To what extent are GLAMs ready for Open Data andCrowdsourcing?Results of a Pilot Survey from SwitzerlandBeat Estermann, 12...
Recent Trends in the GLAM sector…                                                                Single-Point-of-Access   ...
Web 2.0Source: http://www.facebook.com/Zentralbibliothek.Zuerich                                                          ...
Crowdsourcing / Collaborative Content Creation                              Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Com...
Where do Swiss GLAMs stand today with regard to…?…Digitization?…Exchange of metadata in multilateral cooperations?…Open Da...
Pilot Study among Swiss GLAMsGLAMs in Switzerland:• ca. 600-700 independent GLAMs of national or regional significance• ca...
Innovation Diffusion among Swiss GLAMs: The Overall Picture                                                             A ...
Digitization and Availability on the Internet                         Availability on the Internet                        ...
Exchange of Metadata / Cooperation in Networks                                       The exchange of metadata is important...
Metadata: Need for Improvement                     Metadata: Need for improvement? (in % of institutions; N=71)100% 90% 80...
Metadata: What needs to be improved?                             Metadata: What needs to be improved? (in % of institution...
Open Data Readiness              The memory objects are available on the Internet... (in % of institutions; N=68)100% 90% ...
Desirability and Importance of Open Data             Desirability of Open Data (in % of institutions, N=71)40%            ...
Open Data / “Free” Licensing of Content                        Conditions under which they would make memory objects freel...
Crowdsourcing       Are any of your staff members engaging in projects which support open       data or collaborative proj...
Desirability and Importance of Crowdsourcing      Desirability of Crowdsourcing (in % of institutions; N=69)              ...
Linked Data / Semantic Web       Is „Linked Data“ / „Semantic Web“ an issue for your                            institutio...
Recapitulation                     Metadata available on the Internet                               59%              60% o...
Open Data: Opportunities          Why do we need Open Data from the point of view of your institution? (in % of institutio...
Open Data: Risks                             What are the risks of open data for your institution? (in % of institutions; ...
Crowdsourcing: Opportunities                       What are the opportunities of crowdsourcing for your institution?      ...
Crowdsourcing: Risks             What are the risks of crowdsourcing from your point of view? (in % of institutions; N=69)...
Economic Considerations• Extra time effort and expenses are seen as the greatest  risks/shortcomings of Open Data and Crow...
Outlook / Next Steps• Contact GLAMs that have indicated an interest in receiving further  information• Promote the study a...
Contact Information and AffiliationsBeat EstermannE-mail: beat.estermann@bfh.chPhone: +41 31 848 34 38Affiliations:Researc...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Swiss_GLAM_Survey_presentation_20130412

2,609
-1

Published on

0 Comments
7 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,609
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
7
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • CoordinatedDigitizationEfforts (2000)Single-Point-of-Access Offers (2000..)Web2.0, Personnalization (2005..)Crowdsourcing (2006..)Open Data (2009..)Linked Open Data (2010..)
  • CoordinatedDigitizationEfforts (2000)Single-Point-of-Access Offers (2000..)Web2.0, Personnalization (2005..)Crowdsourcing (2006..)Open Data (2009..)Linked Open Data (2010..)
  • CoordinatedDigitizationEfforts (2000)Single-Point-of-Access Offers (2000..)Web2.0, Personnalization (2005..)Crowdsourcing (2006..)Open Data (2009..)Linked Open Data (2010..)
  • Q: There is a trend among memory institutions to make reproductions / content of their objects freely available on the internet.Under which conditions could you imagine making reproductions / content of your objects available on the internet free of charge, without earning any extra money?(Provided that the contents are already available in digital format and are free from third parties’ copyright claims or confidentiality restrictions.)
