Open Access And Open Science in Ukraine From The Researchers’ Perspective (Based On The Results of a Sociological Study 2025)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2025.04.003Keywords:
open science, open access, research data, FAIR principles, data management plan, science policy, institutional repositories, sociological study, Ukrainian science.Abstract
In the current context of digitalization of science and education, the principles of open science and open access are becoming key factors for integrating the Ukrainian scientifi c community into the global research space. However, the level of awareness and practical application of these principles in Ukraine remains insuffi ciently studied, which determines the relevance of a comprehensive analysis of this issue. Aspects of open science have already been subject to review in the scientifi c literature: the development of institutional repositories, open access policies, and the application of FAIR principles. Nevertheless, systematic sociological studies on the attitudes and practices of Ukrainian researchers are scarce, which defi nes the novelty and signifi cance of the proposed work. Th e article presents for the fi rst time the results of a large-scale nation wide sociological study conducted in 2025, which combines analysis of researchers’ practical experience, assessment of institutional support, and identifi cation of barriers to implementing open science principles. Th e research was based on a survey conducted by the State Scientifi c and Technical Library of Ukraine in April—August 2025, covering 702 respondents across Ukraine. Quantitative analysis with elements of com-
parison and generalization was applied. Th e results demonstrated a relatively high level of open access publication of scientific works by Ukrainian researchers (86%), but
a signifi cantly lower level of research data sharing (34%). Th e following barriers were
identifi ed by the respondents: lack of technical knowledge (28 %), uncertainty about legal aspects (28), concerns about plagiarism (24), lack of infrastructure (23). Only 19% of respondents checked their data for compliance with FAIR principles, and 27% have a research data management plan. Half of the respondents’ institutions has an open science policy, but its practical implementation is limited. Respondents consider information support, consultations, and training in research data management most necessary (27%). Th e study confi rmed the necessity of a systematic approach to building open science infrastructure in Ukraine, strengthening institutional support, forming eff ective policies, and raising researchers’ awareness.
References
UNESCO. (2021). UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5834767
Yaroshenko, T., Serbin, O., & Yaroshenko, O. (2022). Open science: The role of universities and libraries in modern changes in scientific communication. Digital Platform: Information Technologies in Sociocultural Sphere, 5(2), 277–292. https://doi.org/10.31866/2617-796X.5.2.2022.270132 [in Ukrainian].
Leonelli, S. (2013). Why the current insistence on open access to scientific data? Big data, knowledge production, and the political economy of contemporary biology. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 33(1–2), 6–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467613496768
Yaroshenko, T., & Iaroshenko, O. (2024). Digital Open Science Tools (DOTS) for research life cycle. In IInd International Conference “Open Science and Innovation in Ukraine 2023” (pp. 179–181). Bentham Science Publishers. https://zenodo.org/records/17036844 (accessed: 29.12.2025).
Zagorodny, A., Khimich, O., Andon, F., Dubrovina, L., Radchenko, A., & Zhuk, O. et al. (2025). Implementation of European principles of open science in the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Visnyk Natsionalnoi Akademiyi Nauk Ukrayiny, (1), 11–33. https://doi.org/10.15407/visn2025.01.011 [in Ukrainian].
Drach, I., Petroye, O., Borodiyenko, O., & Reheilo, I. (2024). Conceptual foundations for the development of open science in the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine for 2024–2030. Herald of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine, 6(2), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.37472/v.naes.2024.6209 [in Ukrainian].
Lugovyi, V., Drach, I., Petroye, O., & Reheilo, I. (2024). On the results of the study “Enhancing the research capacity of Ukrainian universities under war and postwar recovery in the context of implementing the open science concept”. Herald of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine, 6(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.37472/v.naes.2024.6103 [in Ukrainian].
Kormann, E., Klebel, T., Zhezhnych, P., Berezko, O., & Ross-Hellauer, T. (2024). Report on academic integrity awareness and Open Science recognition levels in Ukraine (2021–2023). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13898981
Fecher, B., & Friesike, S. (2014). Open science: One term, five schools of thought. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening Science: The Evolving Guide on How the Internet is Changing Research, Collaboration and Scholarly Publishing (pp. 17–47). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2 (Preprint version: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2272036)
Leonelli, S. (2023). Philosophy of Open Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009416368
Ramachandran, R., Bugbee, K., & Murphy, K. (2021). From open data to open science. Earth and Space Science, 8(5), e2020EA001562. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020EA001562
Borozdykh, N. (2023). Principles of open science as the basis for the formation of research area in Ukraine. Science and Science of Science, (2)120, 116–137. https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2023.02.116 [in Ukrainian].
Yaroshenko, T. (2021). Open access, open science, open data: How it was and where we are going (To the 20th anniversary of the Budapest Open Access Declaration). Ukrainian Journal on Library and Information Science, (8), 10–26. https://doi.org/10.31866/2616-7654.8.2021.247582 [in Ukrainian].
Kumar, N. (2023). Rethinking intellectual property rights in the era of open science. Interdisciplinary Studies in Society, Law, and Politics, 2(3), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.61838/kman.isslp.2.3.1
De la Cueva, J., & Méndez, E. (2022). Open science and intellectual property rights: How can they better interact? State of the art and reflections. URL: https://philarchive.org/rec/DELOSA-3 (accessed: 29.12.2025).
Kapitsa, Yu.M., & Shahbazyan, K.S. (2023). Open science and intellectual property. Information and Law, (2)45, 73–87. https://doi.org/10.37750/2616-6798.2023.2(45).282324 [in Ukrainian].
Patel, D. (2016). Research data management: A conceptual framework. Library Review, 65(4/5), 226–241. https://doi.org/10.1108/LR-01-2016-0001
Briney, K. (2015). Data Management for Researchers: Organize, Maintain and Share Your Data for Research Success. Exeter: Pelagic Publishing. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.28833749
Yaroshenko, T., & Chukanova, S. (2025). FAIR principles in science: Developing competencies for proper data management. Digital Platform: Information Technologies in Sociocultural Sphere, 8(1), 223–248. https://doi.org/10.31866/2617-796X.8.1.2025.335555 [in Ukrainian].
Lindemann, T., & Häberlein, L. (2023). Contours of a research ethics and integrity perspective on open science. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 8, 1052353. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1052353
Sivasubramaniam, S.D. (2024). Open AI and open science: The influence of artificial intelligence on maintaining academic integrity in open science. Baltija Publishing. https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-397-2-44
Limongi, R. (2024). The use of artificial intelligence in scientific research with integrity and ethics. Future Studies Research Journal: Trends and Strategies, 16(1), e845. https://doi.org/10.24023/FutureJournal/2175-5825/2024.v16i1.845
Gulumbe, B.H., Audu, S.M., & Hashim, A.M. (2025). Balancing AI and academic integrity: What are the positions of academic publishers and universities? AI & Society, 40(3), 1775–1784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-01946-8
Corrall, S., & Pinfield, S. (2014). Coherence of “open” initiatives in higher education and research: Framing a policy agenda. In iConference 2014 Proceedings (pp. 293–313). https://doi.org/10.9776/14085
Levin, N., Leonelli, S., Weckowska, D., Castle, D., & Dupré, J. (2016). How do scientists define openness? Exploring the relationship between open science policies and research practice. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 36(2), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467616668760
Ferguson, H. (2016). What social workers do in performing child protection work: Evidence from research into face-to-face practice. Child & Family Social Work, 21 (3), 283—294. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12142
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Akademperiodyka of the NAS of Ukraine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
