What is this about? (Is About)
From The Embassy of Good Science
A short summary providing some details about the theme/resource (max. 75 words)
- ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
P
This introductory micromodule explores the concept of Planetary Health as a framework linking human well-being with the state of natural systems. Through an animated video and guided reflection, participants will examine how human activities have breached planetary boundaries, exacerbating health inequalities and environmental injustices. The module fosters ethical awareness and encourages learners to consider sustainability as a foundational principle of responsible research and innovation. +
<div>
<span lang="EN-GB">This activity builds on the content of the fourth episode of “Earth to Research”, titled “Planetary Health (Part One): Expelling Shell”. In this episode Host Lucy Sabin speaks with Petra Verdonk, co-founder of the Dutch Society for Gender and Health. They discuss gender, intersectionality, values in research and how universities can divest from fossil fuel interests while nurturing integrity and activism in academia. They reflect on what new possibilities emerge when research is guided by planetary health, gender and intersectionality perspectives.</span>
</div><div>
<span lang="EN-GB">This podcast explores how health and climate research are deeply shaped by social inequalities, showing why gender, intersectionality, and power relations are essential for understanding real-world health outcomes in the context of the climate crisis. Through examples from research, activism, and creative practice, it challenges the idea of neutral science and invites researchers to rethink their roles, methods, and responsibilities.</span>
</div> +
Platforma za otvorenu nauku (2018), Ministry of Education Science and Technological Development (MESTD) +
The Platforma za otvorenu nauku (2018), produced by Serbia’s Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development (MESTD), provides a national framework for open science and open access in Serbia. It translates high-level principles into actionable guidance for researchers, institutions, funders, and publishers, promoting openness as the default while respecting ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security. The platform links openness to research quality, reproducibility, equitable access, and faster translation of knowledge, particularly for communities with limited resources. Key elements include open access to publications with preferred licensing (e.g., Creative Commons), deposition in trusted repositories, FAIR data principles, and detailed data management plans. Responsibilities are defined for authors and institutions, covering funding acknowledgment, rights retention, and budgeting, while justified embargoes and sensitive-data exceptions are transparently documented. It encourages enabling infrastructure repositories, registries, discovery services and aligns with international initiatives such as Plan S and the European Open Science Cloud. Assessment focuses on the quality of openness, including machine-readable metadata, persistent identifiers, and sharing of methods, code, and data. Equity, multilingual communication, and capacity building are emphasized. Implementation relies on early planning, institutional support, and funder-backed infrastructure. The document serves as a practical reference, checklist, and benchmark, supporting compliance, transparency, reproducibility, and harmonization with global norms. +
This policy brief presents a Glossary for Academic Integrity that collates 208 terms and their definitions related to academic integrity and misconduct, drawn from 60 core national and international sources. Because there is considerable variation and ambiguity in how academic integrity concepts are used, the glossary aims to provide a shared understanding across institutions, disciplines, and jurisdictions. It covers concepts such as plagiarism, contract cheating, authorship ethics, self-plagiarism, and integrity management, including synonyms and contextual nuances. The document encourages its use as a living tool, adaptable over time as new terms and practices evolve. It is intended as a foundational resource for educators, institutions, policy developers, ombudspersons, and students to coordinate consistent practices around academic integrity. +
This is a policy brief produced under COALESCE a European science-communication initiative. The brief draws on a state-of-the-art review, interviews and workshops involving actors from the “quadruple helix” (science, policy, industry, civil society) to explore how science communication can respond to urgent societal challenges. It outlines existing communication practices from traditional one-way dissemination and fact-checking to two-way and multi-way, participatory models and evaluates their effectiveness in a “post-truth” environment marked by misinformation and distrust. The document reviews existing tools and resources (e.g. media-literacy toolkits, fact-checking guidelines, crisis-communication frameworks) and proposes strategies for building a more robust, trust-oriented science communication ecosystem. Its goal is to inform a future European Competence Centre for Science Communication that supports scientists, communicators, policymakers and other stakeholders. +
Policy Statement on Open Access for Publications from Publicly Funded Research Projects Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) (2014), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) +