  • Swiss_GLAM_Survey_presentation_20130412

    1. 1. To what extent are GLAMs ready for Open Data andCrowdsourcing?Results of a Pilot Survey from SwitzerlandBeat Estermann, 12 April 2013 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
    2. 2. Recent Trends in the GLAM sector… Single-Point-of-Access Source: http://www.europeana.eu/ Coordinated Digitization EffortsWikimedia Commons, User:Dvortygirl (CC-by-sa) Increased cooperation and coordination among GLAMs: - common catalogues - virtual libraries EU: Lund Action Plan for - coordination of digitization efforts Digitization (2001) - long-term archiving 2
    3. 3. Web 2.0Source: http://www.facebook.com/Zentralbibliothek.Zuerich Interactivity / Personnalisation Flickr, User:victuallers2, (CC-by-sa) 3
    4. 4. Crowdsourcing / Collaborative Content Creation Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Bundesarchiv and http://www.flickr.com/groups/greatwararchive Crowdsourcing Approaches: - Correction Linked Open Data - Classification Free Licensing / Open Data - Contextualisation Source: http://www.wikiarthistory.info (CC-by-sa)Source: http://www.creativecommons.org - Co-curation - Complementing «Web of Data» / collections Open Data: Semantic Web - Crowdfunding - machine readable - RDF triples 4 - «freely» re-usable See: Oomen / Aroyo 2011 - unique URLs
    5. 5. Where do Swiss GLAMs stand today with regard to…?…Digitization?…Exchange of metadata in multilateral cooperations?…Open Data?…Crowdsourcing?…Linked Open Data? Innovation Diffusion Model, Everett Rogers, 1962 Awareness Interest Evaluation Trial AdoptionWhat are the perceived risks and opportunities? (drivers vs. hindering factors)What are the expected benefits? Who are the beneficiaries? 5
    6. 6. Pilot Study among Swiss GLAMsGLAMs in Switzerland:• ca. 600-700 independent GLAMs of national or regional significance• ca. 1000 independent GLAMs organized in three umbrella organizationsOur sample: memory institutions of national significance in the German-speakingpart of Switzerland• 197 organisations contacted (233 e-mail addresses)• 72 questionnaires completed (34% of the contacted organisations)Caveats:• The sample is rather small (results are not very precise with regard to the entire Swiss GLAM population, large confidence intervals apply)• Archives are over-represented in the sample (higher response rate); museums and «other institutions» are under-represented; libraries are about average. 6
    7. 7. Innovation Diffusion among Swiss GLAMs: The Overall Picture A critical mass has been reached. How about the laggards? Will we see a higher rate of adoption for Open Data than for Crowdsourcing? Some institutions are starting to think about Linked Data… 7
    8. 8. Digitization and Availability on the Internet Availability on the Internet (in % of institutions, N=71) 17% "is partly the case" 37% 32% "is the case" 42% 23% 11% Metadata Reproductions of Background memory objects information 60% of institutions make metadata and reproductions at least partly available on the Internet. 40% still don’t! 8
    9. 9. Exchange of Metadata / Cooperation in Networks The exchange of metadata is important for us... (in % of institutions; N=72) Do you exchange metadata 100% with other institutions? 90% (in % of institutions; N=72) 80%100% 70% 90% 60% 80% 50% 70% 40% 8% 17% 61% 30% 60% 15% 20% 35% 50% 29% 39% 10% 15% 3% 3% 40% 0% "is partly the case" 30% "is the case" 20% 10% 0% yes no61% of the responding GLAMs exchange metadata with other institutions. 39% don’t.30% do so in the context of bilateral cooperations; 43% in the context of multilateralcooperations.For 29% the exchange of metadata is part of their core mission. 17% say this is partly the 9case.
    10. 10. Metadata: Need for Improvement Metadata: Need for improvement? (in % of institutions; N=71)100% 90% 80% 70% 60% Quality of metadata 50% (accuracy, completeness, up-to- 42% 43% dateness, clarity, availability) 40% Interoperability of metadata 30% 25% 24% (availability in digital 21% 23% 20% format, conformity with standards) 11% 10% 10% 0% urgent need need in the no need no answer medium term A bit more than 50% of responding GLAMs perceive a need to improve their metadata. The need to improve metadata quality and the need to improve their interoperability are highly correlated. – Does the envisioned exchange of metadata lead to higher quality requirements? 25% of responding GLAMs couldn’t answer this question. – What does this mean? 10
    11. 11. Metadata: What needs to be improved? Metadata: What needs to be improved? (in % of institutions; N=43)100% 90% 80% 70% 33% 60% 26% 50% 23% 37% "is partly the case" 40% 60% 28% 40% "is the case" 30% 51% 20% 40% 42% 30% 26% 10% 16% 9% 0% accuracy completeness up-to-dateness clarity availability digitization conformity with current exchange formats The main challenges: completeness, availability, digitization 11
    12. 12. Open Data Readiness The memory objects are available on the Internet... (in % of institutions; N=68)100% 90% 80% 70% 60% not accessible for free 50% 21% accessible at no charge (but you are 40% not allowed to modify them) 51% 30% "freely" accessible 32% 20% 10% 7% 7% 0% 1% for charitable projects, such as for users who are intending to Wikipedia, which also permit commercially exploit them commercial useBetween 1% and 7% of responding GLAMs make scans/photographs of theirmemory objects «freely» available on the Internet. Over half of them make themavailable on the Internet, but with restrictions. 40% don’t make them available at all.Over 50% of the GLAMs which make their memory objects available on the Internetdo not understand that you cannot make works available for Wikipedia and 12simultaneously prevent their modification and/or their commercial use!
