The Open Pharma Movement
Social Action to ‘Open’ Drug Research and Its Implications for Health
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11923487 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Nicole Foti (0000-0002-8812-8724, Stanford University, CA, USA, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Pages | 3063127251386079-3063127251386079 |
| Publication date | 2025-11-02 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Studies of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0306-3127 • E-ISSN: 1460-3659 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/03063127251386079 |
| PMID | 41178235 |
| OpenAlex | W4415784292 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 41 |
Concerns over the complexity and costs of drug development have led some to consider whether practices of open science should be extended to pharmaceuticals, a space known for entrenched intellectual property regimes. In this article, I trace the emergence of collective action to apply open science to the research and making of drugs, an area I call open pharma . Drawing on in-depth interviews with open pharma leaders and document analysis of journal articles, organizational policies, and websites, I show that open pharma resembles other scientific/intellectual movements in developing new research practices and transmitting new ideas for sharing data. At the same time, the sociotechnical space of pharmaceuticals is deeply entwined in capitalist political economic structures (legal, regulatory, and financial markets) that shape how actors frame and organize their work. I identify key narratives that actors use to frame the movement and mobilize others, often drawing on market logics. I illustrate the active building and institutionalizing of open pharma infrastructure through the establishment of organizations and open science policies. And I describe structural barriers to open pharma in universities with publishing and commercialization imperatives-which are frequently translated into patent imperatives. 'Open' is often defined and operationalized in particular ways, prioritizing public data sharing of early research (which may later be privatized) over such interventions as public clinical trials and commercialization, raising the question of where, when, and for whom open pharma is beneficial
Action (physics · Best practice · Collective action · Commercialization · Intellectual property · Open Innovation · Operationalization · Politics · Sociotechnical system · Intellectual Property and Patents · Open Source Software Innovations · Research Data Management Practices
Biocapital
Markets in the Making
Pharmocracy
Drugs for Life
Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time
Assetization
Patents and the challenge of ‘open source’ in an emergent biological commons or … the strange case of Betty Crocker and the mouse
Novel constitutions? New regimes of openness in synthetic biology
Pharmaceutical innovation and its crisis
This is not an article
Making valuable health
The unacknowledged convergence of open source, open access, and open science
Product development public–private partnerships for public health
Addressing Health Care Disparities
Ownership and sharing in synthetic biology
The future(s) of open science
Capitalizing a Cure
Market Failures and Market Framings
How Does One "Open" Science? Questions of Value in Biological Research
The Pharmaceutical Commons
Open Science and Closed Science
Recent scientific/intellectual movements in biomedicine
Contradiction, convergence and the knowledge economy
A General Theory of Scientific/Intellectual Movements
Disciplining an Unruly Field
Interdisciplinarity
The Oncomouse That Roared
The Proper Copy
Science, capitalism, and the rise of the 'knowledge worker
| Highly cited | No |
|---|