The Policy Statement on Open Access by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) provides national guidance for researchers, institutions, funders, and publishers in China. Written in Chinese, it frames openness as the default, balanced by ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security. Key elements include open access to publications, FAIR data principles, persistent identifiers, and deposition in trusted repositories. Responsibilities for authors and institutions cover rights retention, funding acknowledgment, and cost management. Exceptions for sensitive or commercial data are documented transparently. The policy encourages enabling infrastructure, training, and monitoring, aligned with international standards like Plan S. Equity, responsible openness, and inclusion are emphasized. For practitioners, it offers a practical checklist to improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. Published in 2014, it is a credible reference for implementing open research in China. +
The German Rectors' Conference (HRK) is the leading association of higher education institutions in Germany, with over 250 members. Besides engaging in public and political policy shaping, the HRK also develops and sets institutional standards in education. In this regards, they publish regulations and guidelines that are required to be followed at member institutions. +
The ''Policy on Ethics and Scientific Integrity'' (2014), authored by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche, is a national framework promoting research integrity in France. Written in French and targeting French researchers and institutions, it formalises principles of honesty, accountability, professional courtesy, and stewardship of resources, linking these to reproducibility, credibility, and societal trust. It defines responsibilities across the research cycle, including authorship, citation, conflict-of-interest management, transparency of methods and data, responsible supervision, and fair peer review. Procedures for handling misconduct are outlined, ensuring due process, proportional sanctions, and learning opportunities. By aligning with international standards, the policy connects French practice to global norms, supporting mobility and comparability of researchers. Education and training on responsible conduct are emphasised, alongside guidance on open science, digital tools, and data management. Equity and diversity are integrated as cross-cutting themes. Combining principles with practical tools, glossaries, and reporting systems, it serves as both a policy and a practical handbook. +
Policy on Open Access (2017), produced by NordForsk for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, sets out practical guidance for open science in the Nordic region. It frames openness as the default—balanced by ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security—and promotes the principle of being “as open as possible, as closed as necessary.”
The policy requires open access to publications via clear compliance routes, Creative Commons licensing, persistent identifiers, and deposition in trusted repositories. It aligns with FAIR data principles, encouraging data management plans that address stewardship, metadata standards, and repository choice. Embargoes are limited and exceptions must be transparently justified.
Responsibilities are defined for researchers (plan for openness, acknowledge funding, retain rights), institutions (training, repositories), funders (support core infrastructure), and publishers (enable rights retention, interoperability). Compliance is monitored through reporting, metadata quality, and transparency of outputs rather than volume alone.
Equity is central: the policy promotes zero-embargo access where possible, publisher-agnostic routes, and multilingual communication. It also stresses responsible openness, safeguarding personal, health, or Indigenous data through oversight and secure environments.
Overall, the policy gathers fragmented rules into one reference, links Nordic practice to global initiatives like Plan S and EOSC, and provides actionable steps for researchers, managers, librarians, and policymakers. +
Policy on Open Access (2017) is a international policy produced by NordForsk, written in english, and intended for stakeholders in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. It synthesizes expectations for open science and open access within Nordic region, translating high‑level principles into actionable guidance for researchers, institutions, funders and publishers. The document frames openness as a default—tempered by considerations of ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security—and promotes the maxim of being as open as possible and as closed as necessary. It links openness to research quality, reproducibility, speed of translation, and equitable access to knowledge, particularly for communities with limited subscription access. Core elements typically covered include open access to publications with clear routes to compliance, preferred licensing such as Creative Commons, the use of persistent identifiers, and deposition of the accepted manuscript or version of record in trusted repositories. The guidance also references FAIR data principles and encourages data management plans that specify stewardship, metadata standards, and repository selection. On the operational side, the resource explains responsibilities for authors and host institutions, including acknowledging funding, retaining rights where feasible, and budgeting for publication costs only when necessary. Embargoes, where still allowed, are circumscribed and justified, and exceptions exist for sensitive, commercial, or security‑relevant data;these exceptions are documented through transparent waiver or justification processes. To support adoption, the document points to enabling infrastructure—repositories, registries, discovery services, and research information systems—that