Lecturers’ Perceptions on the Democratization of Open Science in Kenya: Case of Two Private Christian Universities in Nairobi County, Kenya

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Jan 13, 2026
https://doi.org/10.71064/spu.amjr.10.2.2025.497
Download
PDF
Statistic
Vol. 10 No. 2 (2025): African Multidisciplinary Journal of Research

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Dr. Nason Vundi
St. Paul's University

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to investigate university lecturers’ perceptions of democratisation in Open Science (OS) in Kenya, focusing on schools from 2 Private Christian Universities in Nairobi County, Kenya. While embracing the tenets of OS, there is a need for more conversation about how to collectively level the scientific landscape and ensure every emerging scientist from the Global South has an equal opportunity to their counterparts in the Global North. In that regard, the world should be moving towards the establishment of a scientific infrastructure that is openly accessible, inclusive, innovative, reflexive, flexible, and integrative in conducting research and sharing and disseminating knowledge across the globe. Without clear regard and principles to guide scientific internationalisation and collaboration between the Global South and North, the establishment of international research infrastructure may remain a pipe dream. In history, Europe and the United States of America (USA) prioritize their interests above all forms of global cooperation; therefore, they seek to maintain economic, political, cultural and scientific control over other nations of the world. Viewed through neocolonial lenses, OS may be viewed as a neocolonial strategy by the former colonial powers and the new superpowers to establish a new world order by flooding the world with Eurocentric ideas, scientific ‘knowledge’ and innovations to expand their economic, political and cultural interests. The study adopted a descriptive study design; data were collected from senior lecturers in the Department of Social Sciences in the 2 universities using a structured questionnaire. Data was analyzed and presented using tables showing frequencies and percentages. Interpretations and conclusions were drawn from the major findings, and recommendations for further research were made.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Vundi, D. N. . (2026). Lecturers’ Perceptions on the Democratization of Open Science in Kenya: Case of Two Private Christian Universities in Nairobi County, Kenya. African Multidisciplinary Journal of Research, 10(2), 238–256. https://doi.org/10.71064/spu.amjr.10.2.2025.497

