having sort of regular community of practice style meetings very, very often. I think now it's twice a month with agency public access leads and people responsible for implementation to exchange best practices, lessons learned, different approaches to the expectations of that 2022 memo. There's also been really wonderful work that's been supported by agencies. So for example, the National Science Foundation had sponsored some work around for the Association for Research Libraries to look at sort of costs around data management and sharing and that work is now being supported by the Institute for Museum and Library Services, IMLS. There's to kind of get at some of these other considerations and a lot of discussion about the learnings and the processes that are being sort of uncovered through those studies. So a lot of coordination and really hands-on engagement both with OSTP2 agencies and across agencies and sort of mentorship or sharing of best practices relationships. That's great, super helpful. Thank you for those insights. Okay, I'm gonna pull back a little bit and from Hilary Connolly. So she writes, the stage setting has been so useful and also a bit like drinking from a fire hose in the best way, of course, from a research institution perspective and practicing researcher, where does one start? And I think this kind of speaks a little bit, Maryam, you mentioned the importance of capacity building, right? And so making sure that we're creating the space and the time and offering the resources. But for any of you, if you're a little overwhelmed of where to begin and situated in research institution and or practicing researcher, what advice would you offer in terms of where to begin? I'll jump in because especially if you're at a research institution, I think all of our best friend are the friendly librarians. They're often extremely knowledgeable about these areas and these activities and can give you, connect you to communities, connect you to maybe other people at your institution who are doing open science or just know who we're asking questions. There's lots of online resources as well, but often it's easier to just walk down to the library. That's great, show. Maryam? I'll do a plus 1,000 for libraries as being really, really amazing resources because their mission is connecting people with information in ways that are meaningful. So that, I'll also put in a plug for NASA's open science 101, 101, what better way to start to kind of get an introduction into these principles and kind of move your way deeper and deeper. I also think I'm somebody who works really well in community and so finding other people at your institution who may want to gather in the library, for example, to take that together and share these best practices. I found when I was an early career researcher that finding that community and just sharing what we were learning as we were doing data management and sharing was just so incredibly helpful. These informal communities of practice are just really wonderful. That's great. Anna, did you want to jump in? I mean, I haven't been in a research institution for a while now, so it's difficult, but the feedbacks that we also receive is definitely the librarians. I mean, they are supposed to be there and they're the ones who are like the first entry point to the open science world. But in those places where there is no information because there are a lot of places where there still is no other information, then there are places for those who are interested reaching out even to UNESCO or to others who can then kind of steer them towards some of the connections, including some of the organizations who are participating here today. I think it's useful and definitely then creating a community of practice that's always the first step. We've had some very interesting communities around hydrology, for example, and all stemming from just very young researchers who wanted to share their research and little by little created this community of hydrologists doing open science. So there is a lot of good examples there. There is a lot of good capacity building modules that we can share and I will be talking to Shell and see how we can disseminate even more broadly and maybe adapt a little bit the open science 101 that NASA produced that we can share it with other countries as well and other institutions too. Wonderful, thank you all. Okay, one final question and it's a little bit more specific actually I'm drilling back down and it's from Merriam and it's from Jenny Heimberg. Where might one find a list of the current federal repositories for open science and then just a comment that it would also be interesting to see the trends over time on the number of repositories and their use. And I know that's a bit of a loaded question in some senses but I think the gist of it is federal repositories really supporting open science practices and demonstrating that. So for a list of public access repositories for publications, you can find those on science.gov as a really helpful resource in terms of data, there's a whole that system is a lot more diverse and evolving. I'll make a plug, this is in the biomedical research space but NIH has a really nice list of data repositories that they support that are funded by NIH. And you can find those, I think if you look up like BMIC data repositories, a list will come up. Some agencies have these kinds of lists of repositories that their researchers can use for data but that is kind of a mix. Data.gov is also a good resource for some data resources. It's very, very diverse landscape when it comes to data sharing. That's great, thank you. Yeah, some of these questions require a whole other event and we will get there. Thank you, Maryam. I'm gonna pause here and give everyone at least a gift of one minute to certainly get another cup of coffee or caffeine or whatever your beverage of choice is and to begin to transition to the next sessions. I wanna first of all comment on the thoughtfulness of the questions. So thank you to all of the participants and audience members. The range of questions are wonderful to see because they reflect the program that we've also put together. So there's a lot of questions around infrastructure, community building, capacity building, rewards and incentives, and then really policy implementation. What does good implementation look like? And so I hope you enjoy the rest of the program and see and find some of the answers potentially or at least open up yet more questions for all of you to explore. So definitely I encourage you to continue to join those sessions. I also wanna thank Anna, Maryam, and Shell for their insights and reflections. It's certainly, I think, Anna, you summed it up beautifully in terms of many of these things happened during the year of open science, but they've also come before that, right? And so we are talking about a continuum here and this is the point of this meeting as well is to keep this excellent work going to forge stronger coalitions and to move forward together and learn from one another. So really grateful to all three of you for the thoughtfulness in your presentations and being available to answer the audience's questions. And with that, I will say that we will be posting the recording of this and all of these sessions after the event. We'll also be putting together a proceedings from the event and some resources. A lot of resources will be shared throughout the event, but we'll try to organize those for folks as well. So really grateful for your attention and time and enjoy the rest of the conference.