data management planning: uk policies and beyond

Martin DonnellyDigital Curation CentreUniversity of Edinburgh

FUNDER POLICIES UPDATE:UK & beyond

iConference 2013, pre-conference workshopFort Worth, TX, 12 February 2013

RUNNING ORDER (30 mins)

1. Introduction and background2. UK (and publishers)3. Europe4. Australia5. Acknowledgements

1. Introduction/Background

- Digital Curation Centre, est. 2004- Three partners: Universities of Edinburgh,

Glasgow and Bath- Primary funder is JISC

Helping to build capacity, capability and skills in data management and curation across the UK’s higher education research community

-DCC Phase 3 Business Plan

www.dcc.ac.uk

- Liz Lyon, “Dealing With Data” (2008)- UK funder expectations (2009)- Development of Checklist, DMP Online

and other resources (2009-10)- NSF policy requirement (2010)- Development of DMPTool (2011)- Developments and discussions further

afield (2012, 2013…)

DCC and DMP: a short history…

IMPETUS

ACTION

IMPETUS

ACTIONANDIMPETUS

DMP resources– “Dealing with Data” (Lyon, 2008)– Analysis of Funder Policies (Jones, 2009)– Checklist for a Data Management Plan

(Donnelly and Jones, 2009-2013)– DMP Online tool (2009-2013)– “How to Develop a Data Management and

Sharing Plan” (Jones, 2011)– “Data Management Plans and Planning”

(Donnelly, 2012) in Pryor (ed.) Managing Research Data, London: Facet

– DMP Online briefing paper (Donnelly and Richardson, forthcoming 2012)

Links to all DCC resources via http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/data-management-plans

2. UK funders

1. Policy context / drivers2. Current status3. MRC / ESRC case study

Content courtesy Veerle Van den Eynden, UK Data Archive…

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

DATA SHARING DRIVERS UK

• Research funder policies• Publisher policies• Demand from users • Transparency and openness agenda• Maximise investment returns

Research data available for:• New research• Scrutiny / duplication / validation• Research visibility / impact

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

RESEARCH FUNDER DATA POLICIES

1. Publicly funded research data are a public good, produced in the public interest, that should be made openly available with as few restrictions as possible in a timely and responsible manner that does not harm intellectual property.

2. in accordance with relevant standards and community best practice

3. metadata to make research data discoverable

4. legal, ethical, commercial constraints on release of research data

5. recognition for collecting & analysing data; limited privileged use

6. acknowledge sources of data, intellectual contributions, terms & conditions

7. use public funds to support the management and sharing of publicly-funded research data

From Research Councils UK Common Principles on Data Policy (May 2011)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

RESEARCH FUNDER POLICIES

Research Councils UK Policy on Access to Research Outputs (July 2012)

• peer reviewed research papers to be published in journals that are compliant with Research Council policy on Open Access

• include statement on how the underlying research materials such as data, samples or models can be accessed

• for publications submitted for publication from 1 April 2013

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

7 RCUK RESEARCH COUNCILS

• Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC)• Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council

(BBSRC)• Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC• Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)• Medical Research Council (MRC)• Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)• Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

RESEARCH COUNCIL DATA POLICIES

Research Councils:• Data sharing policy mandating/encouraging data sharing• Data management / sharing planning required• Award holders responsible for managing & sharing data,

except EPSRC• Some councils fund their own data sharing support

services and infrastructuree.g. UK Data Service (ESRC)

NERC data centres (NERC)

MRC Data Support Service (MRC)

Atlas Petabyte Storage (STFC)

Archaeology Data Service (AHRC)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

EPSRC POLICY FRAMEWORK ON RESEARCH DATA

Research organisations receiving EPSRC funding have a responsibility to:

• publish metadata online, with DOI (digital object identifier)

• maintain data securely for 10 years from last access

• papers to include statements on access to supporting data

• expectations also follow RCUK principles

Roadmap for compliance by May 2012; institutional infrastructure in place by May 2015

Influenced by Freedom of Information Act

EPSRC Policy Framework on Research Data

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

OTHER FUNDER DATA POLICIES

Data sharing policy & data management planning• Cancer Research UK• Department for International Development (DFID)• Wellcome Trust

Data sharing policy, no DMP• British Academy• Nuffield Foundation• Department of Health

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

DATA PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Funder Required at application Data topics in DMP

AHRC Technical plan Standards, preservation, continued access & use

BBSRC Data management and sharing plan

Type, format, standards, sharing methods, restrictions, timeframe

CRUK Data sharing plan Volume, format, standards, metadata, documentation, sharing method, timescale, preservation, restrictions