    13. 13. Desirability and Importance of Open Data Desirability of Open Data (in % of institutions, N=71)40% 36% Importance / Desirability of Open Data35% (in % of institutions; N=71)30% risks prevail opportunities prevail 25% 35%25% 30%20% 25% 20%15% 15% 31% 11% 8% 14% 21% 10%10% 7% 5% 6% 6% 6% 6% 8% 7%5% 0% 1% 3% 3% 1% 0% very important neither, nor unimportant no answer0% important -10 to - -8 to -6 -6 to -4 -4 to -2 -2 to 0 0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 6 6 to 8 8 to 10 8 For over 80% of responding GLAMs the opportunities outweigh the risks of Open Data. Over 50% think Open Data is an important issue; almost all of these believe that the opportunities outweigh the risks. 13
    14. 14. Open Data / “Free” Licensing of Content Conditions under which they would make memory objects freely accessible on the Internet (in % der Institutionen; N=70)100% 90% 19% 80% 20% 70% 23% 21% 60% 34% 50% "is partly the case" 40% 26% "is the case" 76% 69% 30% 59% 60% 20% 40% 29% 10% 9% 7% 1% 0% For private use For education and research For users who are the name to commercially exploit them For charitable projects, suchOnly if intending of the institution remains attached to the data For charitable projects as Wikipedia, whichOnly if the work will be re-used in unmodified form also permit commercial useMost GLAMs wouldn’t readily agree to «freely» license their content – even inthe absence of third party rights: they would like to prevent the commercial useat no charge as well as the modification of works. 14
    15. 15. Crowdsourcing Are any of your staff members engaging in projects which support open data or collaborative projects on the Internet? (in % of institutions; N=71)100%90%80%70%60%50% in their spare time40% as part of their professional30% activity20% 14%10% 11% 3% 4% 6% 1% 0% Wikipedia Wikimedia Flickr others Commons Commons 11% of responding GLAMs have staff members who contribute to Wikipedia as part of their professional activity. 10% of responding GLAMs say that online volunteering plays partly an important role for them. 15 Interestingly, no correlation was found between the two variables.
    16. 16. Desirability and Importance of Crowdsourcing Desirability of Crowdsourcing (in % of institutions; N=69) 43% Importance / Desirability of Crowdsourcing45% (in % of institutions; N=69)40% risks prevail opportunities prevail35% 35%30% 30%25% 25% 3% 19%20% 20% 15% 1% 15% 1% 29%15% 11% 25% 10%10% 14% 16% 5% 10% 4% 5% 3% 3% 0% 1% 0% very important neither, nor unimportant no answer -10 to - -8 to -6 -6 to -4 -4 to -2 -2 to 0 0 to 2 2 to 4 4 to 6 6 to 8 8 to 10 important 8 For over 90% of the responding GLAMs the risks of Crowdsourcing are at least as great as the opportunities. For half of them the risks clearly prevail. Among GLAMs which think that Crowdsourcing is an important issue, the risk perception is equally high. 16
    17. 17. Linked Data / Semantic Web Is „Linked Data“ / „Semantic Web“ an issue for your institution? (in % of institutions; N=71)100%90%80%70% Yes, it is an issue, but we havent planned any projects yet60%50% Yes, we have already planned projects in this area40%30%20% 23%10% 6% 0%29% of responding GLAMs say that Linked Data is an issue for them.None of them has a running project. 17
    18. 18. Recapitulation Metadata available on the Internet 59% 60% of respondingPhotos/scans of memory object available on the Internet 60% GLAMs are technically ready for Open Data. Exchange of metadata takes place and is important 43% Open Data is important 53% Open Data is desirable 81% Readiness to make data available for Wikipedia 7% Readiness to make data available for commercial use 1% Different dynamics for Open Data and Crowdsourcing is important 38% Crowdsourcing Crowdsourcing is desirable 7% Importance of online-volunteer work 10% Professional engagement in Wikipedia 11% Linked Data is an issue 29% 18 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%
    19. 19. Open Data: Opportunities Why do we need Open Data from the point of view of your institution? (in % of institutions; N=72) 100% "is partly the case" 90% "is the case" 80% 18% 19% 70% 14% 21% 24% 26% 21% 60% 50% 33% 40% 22% 65% 68% 67% 30% 58% 53% 50% 53% 20% 19% 36% 29% 10% 11% 3% 0%Main target groups: research and education, private individuals, cultural institutionsMain opportunities: better visibility and accessibility of holdings; better visibility of 19 theinstitutions; better networking among GLAMs.