help automate compliance and improve the visibility of outputs. It often aligns with or references international efforts such as Plan S, the European Open Science Cloud, or national repository networks, situating local practice within a broader, interoperable ecosystem. Assessment and monitoring are addressed through reporting requirements, progress indicators, and compliance checks at grant reporting or institutional review stages. Rather than counting publications alone, emphasis is placed on the quality of openness: machine‑readable metadata, persistent links, transparent methods, and, where appropriate, sharing of code and data under well‑described licences. The audience for the resource spans researchers who need practical steps to comply;research managers who design workflows and training;librarians and repository managers who provide infrastructure;and policymakers seeking to harmonise national strategies. Examples and FAQs translate policy statements into tangible actions, covering preprints, rights retention statements, and the handling of third‑party content. Equity is treated as a cross‑cutting theme: the document encourages zero‑embargo access when feasible, recognises the burden of author‑facing publication charges, and highlights publisher‑agnostic routes such as repositories and community‑owned platforms. It underscores that openness without attention to inclusion can reinforce disparities, and therefore pairs access with capacity building and multilingual communication where possible. Responsible openness features prominently, requiring safeguards for participants and communities, especially when dealing with personal, health, or Indigenous data. The resource endorses governance mechanisms—ethics oversight, data access committees, and secure environments—that balance public value with legitimate protections, while promoting transparency about any restrictions that remain. Implementation relies on clear roles and timelines. Researchers are encouraged to plan for openness at project inception;institutions to provide training and repository services;and funders to underwrite core infrastructure rather than pay‑per‑article charges where avoidable. Publishers are invited to support author rights, interoperability, and machine‑readable licensing and metadata. For practitioners, the value of Policy on Open Access lies in its specificity and coherence: it gathers dispersed rules into one dependable reference, connects them to global norms, and explains how to demonstrate compliance without excessive administrative load.
Policy on open access to research publications (2019), the Federation of Finnish Learned Societies (TSV) +
The Policy on Open Access to Research Publications (2019) by the Federation of Finnish Learned Societies sets openness as the default in Finland’s research system, guided by the principle “as open as possible, as closed as necessary.” It provides practical guidance for researchers, institutions, funders, and publishers on achieving open access, emphasizing repositories, Creative Commons licensing, persistent identifiers, FAIR data principles, and transparent rights retention. While safeguarding ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security, the policy limits embargoes to justified cases and calls for transparent waiver processes. It highlights equity by promoting zero-embargo access, multilingual communication, and affordable, publisher-agnostic routes, while stressing responsible openness for sensitive or Indigenous data through ethics oversight and secure environments. Implementation is supported by national infrastructure, compliance monitoring, and alignment with international initiatives like Plan S and the European Open Science Cloud, ensuring Finland’s practices are interoperable, inclusive, and sustainable. +
Policy statement on ensuring research integrity in Ireland (2020), National Research Integrity Forum +
The Policy Statement on Ensuring Research Integrity in Ireland (2020), published by the National Research Integrity Forum, provides a national framework to uphold responsible research practices across Ireland. It formalises principles of honesty, accountability, professional courtesy, and stewardship, linking these values to reproducibility, credibility, and societal trust. The policy defines responsibilities for researchers, supervisors, institutions, funders, and journals, outlining good practice in planning, conducting, publishing, and reviewing research. Key provisions cover authorship, citation, conflict of interest management, data transparency, supervision, and fair peer review. It also establishes procedures for addressing misconduct, ensuring due process, proportional sanctions, and learning opportunities. Education and training are embedded to teach integrity as a core skill, while guidance on open science, digital tools, and data management reflects contemporary research challenges. Equity and diversity are emphasised as integral to credible research environments. By aligning with international standards, the policy reinforces comparability, researcher mobility, and global trust in Irish research. +
This guideline presents principles introduced by the scientific community in the belief that the primary duty of a researcher is to adhere to the established principles and honesty in scientific work. The Code of Ethics for Research Workers was prepared by the Science Ethics Committee and enacted by the General Assembly of the Polish Academy of Sciences. +
Polish Ministry of Science and Information Society Technologies' Good Scientific Research Practice Recommendations +
