Promoting access to public research data for scientific, economic, and social development

It is now commonplace to say that information and communications technologies are rapidly transforming the world of research. We are only beginning to recognize, however, that management of the scientific enterprise must adapt if we, as a society, are to take full advantage of the knowledge and understanding generated by researchers. One of the most important areas of information and communication technology (ICT)-driven change is the emergence of escience, briefly described as universal desktop access, via the Internet, to distributed resources, global collaboration, and the intellectual, analytical, and investigative output of the world’s scientific community.The vision of e-science is being realised in relation to the outputs of science, particularly journal articles and other forms of scholarly publication. This realisation extends less to research data, the raw material at the heart of the scientific process and the object of significant annual public investments.Ensuring research data are easily accessible, so that they can be used as often and as widely as possible, is a matter of sound stewardship of public resources. Moreover, as research becomes increasingly global, there is a growing need to systematically address data access and sharing issues beyond national jurisdictions. The goals of this report and its recommendations are to ensure that both researchers and the public receive optimum returns on the public investments in research, and to build on the value chain of investments in research and research data. To some extent, research data are shared today, often quite extensively within established networks, using both the latest technology and innovative management techniques. The Follow Up Group drew on the experiences of several of these networks to examine the roles and responsibilities of governments as they relate to data produced from publicly funded research. The objective was to seek good practices that can be used by national governments, international bodies, and scientists in other areas of research. In doing so, the Group developed an analytical framework for determining where further improvements can be made in the national and international organization, management, and regulation of research data.The findings and recommendations presented here are based on the central principle that publicly funded research data should be openly available to the maximum extent possible. Availability should be subject only to national security restrictions; protection of confidentiality and privacy; intellectual property rights; and time-limited exclusive use by principal investigators. Publicly funded research data are a public good, produced in the public interest. As such they should remain in the public realm. This does not preclude the subsequent commercialization of research results in patents and copyrights, or of the data themselves in databases, but it does mean that a copy of the data must be maintained and made openly accessible. Implicitly or explicitly, this principle is recognized by many of the world’s leading scientific institutions, organizations, andagencies. Expanding the adoption of this principle to national and international stages will enable researchers, empower citizens and convey tremendous scientific, economic, and social benefits. Evidence from the case studies and from other investigation undertaken for this report suggest that successful research data access and sharing arrangements, or regimes, share a number of key attributes and operating principles. These bring effective organization and management to the distribution and exchange of data. The key attributes include: openness; transparency of access and active dissemination; the assignment and assumption of formal responsibilities; interoperability; quality control; operational efficiency and flexibility; respect for private intellectual property and other ethical and legal matters; accountability; and professionalism. Whether they are discipline-specific or issue oriented, national or international, the regimes that adhere to these operating principles reap the greatest returns from the use of research data. There are five broad groups of issues that stand out in any examination of research data access and sharing regimes. The Follow Up Group used these as an analytical framework for examining the case studies that informed this report, and in doing so, came to several broad conclusions: • Technological issues: Broad access to research data, and their optimum exploitation, requires appropriately designed technological infrastructure, broad international agreement on interoperability, and effective data quality controls; • Institutional and managerial issues: While the core open access principle applies to all science communities, the diversity of the scientific enterprise suggests that a variety of institutional models and tailored data management approaches are most effective in meeting the needs of researchers; • Financial and budgetary issues: Scientific data infrastructure requires continued, and dedicated, budgetary planning and appropriate financial support. The use of research data cannot be maximized if access, management, and preservation costs are an add-on or after-thought in research projects; • Legal and policy issues: National laws and international agreements directly affect data access and sharing practices, despite the fact that they are often adopted without due consideration of the impact on the sharing of publicly funded research data; • Cultural and behavioural issues: Appropriate reward structures are a necessary component for promoting data access and sharing practices. These apply to both those who produce and those who manage research data.The case studies and other research conducted for this report suggest that concrete, beneficial actions can be taken by the different actors involved in making possible access to, and sharing of, publicly funded research data. This includes the OECD as an international organization with credibility and stature in the science policy area. The Follow Up Group recommends that the OECD consider the following: • Put the issues of data access and sharing on the agenda of the next Ministerial meeting; • In conjunction with relevant member country research organizations, o Conduct or coordinate a study to survey national laws and policies that affect data access and sharing practices; o Conduct or coordinate a study to compile model licensing agreements and templates for access to and sharing of publicly funded data; • With the rapid advances in scientific communications made possible by recent developments in ICTs, there are many aspects of research data access and sharing that have not been addressed sufficiently by this report, would benefit from further study, and will need further clarification. Accordingly, further possible actions areas include: o Governments from OECD expand their policy frameworks of research data access and sharing to include data produced from a mixture of public and private funds; o OECD consider examinations of research data access and sharing to include issues of interacting with developing countries; and o OECD promote further research, including a comprehensive economic analysis of existing data access regimes, at both the national and research project or program levels.National governments have a crucial role to play in promoting and supporting data accessibility since they provide the necessary resources, establish overall polices for data management, regulate matters such as the protection of confidentiality and privacy, and determine restrictions based on national security. Most importantly, national governments are responsible for major research support and funding organizations, and it is here that many of the managerial aspects ofdata sharing need to be addressed. Drawing on good practices worldwide, the Follow Up Group suggests that national governments should consider the following: • Adopt and effectively implement the principle that data produced from publicly funded research should be openly vailable to the maximum extent possible; • Encourage their research funding agencies and major data producing departments to work together to find ways to enhance access to statistical data, such as census materials and surveys; • Adopt free access or marginal cost pricing policies for the dissemination of researchuseful data produced by government departments and agencies; • Analyze, assess, and monitor policies, programs, and management practices related to data access and sharing polices within their national research and research funding organizations. The widespread national, international and cross-disciplinary sharing of research data is no longer a technological impossibility. Technology itself, however, will not fulfill the promise of escience.Information and communication technologies provide the physical infrastructure. It is up to national governments, international agencies, research institutions, and scientists themselves to ensure that the institutional, financial and economic, legal, and cultural and behavioural aspects of data sharing are taken into account

