1 of 15

Community infrastructure to further open research software

SciCodes, Feb 20, 2025

​

Grant G-2024-22595

Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

investinopen.org |

@investinopen

2 of 15

Project Aims

Advance understanding of the landscape

Offer field-level recommendations

Facilitate conversation and engagement

We especially looked for:

  • Existing connections between services and initiatives;
  • Overcrowding or excessive functional overlap and where gaps, blockers, vulnerabilities, and critical dependencies need attention;
  • Indications of value - what helps infrastructure services and initiatives succeed in adding value to the research software community

​

1

2

3

RSW Infrastructure

3 of 15

Findings

In 2025, research software is still navigating its evolution towards formalization; it is dominated by disciplinary and geographical �pockets of activity, many of which overlap, with competing missions, goals, and funding options.

4 of 15

RSW Infrastructure

The political and fiscal climate makes �this a moment in which we need to champion early efforts to build across initiatives and increase collaborative planning and action as much as possible.

5 of 15

Common themes

“like an iceberg” - some is visible, most is not

  • e.g., lack of
    • canonical resources
    • ways to recognize and reward practitioners
    • citability
    • reuse

Balancing needs

  • Semi-Agreement that:
    • Research software should be a first class research object
    • Recognition and support is needed for functions across the software lifecycle
  • Interest in collaboration but
    • Issues with cross-border funding
    • Siloed or niche work

Hidden

Visible

Fragmented

Coherent

6 of 15

Common themes

The “danger zone”

  • Emergence comes with promise & peril, e.g.
    • Defunding of science
    • Heavy reliance on volunteers
    • Different academic cultures
    • Cost transparency is needed
    • Potential for shared services
      • To what extent can infrastructures support multiple disciplines?

Fragile

Robust

7 of 15

Recommendations

zenodo.org/records/14888589

  1. Surface hidden information

​

8 of 15

Recommendations

Address the paucity of available, standardized, �and meaningful data

Data about funding, production, use/reuse, engagement needs to be collected, assessed, and used to promote intentional change.

​

9 of 15

Recommendations

zenodo.org/records/14888589

  • Surface hidden information
  • Strengthen the scaffolding

​

10 of 15

Recommendations

Shift funding and attention to reinforce a common set of social and tech infrastructures

​

The field is rife with experiments that are propped up with small amounts of funding and that falter or fail after a short period.

​

​

​

​

11 of 15

Recommendations

zenodo.org/records/14888589

  • Surface hidden information
  • Strengthen the scaffolding
  • Grow the “market”

​

12 of 15

Recommendations

Emerging fields do not spring up full grown in order to meet the needs of a new market.

​

​

​

The vast majority of the actors in research software do not have a set of known and structured interactions, to depend on as they conduct their work.

​

​

​

​

13 of 15

Recommendations

zenodo.org/records/14888589

  • Surface hidden information
  • Strengthen the scaffolding
  • Grow the “market”
  • Invest in coordination

14 of 15

Recommendations

Treat this moment like the emergency that it is

​

​

​

Streamlining is essential for success given the funding risks ahead for this and other open science fields

​

​

​

​

​

15 of 15

Thank you!

Katherine Skinner, PhD

Director of Programs

katherine@investinopen.org

investinopen.org |

@investinopen |