DFID Access and data management plan

Repositories, limits, timescale, responsibilities, resources, access strategy

EPSRC Policy framework

ESRC Data management plan Volume, type, quality, archiving plans, difficulties sharing, consent sharing, IPR, responsibilities

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

DATA PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Funder Required at application Data topics in DMP

MRC Data management plan Collection methods, documentation, standards, preservation, curation, security, confidentiality, sharing & access, timescale, responsibilities

NERC Outline data management plan

DM procedures, created data

STFC Data management plan Type, preservation, metadata, value, sharing, timescale, resources needed

Wellcome Trust

Data management and sharing plan

What data? When share? Where share? How access? Limits, how preserve? What resources?

Digital Curation Centre, Funders’ data plan requirements:www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/data-management-plans/funders-requirements

Knight, G; (2012) Funder Requirements for Data Management and Sharing. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London. researchonline.lshtm.ac.uk/208596/

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

JOURNAL / PUBLISHER DATA POLICIES

• Data underpinning publication accessible• upon request from author• supplement with publication• public repository • mandated repository (e.g. PANGAEA – Elsevier)

• Many top-rated science journals (Science, Nature, J Evol. Biol...) have strong policies relating to data repositories which give dataset accession numbers

e.g. GenBank, EMBL, DRYAD, TreeBASE

JORD: survey of journal policies jordproject.wordpress.com/ 2012/09/13/journal-research-data-policies-survey/ jordproject.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/overview-of-policy-types-from-the-science-journals-in-the-sample/

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

CASE STUDY 1 - ESRC

• DMP requirement introduced April 2011

• Requirements & guidance developed: UK Data Archive & ESRC

• DMP topics:• assessment of existing data that could be used for the research• information on new data that will be created• quality assurance of data• back-up and security of data• expected difficulties in data sharing, e.g. ethical or legal issues• copyright and Intellectual Property Right of data• data management responsibilities• preparation of data for sharing and archiving

• DMP Review 2012, UK Data Archive, Research Data Management Support Team

• evaluate quality of random sample of 24 DMPs

• score each topic: 1=insufficient; 2=sufficient; 3=excellent

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

ESRC REVIEW OF DMPs

Findings• Average quality score: 17 (9-23)• 7 DMPs (29 %) < 16 • 4 DMPs (17 %) < 12• On average good to excellent information on assessing existing

data (average score of 2.4 )• Poorest information:

• copyright and IPR of research data (avg score 1.8)

• preparing data for sharing / archiving (avg score 1.9)

• Score = 1 (insufficient information provided) most common for copyright (7 plans), data management responsibilities (5 plans) and data preparation (5 plans)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

CASE STUDY 2 – MRC

• DMP requirements introduced June 2012• Requirements & guidance developed MRC-DSS & JISC-funded

project ‘Data Management Planning for MRC projects’• DMP Review Dec 2012: panel of MRC theme / programme /

policy managers & external data scientists / DM experts• evaluate 22 DMPs• info provided in DMP fit for purpose ?• DMP template / guidance interpreted correctly ?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………………..

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…

UK DATA ARCHIVE

MRC REVIEW OF DMPs

Findings: template & guidance being amernded• Data security, not only relevant for data with personal identifiers,

also to safeguard valuable data in general• Need to describe institutional resources to support data

management and sharing • DMPs require input from key institutional support staff • DMP also for institution to plan effective data support for research• DMP should identify which resources a project needs• Data suitability for sharing – justification needed to ensure all

implications of data sharing are considered / understood• Clear timescales for data sharing needed• DMP’s using template easier to evaluate • Free text / brief DMPs fairly generic

3. Europe

1. EC policies for scientific information

2. EC and data infrastructures

Content courtesy Carlos Morais-Pires, European Commission…

Neelie KroesDigital AgendaDigital (information) single market

Open Science means optimal sharing of research results and tools such as publications, research data, software, educational resources and infrastructures across institutional, disciplinary and national boundaries.

network infrastructure, GÉANT

distributed computing/software infrastructure

scientific data infrastructure

intelligent access to scientific information

We don't know how scholarly communication

will adapt to new paradigms bringing closer

human and machine readable information...

e-Infrastructure can help realising the

AAIR vision and opportunities for

innovation in publishing

publication + data + software

Open Infrastructures for Open Science

Open Scientific Content

data, computational resources and software resulting from public funded research

Open Culture

career systems should support and reward those who participate in the culture of sharing