If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web 2.0

Over the past 15 years, the web has transformed the way we seek and use information. In the last 5 years in particular a set of innovative techniques – collectively termed ‘web 2.0’ – have enabled people to become producers as well as consumers of information. It has been suggested that these relatively easy-to-use tools, and the behaviours which underpin their use, have enormous potential for scholarly researchers, enabling them to communicate their research and its findings more rapidly, broadly and effectively than ever before. This report is based on a study commissioned by the Research Information Network to investigate whether such aspirations are being realised. It seeks to improve our currently limited understanding of whether, and if so how, researchers are making use of various web 2.0 tools in the course of their work, the factors that encourage or inhibit adoption, and researchers’ attitudes towards web 2.0 and other forms of communication. Context: How researchers communicate their work and their findings varies in different subjects or disciplines, and in different institutional settings. Such differences have a strong influence on how researchers approach the adoption – or not – of new information and communications technologies. It is also important to stress that ‘web 2.0’ encompasses a wide range of interactions between technologies and social practices which allow web users to generate, repurpose and share content with each other. We focus in this study on a range of generic tools – wikis, blogs and some social networking systems – as well as those designed specifically by and for people within the scholarly community. Method: Our study was designed not only to capture current attitudes and patterns of adoption but also to identify researchers’ needs and aspirations, and problems that they encounter. We began with an online survey, which collected information about researchers’ information gathering and dissemination habits and their attitudes towards web 2.0. This was followed by in-depth, semi-structured interviews with a stratified sample of survey respondents to explore in more depth their experience of web 2.0, including perceived barriers as well as drivers to adoption. Finally, we undertook five case studies of web 2.0 services to investigate their development and adoption across different communities and business models. Key findings: Our study indicates that a majority of researchers are making at least occasional use of one or more web 2.0 tools or services for purposes related to their research: for communicating their work; for developing and sustaining networks and collaborations; or for finding out about what others are doing. But frequent or intensive use is rare, and some researchers regard blogs, wikis and other novel forms of communication as a waste of time or even dangerous. In deciding if they will make web 2.0 tools and services part of their everyday practice, the key questions for researchers are the benefits they may secure from doing so, and how it fits with their use of established services. Researchers who use web 2.0 tools and services do not see them as comparable to or substitutes for other channels and means of communication, but as having their own distinctive role for specific purposes and at particular stages of research. And frequent use of one kind of tool does not imply frequent use of others as well

