NFIAS Annual Conference February 2016

1. The Evolving U.S. Policy Environment
for Open Research Data
Heather Joseph
Executive Director, SPARC
NFAIS Annual Conference

2. 1. Policy Drivers

3. Funders invest tens of billions of
dollars annually on basic and
applied scien@fic research.
~$60billion/yr. in U.S.
publicly-funded research alone.

4. • S@mulate new ideas
• Accelerate scien@fic discovery
• Improve educa@onal outcomes
• Fuel innova@on
• Grow the economy/create jobs
• Improve the welfare of the
public

5. This can only happen if we can
freely access and fully use the
outputs of this research.

6. Working theory is that policies
that encourage open access to
the results of this research –
including data - will accelerate
and significantly improve these
outcomes.

7. And the community at large
increasingly sees addi@onal benefits
to opening up research data:

8. • Improve reproducibility
• Encourage addi@onal produc@ve
use of data
• Prevent/improve response to
crises (Zika, earthquakes, etc.)
• Enable large-scale collabora@ons
• Improve transparency /
accountability

9. 2. Policy Precedent/Development

10. Key Sources of U.S. Informa=on
Policy
• Freedom of Informa@on Act, 1966
• Copyright Act, 1976
• Paperwork Reduc@on Act, 1980
• Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Circular No. A-130, 1985
• Electronic FOIA Amendments, 1996

11. “…Government informa/on is a
valuable na/onal resource,
and the economic benefits to
society are maximized when
government informa/on is
available in a /mely and
equitable manner to all.”
-OMB Circular A-130

12. “Open and unrestricted access
to public informa/on at no
more than the cost of
dissemina/on..”
- OMB Circular A-130

13. Key Sources of U.S. Informa=on
Policy
• Paperwork Elimina@on Act, 2003
• Open Government Direc@ve, 2009
• Open Data Execu@ve Order, 2013
• Public Access to Federally Funded
Research Outputs Direc@ve, 2013

15. White House Public Access Direc@ve

16. Direc@ve requires “digitally
formaeed scien@fic data resul@ng
from unclassified research
supported…by Federal funding to
be stored and publicly accessible to
search, retrieve, and analyze…”

17. Direc@on to Agencies “Maximize
Access to Data” While S@ll:

18. • Protec@ng confiden@ality and
personal privacy;
• Recognizing proprietary interests,
business confiden@al informa@on
and IP rights;
• Balancing value of long-term
preserva@on & access with costs
and administra@ve burdens.

19. And, oh yes – please do this all
within exis@ng budgets.

20. (Fast) Forward 3 Years…

21. 3. Research Data Policies Are
Emerging

22. As of February 2016, dral or final
policy plans for access to research
data (and ar@cles) have been
released by 14 of the 19 U.S.
science agencies

23. Evolu@onary process, ongoing
Community involvement absolutely
necessary.
NOT a “one-and-done” policy
draling process.

24. WH Direc@ve provided some
guidance, but all plans differ
somewhat in interpreta@on of
guidelines as well as
implementa@on processes.

25. Lots of commonali@es. Most
Agency policy plans:

26. • Require Data Management Plans;
• Provide direc@on for approved
loca@ons for data deposit/storage;
• Acknowledge need for rou@ne
aeribu@on for data;
• Require data inventories & indices;
• Support public/private collabora@on
• Recognize need for long-term
preserva@on

27. However: There is not yet a
common set of standards for any
of these policy components.

28. Example: While all agencies
require Data Management Plans
at funding proposal stage; we
don’t have a common set of
aeributes/expecta@ons for these
plans.

29. To be expected; but makes policy
development more labor intensive
– for funders and and funding
recipients. Policy development is
hard, and compliance is too.

30. This might be interpreted by some
as a signal that more granular
direc@on is needed (i.e., via more
prescrip@ve legisla@on).

31. Fluid poli@cal climate in
presiden@al elec@on year also
poses challenges…

32. 4. What can we do to keep things
moving in right direc=on?

33. Reitera@ng necessity of
evolu@onary policy development
process to produce effec@ve
research data policies in different
disciplines is important.

34. Consistent policy component
tracking, regular community input
(from researchers and ins@tu@ons),
and ongoing interagency
collabora@on is also vital.

35. Collabora@on with community will
be helpful in promo@ng (a
reasonable) level of
standardiza@on to facilitate
smoother compliance process.

36. “Harmonizing” policy components
where possible to reduce
opera@ng fric@on where possible is
key shared goal.

37. Community collabora@on can also
be helpful in developing advocacy
for addi@onal investments in
infrastructure needed to support
access to and use of research data.

38. Cannot build an effec@ve,
sustainable infrastructure to
support vital na@onal/public
interests without addi@onal
investment.

39. Open Research Data is Now a Priority.

40. Thank you for listening.
Heather Joseph
Executive Director, SPARC
21 Dupont Circle, Washington, DC 20009
heather@sparcopen.org
www.sparcopen.org