Open Infrastructures

reliable, high-performance and economically efficient infrastructures

preservation, volumes, costs, etc

(*) Peter Buneman, Univ . Edinburgh, Linz April 2006,

Open Infrastructures for Open Science

COM and REC on Scientific Information, July 2012

Open Access,

Long term preservation,

Capacity building with data infrastructures

recommendation:[…] hereby recommends that member states

recommendation

Preservation and re-use of scientific information

4. Reinforce the preservation of scientific information…

recommendation

E-infrastructures

5. Further develop e-infrastructures underpinning the system for

disseminating scientific information…

recommendation

E-infrastructures

– reinforcing the infrastructure for access to and preservation of

scientific information at national level, and earmarking the necessary funds;

– ensuring the quality and reliability of the infrastructure,

including through the use of certification mechanisms for

repositories;

– ensuring interoperability among e-infrastructures at national and

global level.

recommendation

E-infrastructures

6. Ensure synergies among national e-infrastructures at

European and global level by:

– contributing to the interoperability of e-infrastructures, in particular

addressing scientific data exchange, taking into account experiences with

existing projects, infrastructures and software developed at European and

global level;

– supporting transnational cooperative efforts that promote the use

and development of information and communication technologies

infrastructure for higher education and research.

Policy formulated Policy not formulated

Formulated, notimplementing

Formulated, im

plementing, no

outcomes

Formulated, implementing, with outcomes

Policy formulated Policy not formulated

Formulated, notimplementing

Formulated, im

plementing, no

outcomes

Formulated, implementing, with outcomes

Policy formulated

Policy not formulatedFormulated, not

implementing

Formulated, im

plementing, no outcom

es

Formulated, implementing,

with outcomes

Policy formulated Policy not formulatedFormulated, notimplementing

Formulated, im

plementing, no outcom

es

Formulated, implementing, with outcomes

National policy not formulated

National policy formulated but not implemented

National policy formulated, implemented but no outcomes yet

National policy formulated, implemented, and outcomes delivered

OA Publications OA Data Preservation eInfrastructures

Better Access to Scientific Informationslide from Dr Neil Jacobs (JISC) presentation to the EC

Do you think the following require coordination / collaboration at the European level?

eInfrastructures

Preservation

Research data

OA / publications

• Knowledge exchange

• Effects of scale (economies, negotiations)

• Reduce duplication

• Broad interoperability

• Common evaluation standards

• Disciplinary imperatives

• Common infrastructure

Better Access to Scientific Informationslide from Dr Neil Jacobs (JISC) presentation to the EC

4. Australia

Content courtesy David Groenewegen, Australian National Data Service…

Research funding in Australia

• Australian Research Council (ARC) and National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) provide bulk of competitive government funding

• Funding also comes from other government bodies, private industry, international collaboration, and overseas funding bodies

37

Sharing and other requirements

• NHMRC – publications must be deposited (July 2012)

• ARC – publications must be deposited (Jan 2013)

• Data:– No requirements from either (BUT: both now

“encourage” it)– No history of disciplinary data stores– No requirements for data management planning

38

Research infrastructure funding

• Department of Industry, Innovation, Research, Science and Tertiary Education (DIISRTE)– National Computational Infrastructure (NCI).– Research Storage Infrastructure (RDSI)– Australian National Data Service (ANDS)– National eResearch Collaboration Tools and

Resources (NeCTAR).

39

Consequences

• Storage nodes now in place in most states• Large scale engagement on data management

issues and capability building at virtually all universities– 75% of unis have a data management policy in

place or in progress

• Development of a range of tools

40

Going forward – shorter term

• Collaborative Research Infrastructure Scheme (CRIS)

• The scheme will provide $60 million to support the operation of critical national, collaborative research infrastructure facilities up to 31 December 2014.

41

Going forward – longer term• Australian Research Committee (ARCom) -

– to provide integrated and strategic advice on future research investments, including in the areas of human capital, infrastructure and collaborative activities

• National Research Investment Plan– sets out a comprehensive national research

investment planning process. – enable a coordinated, whole-of-government approach

to research investment that is structured to meet national needs and provide value for money.

– released on 28 November 2012.

42

Thank you

martin.donnelly@ed.ac.uk@mkdDCC

www.dcc.ac.uk

Thanks to colleagues for use of their slides:Veerle Van den Eynden (ESRS), Carlos Morais-Pires (EC), David Groenewegen (ANDS)