Why don't grants from publicly-funded organizations systematically demand code and data to be released?

Question

I wonder why publicly-funded grants do not systematically demand from the recipients that code and data to be released, and results/papers to be publicly accessible. (put aside data that raise privacy issues)

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

Comments

Some do. 654321

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

---

This requirement has become much more common in the past few years; I suspect a combination of institutional inertia and uncertainty regarding the best long-term archival options has thus far arrested its progress. At least NSF and NIH both require *some* form of data plan now.

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

---

In the UK, [this is now the case](http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/datapolicy/) as the default policy from the major public research funders. This is being driven by a number of things: public investment should lead to public knowledge, being able to validate results more easily, and better ability of business to innovate.

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)

Answer 1

Because there has not been a strong enough push to require it and some researchers prefer to keep code/data confidential. This is currently a topic of discussion at the national level led by organizations such as EFF. This is hopefully a situation that will soon change for the better.

This post has been migrated from the Open Science private beta at StackExchange (A51.SE)