Towards an analytical framework of science communication models

This chapter reviews the discussion in science communication circles of models for public communication of science and technology (PCST). It questions the claim that there has been a large-scale shift from a ‘deficit model’ of communication to a ‘dialogue model’, and it demonstrates the survival of the deficit model along with the ambiguities of that model. Similar discussions in related fields of communication, including the critique of dialogue, are briefly sketched. Outlining the complex circumstances governing approaches to PCST, the author argues that communications models often perceived to be opposed can, in fact, coexist when the choices are made explicit. To aid this process, the author proposes an analytical framework of communication models based on deficit, dialogue and participation, including variations on each

Collaborative yet independent: Information practices in the physical sciences

In many ways, the physical sciences are at the forefront of using digital tools and methods to work with information and data. However, the fields and disciplines that make up the physical sciences are by no means uniform, and physical scientists find, use, and disseminate information in a variety of ways. This report examines information practices in the physical sciences across seven cases, and demonstrates the richly varied ways in which physical scientists work, collaborate, and share information and data. This report details seven case studies in the physical sciences. For each case, qualitative interviews and focus groups were used to understand the domain. Quantitative data gathered from a survey of participants highlights different information strategies employed across the cases, and identifies important software used for research. Finally, conclusions from across the cases are drawn, and recommendations are made. This report is the third in a series commissioned by the Research Information Network (RIN), each looking at information practices in a specific domain (life sciences, humanities, and physical sciences). The aim is to understand how researchers within a range of disciplines find and use information, and in particular how that has changed with the introduction of new technologies

Virtual pedagogical model: development scenarios

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Science as systems learning. Some reflections on the cognitive and communicational aspects of science

This paper undertakes a theoretical investigation of the 'learning' aspect of science as opposed to the 'knowledge' aspect. The practical background of the paper is in agricultural systems research – an area of science that can be characterised as 'systemic' because it is involved in the development of its own subject area, agriculture. And the practical purpose of the theoretical investigation is to contribute to a more adequate understanding of science in such areas, which can form a basis for developing and evaluating systemic research methods, and for determining appropriate criteria of scientific quality. Two main perspectives on science as a learning process are explored: research as the learning process of a cognitive system, and science as a social, communicational system. A simple model of a cognitive system is suggested, which integrates both semiotic and cybernetic aspects, as well as a model of selfreflective learning in research, which entails moving from an inside 'actor' stance to an outside 'observer' stance, and back. This leads to a view of scientific knowledge as inherently contextual and to the suggestion of reflexive objectivity and relevance as two related key criteria of good science

From Sensor to Observation Web with Environmental Enablers in the Future Internet

This paper outlines the grand challenges in global sustainability research and the objectives of the FP7 Future Internet PPP program within the Digital Agenda for Europe. Large user communities are generating significant amounts of valuable environmental observations at local and regional scales using the devices and services of the Future Internet. These communities’ environmental observations represent a wealth of information which is currently hardly used or used only in isolation and therefore in need of integration with other information sources. Indeed, this very integration will lead to a paradigm shift from a mere Sensor Web to an Observation Web with semantically enriched content emanating from sensors, environmental simulations and citizens. The paper also describes the research challenges to realize the Observation Web and the associated environmental enablers for the Future Internet. Such an environmental enabler could for instance be an electronic sensing device, a web-service application, or even a social networking group affording or facilitating the capability of the Future Internet applications to consume, produce, and use environmental observations in cross-domain applications. The term ?envirofied? Future Internet is coined to describe this overall target that forms a cornerstone of work in the Environmental Usage Area within the Future Internet PPP program. Relevant trends described in the paper are the usage of ubiquitous sensors (anywhere), the provision and generation of information by citizens, and the convergence of real and virtual realities to convey understanding of environmental observations. The paper addresses the technical challenges in the Environmental Usage Area and the need for designing multi-style service oriented architecture. Key topics are the mapping of requirements to capabilities, providing scalability and robustness with implementing context aware information retrieval. Another essential research topic is handling data fusion and model based computation, and the related propagation of information uncertainty. Approaches to security, standardization and harmonization, all essential for sustainable solutions, are summarized from the perspective of the Environmental Usage Area. The paper concludes with an overview of emerging, high impact applications in the environmental areas concerning land ecosystems (biodiversity), air quality (atmospheric conditions) and water ecosystems (marine asset management)