The effect of research misconduct on the credibility of science cannot be underestimated. To prevent misconduct and to address instances of breach of integrity, is is essential that researchers and research institutions have clear guidelines that can be followed. This document enumerates the principles of good research, the practices that follow and the procedures for addressing misconduct. +
The National Science Centre of Poland proposed a code to govern research integrity and applications for research funding. The code proposes multiple methods of operationalizing principles of integrity throughout the research process, from conception to publication. It also advocates for teaching, training, and supervision as fundamental ways of ensuring research integrity. Finally, the code spells out possible ways it can be violated, and mechanisms of enforcement including penalties and sanctions from the National Science Centre. +
A researcher is unsure how to disseminate potentially controversial findings regarding needle exchange programs and HIV infection rates. +
Política Nacional de Ciencia Abierta 2022- 2031 (2022), Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación +
Política Nacional de Ciencia Abierta 2022‑2031 (2022) is a national resource produced by the Colombian Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation, written in Spanish, and intended for stakeholders in Colombia. It provides comprehensive guidance on open science and open access, translating high-level principles into actionable steps for researchers, institutions, funders, and publishers. The document positions openness as the default, tempered by ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security, promoting “as open as possible, as closed as necessary.” It emphasizes the link between openness, research quality, reproducibility, rapid knowledge translation, and equitable access, particularly for communities with limited subscription access. Key elements include open access to publications, preferred licensing like Creative Commons, persistent identifiers, deposition in trusted repositories, and adherence to FAIR data principles through detailed data management plans. Operational guidance covers author and institutional responsibilities, funding acknowledgment, rights retention, budgeting, and justified embargoes or exceptions. The policy highlights enabling infrastructure, monitoring mechanisms, and governance for responsible openness. For practitioners, it consolidates national rules, aligns Colombian practice with international norms, reduces ambiguity, and provides practical steps to enhance transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. Published in 2022, it is a credible reference for policy, training, and grant documentation. +
Política de acceso abierto a la información científica y a atos de investigación financiados con fondos públicos de la ANID (2022), Chilean National Agency for Research and Development +
The document is about Chile’s national open access policy for scientific information and research data (2022). It sets the rules and vision for ensuring that research funded with public money is openly available to everyone. The policy emphasizes that scientific knowledge is a public good and should not be locked behind expensive paywalls. Instead, it promotes depositing articles, theses, and research data in trusted repositories that follow international standards, ensuring visibility, interoperability, and long-term preservation. It also critiques commercial publishing models that create inequalities and highlights Chile’s role in regional open access initiatives such as SciELO and LA Referencia. Overall, it aims to make research outputs more transparent, reusable, and accessible supporting equity, innovation, and public benefit.<div><div></div></div><div><div><div><div></div><div><div><div><div></div></div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div><div><div><div><div></div><div></div><div></div></div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div> +
Mentors/supervisors of early career researchers (master students, doctoral students, post-doctoral fellows) very often are not aware of what is expected from them in the diadic relationship of a mentor and a mentee. This can lead to misunderstandings and poor research practices, which can finally lead to research misbehaviour and misconduct. [https://ori.hhs.gov/mentoring-and-research-misconduct-analysis-research-mentoring-closed-ori-cases Analysis of misconduct cases by the US Office for Research Integrity in the USA] showed that in man cases mentors failed to properly review research data collected by the mentee, did not teach them specific research standards, and did not ensure healthy, less stressful work environment. This is particularly relevant in large collaborative research collaborations, where the roles and responsibilities of all researchers in the collaboration may be unclear and blurred among different research groups. +
The ''Population Health Data Implementation Guide'' (Deliverable 7.1) is part of the WorldFAIR project, which aims to make research data in population health FAIR Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable. The guide explains how to describe and share population health data using standard metadata so that both domain experts and broader users can understand and reuse it effectively. It focuses on how to use established models and tools especially the OMOP Common Data Model (CDM) from the OHDSI community to harmonise and structure health datasets. To support access beyond specialist communities like INSPIRE, the guide shows how general metadata standards such as Schema.org can be combined with domain-specific models to describe data resources in a way that is machine-readable and broadly accessible. A significant part of the guide highlights documenting not only the data itself but also the study protocols and analytical processes behind it. +
