What does It take to move toward a more equitable research ecosystem: Insights from Godwyns Onwuchekwa

Open access represents a crucial advancement in democratizing research access and is a focal point of discussion in the scholarly community. As momentum builds, stakeholders are increasingly adopting policies and frameworks that enhance transparency in science. However, if open access systems, policies, and practices fail to prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEl), we risk silencing numerous voices, neglecting various perspectives, and overlooking potential solutions. In an insightful episode of the Insights Xchange podcast, host Nikesh Gosalia is in conversation with Godwyns Onwacekwa, a passionate advocate for social justice and Head of Communities at eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd. 

Godwyns has been on the front lines, challenging the barriers to diversity and inclusion within the research community and society at large. In their discussion, they dive deep into the essential integration of DEl principles and emphasize the importance of ‘justice’. Together, they explore how the concepts of JEDI (Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion) can form the foundation of the open access movement, shifting the emphasis from financial concerns to the more pressing issues of equity and inclusion. 

Frameworks and policies for integrating equity, diversity, and inclusion into open access publishing 

Because of the focus usually boils down to APC, we tend to forget other mechanisms that can enable researchers to benefit fully in the open access discussion as well. 

— Godwyns Onwuchekwa 

The ongoing conversation about open access, particularly in relation to equity, is incredibly valuable. Godwyns highlights that while the focus often narrows to Article Processing Charges (APCs), it's important to remember other mechanisms that can enable researchers to fully participate in the open access dialogue. Ignoring these factors risks leaving many potential participants unable to join due to a lack of essential infrastructure that supports their involvement. Recognizing and addressing these broader issues, especially those affecting underrepresented communities, is vital for promoting equity. A significant starting point is ensuring that frameworks and principles are developed with the input of a diverse range of stakeholders. 

When decision-making groups lack representation, the resulting frameworks often fail to meet the needs they aim to serve, resulting in policies that do not address the actual challenges faced by diverse populations. To achieve true equity, diversity, and inclusion, it is essential to involve representatives from various communities, particularly considering geographic diversity, which influences context, history, and approaches significantly. Unfortunately, many inclusion efforts fall short, treating representation as a mere checkbox rather than engaging authentically with diverse voices. Numerous frameworks exist, such as ‘How Equitable is It?’, introduced at the OASPA conference in September 2024, encouraging integration of Accessibility, Diversity, and Inclusion (ADI) principles from the outset, rather than as an afterthought. Godwyns shares an example of an approach taken at eLife, where those planning to initiate a project complete an EDI assessment form, which is designed to be a reflective tool, encouraging project leaders to consider their audience, identify potential barriers to participation, and explore ways to enhance inclusivity. By prompting concise and thought-provoking inquiries about audience characteristics and obstacles, project leaders can develop greater empathy and foresight, leading to frameworks that are more inclusive, impactful, and effective when scaled to larger initiatives or policies. 

Catch the podcast now 

Role of open access in amplifying marginalized voices 

In discussing the vital role of open access in elevating underrepresented voices, Godwyns highlights critical issues that often go unanswered, such as infrastructure, publication barriers, equitable collaboration, and overall funding inequalities. Addressing these issues requires focused attention, tackling each one as an individual concern to find viable solutions. Take open access fee waivers, for instance, they can create psychological toll, making recipients feel like second-class citizens who must plead for support. Moreover, some organizations do not have a streamlined waiver application process, adding to the frustration for researchers. The overarching problem of inequity in funding remains. Research indicates that scholars from the Global South or lower-middle-income communities are disproportionately less likely to secure funding compared to their peers in the Global North, with many funding opportunities entirely inaccessible to them. 

A significant contributing factor also is the lack of context among decision-makers about the backgrounds of these researchers, which feeds into the broader issues of inclusion and diversity. When those in positions of power lack lived experience related to the communities they serve, their assessments can miss the mark, leading to unhelpful outcomes. This disconnect inhibits the ability to make informed, beneficial decisions. Furthermore, inequities in collaboration must also be examined. If researchers cannot engage in international collaborations, open access alone will not suffice. True collaboration thrives on diverse perspectives and inputs, and without access to global networks, open access becomes ineffective. This situation poses a critical question: Is the research being published genuinely open, or is it restricted to a limited pool of contributors? Publication barriers also complicate the landscape. Researchers from certain regions often face significant challenges simply in submitting their work due to resource limitations, lack of access to technology, and inadequate infrastructure.  

Open access must be viewed through the lens of not only enabling access but also understanding the composition of the knowledge being disseminated. To genuinely improve participation from marginalized communities, it's critical to dismantle these barriers, and this means actively involving those who are affected in the process of change. 

https://youtu.be/Wr7grOzj49g?si=y9ss7rvXYje8B6Vy 

Commercial open access platforms and community driven non-commercial initiatives: striking a balance 

In my view, we shouldn't aim to eliminate all commercial entities. The emphasis should be on addressing the needs at hand and listening to those whom these needs impact, rather than reducing them to mere data points for profit. 

— Godwyns Onwuchekwa 

The ongoing debate between commercial enterprises and non-profit organizations often diverts attention from more critical issues. This distraction results from the misconception that these two entities cannot coexist harmoniously. However, Godwyns asserts that they can indeed work together in a complementary fashion. While generating profits is vital—since investors deserve a return on their investments— Godwyns underscores the necessity of initiatives like open access that promote community empowerment and collective success. Godwyns states, "In my view, we shouldn't aim to eliminate all commercial entities. The emphasis should be on addressing the needs at hand and listening to those whom these needs impact, rather than reducing them to mere data points for profit." This issue may arise from a lack of vision, as we often become preoccupied with short-term gains instead of considering the broader consequences. It is essential for both sectors to coexist, as their collaboration could yield positive outcomes for all stakeholders involved. 

Listen to the podcast episode now  

Practical steps to democratize open access  

It's not enough to simply aim for diversity in our boards; we must proactively assist these communities in enhancing their qualifications to match those of their peers. 

— Godwyns Onwuchekwa 

Godwyns underscores that although a central authority to enforce open access is absent, policy guides like The Nelson Memo hold significant promise. However, such initiatives may not fully address the distinct challenges faced by different countries. So, it is essential for governments, institutions, organizations, publishers, academic circles, and policymakers to collaborate and work towards this goal. He points out progressive actions taken by eLife, such as actively inviting targeted communities to participate in their editorial board. While these initiatives may appear minor, they have the potential to catalyze meaningful change if adopted by more publishers, ultimately fostering a more diverse editorial decision-making process. Beyond recruitment, Godwyns also emphasizes the critical need to implement programs that provide global support for researchers. There is an urgent need to uplift those communities currently facing barriers to access, and systemic challenges. Everyone—organizations, governments, and individual researchers—can play a role by engaging in deliberate, small-scale actions. 

Conclusion 

At the heart of Godwyns’ work is his steadfast commitment to justice and equity, a principle that has guided his journey from advocacy within the UK public health system to founding Justice for Africans and supporting global LGBT initiatives. Now, as Head of Communities at eLife Sciences, he draws on this wealth of experience to tackle biases in scholarly publishing and amplify underrepresented voices in academia. His unwavering dedication to meaningful change continues to inspire and drive impact.