    20. 20. Open Data: Risks What are the risks of open data for your institution? (in % of institutions; N=71)100%90%80% 20%70%60%50% 34% 34%40% 34% "is partly the case" 23% 66% "is the case"30% 17%20% 34% 32% 28% 25%10% 18% 11% 0% 3% Time effort and The use of the Copyright Infringements of Divulgation of Increased time Loss of expense for data cannot be infringements data protection classified effort in order to revenues making them controlled regulations information respond to available enquiriesMajor risk: extra time effort and expensesConsiderable risks: loss of control, copyright, data protection, secrecy infringementsAlmost no risk: Loss of revenues 20
    21. 21. Crowdsourcing: Opportunities What are the opportunities of crowdsourcing for your institution? (in % of institutions; N=71)100%90%80%70%60%50%40% "is partly the case"30% "is the case"20% 20% 24% 24% 21% 21%10% 11% 14% 6% 1% 4% 3% 0% Correction and Enhancement Completion of Classification / Co-curators Crowdfunding transcription and expansion collections completion of (fundraising) tasks of texts (contribution / metadata identification of additional objects)Crowdsourcing is most likely to be employed for classification tasks. 21
    22. 22. Crowdsourcing: Risks What are the risks of crowdsourcing from your point of view? (in % of institutions; N=69)100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 30% 50% 35% 28% 26% 30% 40% "is partly the case" 30% "is the case" 20% 42% 35% 35% 38% 30% 17% 10% 6% 0% Unforeseeable Considerable Difficulties in No guarantee Low level of Fears among results time/effort estimating the concerning planning employees needed for time-effort long-term data reliability (job preparation maintenance loss, changing and follow-up roles and tasks)All the enumerated risks are rated about the same, except for fears amongemployees which seem to play a minor role. 22
    23. 23. Economic Considerations• Extra time effort and expenses are seen as the greatest risks/shortcomings of Open Data and Crowdsourcing.• Expected losses of revenue play virtually no role. The revenues of the responding GLAMs are composed as follows: 71%: institutional funding (public funds) 8%: institutional funding (private funds) 7%: donations and sponsoring 6%: revenues from commercial activities (entrance fees: 3%; lending fees: 1%; sale of image rights: < 0.5%; other: 1%) 2%: project funding (public or private) 6%: other revenues• While the responding GLAMs may perceive at least some efficiency gains related to Open Data, they do not perceive any potential economies associated to Crowdsourcing (yet). 23
    24. 24. Outlook / Next Steps• Contact GLAMs that have indicated an interest in receiving further information• Promote the study among GLAMs and political actors in Switzerland• Orient GLAM outreach activities in the light of the findings• Evaluate the demand for follow-up studies: Study with a larger sample in Switzerland Longitudinal study in Switzerland (e.g. similar survey in 2014 to measure the changes) International benchmark study Please contact me if you are interested! 24
    25. 25. Contact Information and AffiliationsBeat EstermannE-mail: beat.estermann@bfh.chPhone: +41 31 848 34 38Affiliations:Research Associate, Bern University of Applied SciencesMember of opendata.ch (Swiss Chapter of the Open Knowledge Foundation)Member of Digitale Allmend (Swiss Chapter of CreativeCommons)Member of Wikimedia CH’s GLAM working groupThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. 25
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×