By Dr Metolo Foyet and Sampson Kofi Adotey
Introduction
During the global Covid-19 pandemic, there was a lot of efforts that were made to make science available to the public, but as Covid ended, the situation shifted back to the old state of affairs. This “business as usual” practice raises concerns, especially considering how vital access to scientific information was useful to the public during the pandemic. In Africa, AfricArXiv, a pan-African open-access preprint repository, dramatically expanded its services during COVID-19, offering multilingual Q&A, regional-language resources, and a chatbot to disseminate accurate scientific information across the continent. Similarly, African conservationists faced a collapse in ecotourism revenues. In response, organizations like the Kenya Wildlife Trust and the Southern African Wildlife College made real-time wildlife monitoring data publicly available to help communities and policymakers understand the pandemic’s impact on ecosystems. This transparency showed how access to scientific data can empower both local communities and decision-makers.
The momentum for open science and the democratization of scientifically reliable knowledge to the public seems to have slowed, which underscores the ongoing need for advocacy and policy changes to ensure that the right to science is upheld for everyone, not just during a crisis but as a standard practice. This situation reminds us that while progress was made, there is still much work to be done to ensure that scientific knowledge is accessible, understandable, and usable for the general public.
The “right to science” is an expansive concept, often discussed through the lens of policy formulation, while seldom addressing the perspective of the average individual: the everyday person who may not have a scientific background or easy access to academic resources. This perspective is crucial because science is not just for scientists: it’s for everyone. It impacts our daily lives, from the food we eat and the air we breathe, to the technologies we use, the clothes we wear and the medical treatments we rely on. From this viewpoint, the right to science includes ethical considerations like informed consent, privacy, and the equitable distribution of scientific advancements. It is about ensuring that communities have a say in the scientific research that affects them and that individuals are not just subjects of research but active participants in the scientific process. By shifting the focus from policy to people, we can begin to understand the right to science not just as a set of legal or academic principles but as a lived experience, where every individual has the opportunity to explore, understand, and utilize science as a tool for providing a better human condition around the world.
To understand why the right to science is essential for the average person and how it can be better communicated, this policy brief discusses the following four points.
Empowering the individual
The importance of scientific knowledge extends far beyond the confines of laboratories and academic circles; it has a profound impact on our personal health, safety, and well-being. The right to access scientific information plays a crucial role in our ability to make informed decisions that affect various aspects of our daily lives. From interpreting nutrition labels to understanding the environmental impact of our choices and actions, scientific literacy equips us with the tools to navigate decisions based on factual evidence, rather than succumbing to misinformation, guesswork, or unfounded claims. For instance, understanding the science behind the COVID-19 pandemic helped individuals make informed decisions about vaccinations, mask-wearing, and social distancing. South African scientists from institutions like CERI and KRISP, empowered by the Africa CDC’s Pathogen Genomics Initiative, rapidly identified and shared the Omicron COVID-19 variant with global health authorities, demonstrating how local scientific capacity can powerfully inform public health responses. In Namibia’s Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) program, local conservancies are trained in scientific wildlife monitoring methods such as tracking, aerial counts, and GPS mapping. Community members use this knowledge to decide hunting quotas, grazing rights, and tourism zoning, directly linking science literacy to daily livelihoods and conservation outcomes. This type of knowledge is not just academic; it’s practical and can save lives. It is not just about being well-read or scholarly; it is about having the necessary information to protect oneself and others in a world that is increasingly governed by complex scientific phenomena.
Moreover, the democratization of science sparks innovation and opens up a world of opportunity for individuals from all walks of life. Whether it’s a student in a developing country accessing online courses or a farmer learning new agricultural techniques, science is a great equalizer. Access to science does not only advance societal knowledge and technological innovation but also promotes individual growth and societal equality by offering chances for advancement to everyone to contribute to progress and to those who might otherwise be left behind.
Ethical considerations
From the average individual’s perspective, there’s an ethical obligation to ensure that scientific knowledge is available to all, not just the privileged few. This includes breaking down barriers (that prevent people from accessing scientific information) related to language, disability, socioeconomic factors and status, paywalls, geography, the digital divide, censorship, publication bias or complex jargon that make research incomprehensible to a lay audience. It’s about creating pathways for people to ask questions, seek answers, and apply scientific knowledge in ways that are relevant to their personal and community needs.
Also, transparency is key. People have the right to know about scientific experiments that may affect them. In the Republic of the Congo, the Mbendjele community used the open-source Sapelli app for citizen science mapping of culturally significant trees. Their contributions influenced logging company operations, showcasing local communities’ ethical agency in scientific processes. In India, the Kaziranga National Park implemented drone surveillance for anti-poaching, but local communities raised concerns about privacy, livestock disturbance, and lack of consultation. This highlighted the ethical obligation to involve communities in adopting new conservation technologies.
For example, individuals should be informed about (a) how new technologies, such as facial recognition software or personal data collection tools, work and the implications for their privacy and rights; (b) the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in their food supply. They should understand the risks and benefits (c) of any medical treatment or drug trial they participate in; (d) associated to an industrial project predicted to significantly alter local water quality or air purity.
Improving communication
From the individual perspective, the right to science encompasses the ability to understand, engage with, and benefit from science in a way that improves one’s life and community. Science communication is a bridge to people realizing their right to science. It cannot be actualized if people are using jargon. Science communication needs to be clear and free from technical jargon. The goal is to make complex information understandable for everyone, not just experts. Scientific information should be translated into multiple languages and adapted for different educational levels. This makes science accessible to a broader audience and respects cultural differences. For example, in Peru, the science outreach persona @neutralina.lu (“Neutralina“) combines humor and science on Instagram and beyond, successfully engaging young Latin American audiences and countering misinformation, illustrating playful, accessible science communication in action. In the Congo Basin, the Okapi Conservation Project translated ecological research into radio dramas and storytelling in local languages, helping communities understand bushmeat impacts, zoonotic risks, and conservation policies. This approach bridged the gap between complex science and community realities. Finally, effective science communication is a two-way issue. It’s not just about broadcasting information but also listening to people’s questions and concerns. This approach builds trust and helps demystify science.
Implementing the right to science
This can be done through open science. Promoting open access to scientific research allows everyone to benefit from the latest discoveries. This involves making research papers available online for free, supporting open-source software, and sharing data openly. For example, The Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) has made over 2.3 billion species occurrence records openly accessible worldwide, including African mammal and bird data contributed by community monitoring projects. These datasets empower scientists, park managers, and citizens alike to track biodiversity change and inform conservation action. Education systems should emphasize scientific literacy, teaching students not only scientific facts but also how to think critically and evaluate information. This is particularly relevant as the advent of AI risks creating a generation of individuals devoid of critical thinking skills. Tools like Kwame for Science, a bilingual AI teaching assistant deployed across West Africa, answered student science questions with 87% accuracy, providing scalable, equitable access to quality science education. In addition, the Pan-African Citizen Science e-Lab (PACS e-Lab) engages over 600 Africans in astronomy and STEM projects across 40+ countries, democratizing research participation.
Governments and institutions should be encouraged to adopt policies that promote the right to science, such as funding for public science education, support for open access publishing, and regulations that ensure the ethical conduct of research.
By understanding and promoting the right to science, we can ensure that scientific knowledge serves as a public good, enhancing everyone’s ability to live safer, healthier, and more informed lives. This democratization of science isn’t just beneficial; it’s essential for a fair and equitable society.
