The great differences between societies that generate, spread and commercialize knowledge through mechanisms that always go beyond the requested and achieved economic profit, with those that do not produce it and only consume it in different presentations, is a reality that wants to be alleviated. … by international organizations whose declared goal is to build a better world. The two positions, the one that ensures the maintenance of its power and constant enrichment and the one that claims that science and wealth are common, maintain an open dialogue in which the position of those who have knowledge is reaffirmed, which is the case. They take opposing and critical positions that want to contribute to the appearance of a different reality.

Within this framework, there are a number of claims by poor societies that want to benefit more from what the rich produce, either because of their own merits or because of historical processes of conquest and use of the resources of countries with lower levels. developmental. The wealth and progress of some are partly related to the poverty of others. For this reason, it is undeniable that both sides share a global discourse that seeks fairness in the distribution of benefits, despite the fact that there is still a long way to go in practice, since the current differences are still huge.

The concept of open science is one of the cultural products of this planetary social assertion. He proposes that scientific production, which mainly comes from developed countries, be more accessible to all humanity and that it is created in response to the real needs of society, avoiding massive technological production intended for luxury and alienation, so profitable for so few. and so harmful to many.

(…) two initiatives that contribute to building a global balance based on justice and equality.

This criterion, open science, which is based on an ethical approach to the reality of the production and use of knowledge, aims to promote international cooperation among researchers, as well as the free publication of this knowledge in open journals that contribute to overcoming the contemporary reality of profit and exclusion covered by academic requirements. Therefore, the sound and empty criteria of high-impact publications, which in fact are not, are seriously criticized when a direct dialogue between researchers and society is initiated.

Another concept, in this scenario that wants to build a better world, promoted by organizations like UNESCO, is the one that comes from a moral challenge to the traditional notion of intellectual property that undermines the real possibilities of using knowledge to deal with problems such as poverty , climate change and public health, while limiting the use of products and hindering the development of inventors and innovators from poor countries.

These concepts, open science and intellectual property – critically analyzed – are just two initiatives that contribute to building a global balance based on justice and equality. (OR)