References

  1. Banović, J. (2020). The Future of Science – Open Science and Open Data. Infotheca. 20.
  2. -55. 10.18485/infotheca.2020.20.1_2.3.
  3. Chakravorty, N., Sharma, C., Molla, K., Pattanaik, J. (2022).
  4. Open Science: Challenges, Possible Solutions and the Way Forward. Proceedings of the
  5. Indian National Science Academy. 88. 10.1007/s43538-022-00104-2.
  6. Chuan-Peng, H., Xu, Z., Lazić, A., Bhattacharya, P., Seda, L., Hossain, S., Jeftic, A., Özdoğru,
  7. A., Amaral, O., Miljkovic, N., Ilchovska, Z., Lazarevic, L., Bao, H., Ghodke, N., Moreau, D., Elsherif, M., Mullanvathukkal, C., Ghai, S., Carneiro, C., Azevedo, F. (2025). Open Science in the Developing World: A Collection of Practical Guides for Researchers in Developing Countries. 10.31234/osf.io/7ubk2_v1.
  8. Fell, M. J. (2019) ‘The Economic Impacts of Open Science: A Rapid Evidence Assessment’,
  9. Publications, 7/3: 46. (Google Scholar)
  10. Gebril, A., & Bali, M. (2024). A Global South perspective on Open Science in language
  11. assessment: A response to Winke. Language Testing, 41(4), 886-891. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322241260121
  12. Grand, A. (2015). Open science. Journal of Science Communication. 14.
  13. 22323/2.14040302.
  14. Guédon, J. C., Kramer, B., Laakso, M., Schmidt, B., Šimukovič, E., Hansen, J., Patterson, M.
  15. (2019). Future of scholarly publishing and scholarly communication: report of the Expert Group to the European Commission.
  16. Guzmán, A., Acosta, S., Dagne, C. (2025), "Evaluation of the carbonated front in concrete
  17. samples subjected to non-regular wetting-air drying cycles.", Revista ALCONPAT, 15 (1), pp. 3– 49, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21041/ra.v15i1.732
  18. Herrera, M., Maharaj, G,. (2025). Promoting Equity Between the Global North and Global South
  19. in Entomological Research. Current Opinion in Insect Science. 69. 101357. 10.1016/j.cois.2025.101357
  20. Huang, C., & Soete, L. (2025). Reconciling open science with technological sovereignty.
  21. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 1–15.
  22. Idowu, Ayobami & Aigbavboa, Clinton & Oke, Ayodeji. (2023). Barriers to digitalization in the
  23. Nigerian construction industry. 10.35490/EC3.2023.196.
  24. Isbell, D. R., &Kremmel, B. (2024). Open Science practices in language assessment:
  25. Introducing the special issue. Language Testing, 41(4), 697–702. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322241264092
  26. Kamau, A., Kibuine, M., Mugambi, N.(2018). EFFECTIVENESS OF
  27. STRATEGIC DRIVERS ON PERFORMANCE OF SELECTED CHANNELED PRODUCT ICT FIRMS IN NAIROBI, KENYA. Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management. 5. 10.61426/sjbcm.v5i3.806.
  28. Krishna, V. (2020). Open Science and Its Enemies: Challenges for a Sustainable Science–
  29. Society Social Contract. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 6. 61. 10.3390/joitmc6030061.
  30. Lasebikan, N., Oladoyinbo C., Walser D., Kaninjing, E. (2025)
  31. Understanding the needs of African researchers involved in implementation and dissemination science ecancer 19 1862
  32. Lawal, B., Rafi, A., Idris, B., Joseph, A. (2021). Perceptions of academics in Nigerian higher
  33. education institutions on graduate attributes in computing disciplines that are desirable for employability and entrepreneurship in Nigeria. Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances. 8. 019-027. 10.30574/gjeta.2021.8.1.0097.
  34. Le., H., & Hoang, L,. (2025). The perceptions of lecturers about the application of e-
  35. learning in the process of organizing teaching activities at universities.
  36. 31893/multiscience.2025585.
  37. Maedche, A., Elshan, E., Höhle, H., Lehrer, C., Recker, J.,
  38. Sunyaev, A., Sturm, B., Werth, O,. (2024). Open Science. Business & Information Systems Engineering. 66. 1-16. 10.1007/s12599-024-00858-7.
  39. Martínez, C., Cotte P., A,. (2018). Knowledge and Perceptions of Open
  40. Science among Researchers—A Case Study for Colombia. Information. 9. 292. 10.3390/info9110292.
  41. Michael G. B., Josefin S., Dominique G. R., Alfredo, S., Eli S.J. T., Tomas B,. in(2023). Open
  42. science. Current Biology https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2023.05.036
  43. Mielkov, Y,. (2023). THE PARADIGM OF OPEN SCIENCE AND DEMOCRATIZATION
  44. OF THE RESEARCH ACTIVITY OF UNIVERSITIES. PARADIGM OF KNOWLEDGE. 3. 10.26886/2520-7474.3(57)2023.4.
  45. Moradi, S., Abdi, S,. (2023). Open science-related policies in Europe. Science and
  46. Public Policy. 10.1093/scipol/scac082/7069603.
  47. Morrato, E.H., Rabin, B., Proctor, J. (2015). Bringing it home: expanding the local reach of
