Introduction

This page outlines the guiding principles that shape how Conscience operates and makes decisions. It explains the challenges we aim to address, the approaches we use, and the priorities that guide our work. Our Open Science Policy and Frequently Asked Questions provide more detailed explanations of how these principles are applied in practice.

Conscience focuses on developing treatments, therapeutics, and other health solutions where traditional approaches have fallen short. This includes supporting the development of new therapeutics, tools that accelerate the development of those therapeutics, and the data that underpins both. The aim of this document is to provide a clear rationale for our methods and policies, including our commitment to open science, and to explain how they contribute to increasing the availability and affordability of treatments for patients. 

Challenges

There are many reasons why traditional approaches to developing therapeutic solutions fail. At Conscience, we focus on addressing three reasons:

1. The number of patients is so small or has such low market power that the traditional approach of relying on patents does not provide sufficient incentives for firms to invest. Rare diseases – 95% of which do not have a single treatment available – and neglected tropical diseases provide significant examples.
2. The need for and timing of the therapeutic intervention is uncertain. This is the case for many infectious diseases, whether the next pandemic virus or antimicrobial resistance. Should a crisis occur, the world will need treatments right away. But until the crisis happens, firms will refrain from investing because they do not know if there is a market for their product. The trend of large biopharmaceutical firms steering away from infectious diseases illustrates this.
3. The disease is biologically complex, requiring input from many specialties and firms. No one organization has the ability to effectively or efficiently solve these problems themselves and must enter into complex networks of collaborations even at very early stages of development. In these situations, firms vie for leverage and exclusivity but these efforts get in the way of solving foundational problems. The lack of effective drug treatments for dementias and Parkinson’s disease are examples of the need for alternative approaches to conventional drug development.

Open Science and Increasing Access

The primary tool Conscience uses to increase the availability and affordability of therapeutic interventions in the areas described above is open science. Conscience directs its funding and its open science expertise to help researchers, companies, philanthropies, and patients develop novel approaches to create new therapeutics or other health interventions, and tools to increase the availability and affordability of those interventions.

Our goal is not to supplant existing strategies but to add new ones. We aim to expand the number of pathways from idea to intervention in the areas listed above, where no such reliable pathways currently exist. We believe that a combination of teams made up of experts in different fields and/or places and sharing of ideas can help solve problems currently preventing the development of novel interventions and that the greater competition enabled through open strategies will contribute to affordable medical care for patients currently left behind. Not all problems require teams and sharing, but where they do, open science provides a promising route forward and a mechanism for promoting access.

Our open science approach aims at increasing collaboration, building on one another’s knowledge and ideas as quickly as possible, and developing the data that will power the AI tools of the future. Sometimes, open science is needed only in the early phases of research and development, such as demonstrating the use of a new platform, providing proof of concept for a new class of drugs, or bringing together the world’s best and brightest to figure out what causes a disease. Other times, open science accelerates not only early stage research, but development all the way to the patient by using resources more effectively and by ensuring that those who can use the knowledge best get it as quickly as possible. Where appropriate, companies gain exclusivity through tailored mechanisms, such as data protection, that minimally limit free sharing.

Conscience recognizes, however, that open science may not always provide a complete solution to ensuring availability and affordability. In those cases, Conscience will explore more traditional innovation tools in combination with open science, all while putting in place safeguards that help ensure that whatever is produced will get to those who need them. The world is not one-size-fits-all and neither are Conscience’s policies.

Positions

We can summarize Conscience’s approach to open science through the following positions:

Position 1: Traditional Approaches are Limited

Traditional patent-based incentives do not generally deliver available and affordable therapeutic interventions for small patient populations (e.g., rare diseases, where 95% lack treatments) or where populations lack market power (e.g., neglected tropical diseases). Moreover, they do not provide sufficient incentives for uncertain disease areas and, because of disease dynamics, likely never will until it is too late (e.g., when people are already suffering from AMR infections). Biologically complex diseases (e.g., dementias, Parkinson’s, as demonstrated by 98%+ failure rates) exceed single-company capabilities, requiring early, multi-specialty networks free from exclusivity barriers that hinder foundational progress.

Position 2: Open Science Can Increase Availability 

Open sharing of data, ideas, tools, assets, and research — via teams across fields and regions—speeds intervention and development, powers AI tools, and ensures knowledge reaches optimal users quickly and at a lower cost. That is, open science is a way of efficiently bringing together the people and tools needed to develop new interventions in areas where companies will not invest the money normally required to do so. Open science thus creates the possibility of the development and availability of new therapeutic interventions where traditional approaches do not.

Position 3: Open Science Can Increase Affordability

Increased access to data, ideas and research through open sharing leads to greater competition between companies. Such competition is the most reliable way of maximizing the affordability of therapeutic interventions. Where markets are small, market power low, or in regions where relevant industries are underdeveloped, open sharing may need to be supplemented by contractual provisions to ensure affordability.

