Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Ingrid Dillo - Trustworthy repositories for open research data


Published on

From "A National Approach to Open Research Data in Ireland", a workshop held on 8 September 2017 in National Library of Ireland, organised by The National Library of Ireland, the Digital Repository of Ireland, the Research Data Alliance and Open Research Ireland.

Published in: Data & Analytics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Ingrid Dillo - Trustworthy repositories for open research data

  1. 1. DANS is een instituut van KNAW en NWO Trustworthy Repositories for (Open) Research Data Ingrid Dillo, DANS, Netherlands 8 September 2017, 2nd National Irish RDA Worskhop, Dublin
  2. 2. Policy makers
  3. 3. ..but what about the researchers? Source: The State of Open Data, Digital Science Report (2016).Retrieved: December 23, 2016 . Figures have been redrawn from the originals.
  4. 4. Hesitance in reality
  5. 5. “Perhaps the biggest challenge in sharing data is trust: how do you create a system robust enough for scientists to trust that, if they share, their data won’t be lost, garbled, stolen or misused?”
  6. 6. Pillars of trust • actions and attributes of the trustee (integrity, transparency, competence, predictability, guarantees, positive intentions) • external acknowledgements: • reputation (researchers) • third party endorsements (funders, publishers)
  7. 7. The global certification landscape ISO 16363:2012 - Audit and certification of trustworthy digital repositories DIN 31644 standard “Criteria for trustworthy digital archives”
  8. 8. DANS and Data Seal of Approval • 2005: DANS to promote and provide permanent access to digital research resources • Formulate quality guidelines for digital repositories including DANS • 2009: international DSA Board • Almost 70 seals acquired around the globe, but with a focus on Europe •
  9. 9. Partnership with WDS under the umbrella of RDA Goals: • Realizing efficiencies • Simplifying assessment options • Stimulating more certifications Outcomes: • Common catalogue of requirements for core repository assessment • Common procedures for self-assessment and review process • One new certification body
  10. 10. New Requirements • Organizational infrastructure (6) • Digital object management (8) • Technology (2) • Endorsed RDA output • EC-recognition as an ICT technical specification
  11. 11. New Requirements Organizational infrastructure • Mission/scope • Licenses • Continuity of access • Confidentiality and ethics • Organizational infrastructure • Expert guidance Digital object management • Data integrity and authenticity • Appraisal • Documented storage procedures • Preservation plan • Data quality • Workflows • Data discovery and identification • Data reuseTechnology • Technical infrastructure • Security
  12. 12. Institute of Dutch Academy and Research Funding Organisation (KNAW & NWO) since 2005 First predecessor dates back to 1964 (Steinmetz Foundation), Historical Data Archive 1989 Mission: promote and provide permanent access to digital research resources DANS organisation
  13. 13. DataverseNL to support data storage during research until 10 years after NARCIS Portal aggregating research information and institutional repositories EASY Certified Long- term Archive DANS core services
  14. 14. Certification at DANS 2011: certification of the DANS repository becomes an important target in long term policy strategy 2011: DSA seal and ISO test audit 2013: renewal DSA seal 2015: nestorSeal, WDS accreditation 2017: CoreTrustSeal
  15. 15. Certification in practice • Broad support within the organization is needed • Commitment from the top is crucial • Use the framework: do not aim to high at once
  16. 16. Why do repositories invest in certification efforts? • Builds stakeholder confidence in the repository (funders, publishers, etc.) • Raises awareness about digital preservation • Improves communication within the repository • Improves repository processes • Ensures transparency • Differentiates the repository from others
  17. 17. NCDD survey: perceived benefits “The benefits propagated by the DSA itself are in line with the perception of the respondents: this is most clearly the case with the stated benefit “awareness raising about digital preservation,” followed by “stakeholder confidence.” “When queried about other perceived benefits, it is clear that the certification process not only led to external benefits but also to improved internal processes, documentation and opportunities to attract data producers as well as data consumers.” Quote: “The experience of applying and the issues that came up during the process have turned out to be very positive and are helping us consolidate our quality related working lines.”
  18. 18. Why do we do this at DANS? • Certification as a means to build trust in our repository with our clients, both depositors and users of data, with our partner organizations and with research funders • Certification as a ‘big stick’ to further develop and professionalize our core services, workflows and our organization as a whole
  19. 19. NCDD survey: overall judgement “The respondents perceive the benefits of DSA-certification as both tangible and critical to the continuing fulfillment of their mission.” “The majority of the respondents rated the ratio between investments and benefits as “adequate-rewarding” to “rewarding-excellent.” “Almost no one aimed for certification at a higher level (DIN 31644, ISO 16363). ”
  20. 20. A practical guide in the national context
  21. 21. Takeaway for the World Cafe The availability of repositories is an important building block in any approach to (open) research data The draft principles mention the following requirements: • open • sufficient metadata Not included yet: • ensuring the long-term accessibility of open research data through certified trustworthy repositories.
  22. 22. Thank you for listening