  48. dissemination and implementation training via a university-based workshop. Implementation Sci 10, 94. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0281-6
  49. Motshegwa, T,. (2025). The African Open Science Platform: Implementing the African
  50. Open Science Vision. Open Conference Proceedings. 5. 10.52825/ocp.v5i.1427.
  51. Msonde, S., Mariki, B., Kanyuma, L,. (2024). Faculty Adoption of Open
  52. Science and Their Practices Towards Data Sharing in Tanzanian Health Universities. The International Information & Library Review. 56. 1-18. 10.1080/10572317.2024.2409600.
  53. Mwangi, K., Mainye, N., Ouso, D., Esoh, K., Muraya, A.,
  54. Mwangi, C., Naitore, C., Karega, P., Kibet R., Gilbert, M., Sebastian,. Mutisya, J., Mwangi, E., Mgawe, C., Miruka, S., Kibet, C., Bungei, J,. (2021). Open Science in Kenya: Where Are We?. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics. 6. 10.3389/frma.2021.669675.
  55. Mwelwa, J,. Boulton, G., Wafula, J., Loucoubar, C,. (2020). Developing Open Science in
  56. Africa: Barriers, Solutions and Opportunities. Data Science Journal. 19. 31. 10.5334/dsj-2020-031.
  57. Nzweundji, J., Ahmed, N., Carnicelli-Filho, S., Fernandez R, D.,Narita, V., Rios, R., C. (2022).
  58. Open Science -For Whom?. Data Science Journal. 21. 1-8. 10.5334/dsj-2022-001.
  59. Omutoko, L., Amugune, B., Nyawira, T., Inwani, I., Muchoki, C., Masika, M., Omosa-
  60. Manyonyi, G., Kamau, C., K'Apiyo, L., Jaoko, W,. (2023). Strengthening research ethics oversight in Africa: The Kenyan example. South African Journal of Bioethics and Law. 16. 19-22. 10.7196/SAJBL.2023.v16i1.199.
  61. Onyebinama, C., Okere, O., Ayo-Olafare, F., Chima-James, Ng.(2024). Open science and
  62. academic libraries in Africa. Library and Information Perspectives and Research. 6. 249-261. 10.47524/lipr.v6i1.250.
  63. Orest, K., Stepura, T., Korytska, O. (2025). Practices of Open Science Ecosystem Building in the
  64. EU. Проблеми сучасних трансформацій. Серія: економіка та управління. 10.54929/2786-5738-2025-17-02-01.
  65. Pinfield, S. (2025). Achieving Global Open Access The Need for Scientific, Epistemic and
  66. Participatory Openness. Routledge, New York.
  67. Pototsky, P.C., & Will, C., (2020). Conservation research output in sub-Saharan Africa is
  68. increasing, but only in a few countries. Conservation research capacity. Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605320000046
  69. Ramjoué, C. (2015). Towards Open Science: The vision of the European Commission.
  70. Information Services & Use. 35. 167-170.
  71. Rodrigues, R. (2021). Downside up: Science matters equally to the Global South.
  72. Communications Earth & Environment. 2. 10.1038/s43247-021-00171-1.
  73. Ross-Hellauer, T., Klebel, T., Bannach-Brown, A., Horbach, S. P., Jabeen, H., Manola, N.,
  74. Metodiev, T., Papageorgiou, H., Reczko, M., Sansone, S. A., Schneider, J., Tijdink, J., & Vergoulis, T. (2022). TIER2: enhancing Trust, Integrity and Efficiency in Research through next-level Reproducibility. Research Ideas and Outcomes, 8, e98457. https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.8.e98457.
  75. Scotti, K., Jiao, C., Gainey, M., Bongiovanni, E., Slayton, E. (2025). Charting open science
  76. Landscapes: A Systematized Review of US Academic Libraries’ Engagement in Open Research Practices. 10.31219/osf.io/uwcfk_v1.
  77. Turba, R.,Thoré, E., Bertram, M., Bridg, H., Shafiei Sabet, S., Gamboa, M., Ríos-Orjuela, J.,
  78. Takola, E., Capa S., Jose, F., Ana C., Marín, C., (2025). Global North-South science inequalities due to language and funding barriers. 10.5281/zenodo.14902147.
  79. Umbach G. (2024). Open Science and the impact of Open Access, Open Data, and FAIR
  80. publishing principles on data-driven academic research: Towards ever more transparent, accessible, and reproducible academic output? Statistical Journal of the IAOS. 2024;40(1):59-70. doi:10.3233/SJI-240021
  81. UNESCO (2022). An introduction to the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science.
  82. UNESCO Canadian Commission for UNES. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54677/XOIR1696
  83. Zaidi, I., Amir, R., Student, M. E., & Bhatia, H. K. (2022). Benefits and Barriers to Open
  84. Educational Resources (OERs): Preservice Teachers’ perception. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning,
  85. Weng’ua, F., Rotich, D., Kogos, E,. (2018). The role of Kenyan universities in
  86. promoting research and scholarly publishing. South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science. 83. 10.7553/83-2-1705.
  87. Wilson, K., Baleela, R. P., Heila, van D., Martie., P. D. (2023).
  88. E-book on Open Science in Africa.