Position 4: Open Science Produces Positive Spillovers

Open science has positive spillovers as the knowledge produced – even if negative results – informs future research both within and outside of the organization that produced it. On the other hand, closed research puts limits on sharing – particularly of negative results – given trade secrecy protection, leading to duplication of effort and slower development. The positive spillovers from open science approaches are especially important when the failure of a project is due to factors other than the underlying scientific rationale (e.g., market conditions, bad luck, mismanagement, purely business considerations). 

Position 5: Restrictive IP is Less Effective at Promoting Access

Open science increases competition by allowing many actors – private and public – to enter the field and compete, putting downward pressure on price. Restrictive IP such as patents increase costs directly through filing and enforcement costs and indirectly by keeping competitors off the market. While contractual terms can attempt to limit price, they are difficult to define and to enforce. There is no commonly accepted definition of costs nor is there transparency about costs, making it difficult to impose price controls. Enforcement of contractual terms depends on the ability to litigate, which smaller entities like Conscience usually do not possess. 

Position 6: Open Science Needs New Incentives 

As open science rests outside of traditional approaches, to enable open science, companies need different incentives. These incentives may include those generated through competitions (e.g., CACHE Challenges for hit finding), new or additional funding sources (e.g., philanthropies), prizes, government regulation or legislation (e.g., data protection regulations adapted to specifically support open science), or targeted government grants (e.g., grants supporting open science research, such as DMOS and OSAS).

Position 7: Practicing Open Science Requires Support 

Most companies and researchers do not have sufficient knowledge of open science to implement it, and they require support from experts (e.g., OSAS and Conscience’s Consultation Services) and a community of practice to support their efforts.

Position 8: Open Science is Crucial for New Technologies

New technological approaches, such as AI, quantum computing, and synthetic biology, provide opportunities to accelerate the development of new therapeutic interventions. These fields are moving so quickly that open platforms, open data, and open partnerships provide companies and researchers with the only way to keep up with developments. Given the speed of development and claims that cannot yet be assessed, there is a need for honest brokers to ensure a fair, unbiased, and objective assessment of solutions to complex biomedical problems (e.g., BEACON/CACHE).

Priorities

Together, these 8 positions inform the priorities and policy approaches that Conscience will concentrate on. While these will evolve over time, the following are Conscience’s initial priorities. They are not listed in order of importance and are in many cases overlapping and mutually reinforcing.

Provide Support for Open Science Initiatives

Conscience will support companies, researchers, networks, and universities to develop, implement, and manage open science initiatives across life sciences technologies. Conscience will thus continue to seek contracts to support efforts in the life sciences that can benefit from open science. To accomplish this, Conscience will make a concerted effort to publicize its strengths in open science consulting and consider hiring dedicated staff to support open science initiatives on a consultancy basis.

Create New Incentives for Open Science 

Conscience will work with governments, philanthropies, and firms to develop and implement incentives that support open science partnerships. These efforts include working with Health Canada to extend regulatory exclusivities for those who abide by open science principles, working with granting councils and governments on developing targeted funding for open science partnerships, and encouraging universities to incorporate participation in open science in promotion.

Default to an Open First Approach

Conscience will adopt an open science first approach, preferring projects that are fully open. Nevertheless, Conscience will consider adapting its open science approach to meet other scientific, technical, or commercial situations – for example where there is a pre-existing patent or other funders insist on traditional intellectual property – but only to the extent that these projects satisfy Conscience’s goal of creating available and affordable therapeutic interventions.

Prioritize Broad Impact

Where Conscience chooses to support a project, create a new program, or adopt a policy position, it will prioritize those that can have the broadest impact on drug discovery. This includes creating a new technology that is shared widely and can be used by numerous researchers or firms, developing a business or partnership model that enables greater open collaboration, and the crafting of policies that enable open science across fields. This approach maximizes the positive spillovers and the acceleration of the field as a whole. 

Increase visibility of Open Science Among Policymakers

As lack of knowledge about open science is a significant barrier to participation, Conscience will prioritize introducing open science into policy discourse around innovation, health technologies, AI and quantum computing. Over the next few years, Conscience will apply for and participate in policy discussions at events, roundtables, consultations, and with intergovernmental agencies, such as UNESCO. In addition, Conscience will continue to seek opportunities to submit opinion articles that explain open science to a more general audience.

Being the Honest Broker in Rapidly Advancing Fields 

Conscience views rapidly advancing fields, such as AI and quantum computing, as offering the opportunity to develop new drugs at lower cost more quickly and equitably, but only if transparently validated. As an independent non-profit, Conscience can play the role of an honest broker to assist those building collaborations, hosting data, and running competitions and benchmarking exercises. Doing so in the open ensures both quality and speed.