This thesis examines how open science is defined, legitimized and implemented by different actors in the Swedish research policy context. The study analyzes responses submitted to the public consultation on the national guidelines for open science and compares these with the understandings of open science articulated in Swedish government policy documents. The study applies a qualitative document analysis based on an analytical framework structured around three dimensions: definition, legitimation and implementation. The analysis is informed by the concept of boundary objects, which provide a theoretical lens for understanding how open science can function as a shared yet flexible concept across different institutional contexts. The findings show that the consultation responses are generally positive towards open science, but that variations exist in how the concept is interpreted and emphasized. It’s clear that the definition of open science is directly linked to the actor's own activities and interests. Differences also emerge in how open science is legitimized, with some actors emphasizing efficiency and innovation while others stress democratic values and research quality. Regarding implementation the responses requests a clear division of responsibilities as well as a changed academic reward system. The thesis contributes to a deeper understanding of how open science is negotiated in policy implementation processes and highlights the importance of recognizing and discussing interpretive flexibility in the development of national open science strategies.