Amy Friedlander (speaker), Howard Ratner (speaker), John Wilbanks (speaker), Judy Ruttenberg (speaker)

1. Public Access: The View from NSF
Charleston Conference
November 8, 2013
Amy Friedlander
National Science Foundation
Not for redistribution

2. OSTP Memo, 2/22/2013
• Within six months (by 8/22), agencies will develop plans to
increase public access to scientific publications and scientific
data in digital formats, consistent with their missions and
existing law, and within existing budgets
• Underlying principles:
•
•
•
•
Maintains the importance of peer review and the role of publishers
Calls for collaboration among agencies and stakeholder groups
Does not specify a funding strategy, allowing for experimentation
Does not specify a technical approach but does encourage
leveraging existing archives
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
2

3. Where are we?
• NSF submitted its draft plan on time.
• Plans will be made public after they are accepted
by OSTP and OMB.
• No timeframe has been specified.
• There has been a lot of activity among key
stakeholder groups, notably:
– Publishers
– Universities
– Academic libraries
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
3

4. Developing the Public Access Plan(s)
•
•
•
•
Collaborate
Listen
Leverage existing resources and capabilities
Learn from prior experience
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
4

5. Collaborate
• FY 2012-13: Preliminary activities
• Interagency
– OSTP Working Group on Public Access to Publications
– OSTP Working Group on Public Access to Digital Scientific Data
• NSF
– Steering Committee on Public Access to Results of NSF-funded
Research
– Working Group on Public Access to Publications
– Working Group on Public Access to Digital
Scientific Data
•
National Science Board
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
5

6. Listen
• National Academies Public Meetings on
Publications and Digital Scientific Data, May 1417, 2013
– http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/
CurrentProjects/DBASSE_082378
• Individual meetings
• Other agencies (NIH)
• NSF program and
administrative staff
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
6

7. Some of the issues?
• Repository architectures: Information
management, storage, and custody
• Access
– Embargo: Whether, how long, and who pays?
– Access: To what? by whom? for what purpose?
• Relationship between data and publications – and
other products of research
• Roles of different groups
• Compliance and metrics
• Change: Technological, organizational, and regulatory
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
7

8. Leverage
• Standards and best practices – NISO/NFAIS; RDA; etc.
• Systems
– NIH, USDA, NASA, DOD, DOT, etc. (external)
– Fastlane, Research.gov, web (enterprise)
– Numerous data repositories
• Private sector: CrossRef, FundRef, ORCID
• Positioned for change
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
Credits: Courtesy Frances Griffin
8

9. Prior Experience: NSF Context
• NSF funds a wide range of disciplines.
• Disciplines and communities have different
traditions of publication and data management.
• NSF investigators usually have more than one
source of funding, and patterns in agency cofunding vary by directorate and office.
• Preliminary research indicates that NSF-funded
authors publish in a wide range of journals and
venues.
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
9

10. Tools and Procedures
• NSF has a history of encouraging data
sharing.
• January 2011: Data management plan
requirement went into effect.
• January 2013: Datasets can be reported in the
individual biosketch in proposals as evidence of
expertise.
• Datasets (as well as publications) are reported in
annual and final reports as outcomes of research.
• Article processing charges can be identified as a
direct expense in a budget proposal.
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
10

11. Approach:
Open, Flexible, Incremental
• Communicate with research communities, agencies, and
others
• Minimize burden on awardees and investigators
• Minimize burden on NSF program and administrative
staff
• Align (where possible) with existing capabilities
• Recognize diversity of research
disciplines and communities
• Obtain high-level coherence
• Implement an integrated approach
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
11

12. This is an opportunity.
• Broaden access to research
results in science and technology
• Use information to advance the
Foundation’s mission to support
research and innovation
• Provide a platform for innovation
in services and business models
as well as in research
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
12

13. Thank you!
Amy Friedlander
afriedla@nsf.gov
Clifford Gabriel
cgabrie@nsf.gov
Joanne Tornow
jtornow@nsf.gov
Credit: Nathan Smith, University of Minnesota/NOAO/AURA/NSF; Credit: Alexei Kritsuk, Michael Norman,
Paolo Padoan, and Rick Wagner, UC San Diego; Source: San Diego Supercomputer Center, UC San Diego;
Credit: Gemini Observatory/AURA
November 8, 2013
National Science Foundation -- Not for
Redistribution
13