Researchers require infrastructures that ensure a maximum of accessibility, stability and reliability to facilitate working with and sharing of research data. Such infrastructures are being increasingly summarised under the term Research Data Repositories (RDR). The project re3data.org – Registry of Research Data Repositories – began to index research data repositories in 2012 and offers researchers, funding organisations, libraries and publishers an overview of the heterogeneous research data repository landscape. In December 2014 re3data.org listed more than 1,030 research data repositories, which are described in detail using the re3data.org schema (http://dx.doi.org/10.2312/re3.003). Information icons help researchers to identify easily an adequate repository for the storage and reuse of their data. This talk describes the heterogeneous RDR landscape and presents a typology of institutional, disciplinary, multidisciplinary and project-specific RDR. Further, it outlines the features of re3data. org and it shows current developments for integration into data management planning tools and other services. By the end of 2015 re3data.org and Databib (Purdue University, USA) will merge their services, which will then be managed under the auspices of DataCite. The aim of this merger is to reduce duplication of effort and to serve the research community better with a single, sustainable registry of research data repositories. The talk will present this organisational development as a best practice example for the development of international research information services.

1. Making Research Data Repositories
Visible – The re3data.org Registry
Frank Scholze | Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, KIT Library
Heinz Pampel, Paul Vierkant | GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences,
LIS
LIBER 2015 | London, June 26, 2015

3. Background
European Commisson. (2014). Horizon 2020 Annotated Model Grant Agreements. Version 1.6.2 .Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/amga/h2020-amga_en.pdf
• Funders' data policies
• Example: European Commission

4. Background
NPG (2013). Availability of data and materials. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/authors/policies/availability.html
PLOS (2014). PLOS Editorial and Publishing Policies. Retrieved from http://www.plosone.org/static/policies.action
• Journal Data Policies
• Nature Publishing Group
• “[...] authors are required to make materials, data and
associated protocols promptly available to readers
without undue qualifications. “
• PLOS
• “PLOS journals require authors to make all data
underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully
available without restriction, with rare exception.“

5. Reproducability and trust

6. re3data.org - Mission
• global registry of research data repositories
• covers all academic disciplines
• helps researchers, funding bodies, publishers,
libraries and scholarly institutions to find research
data repositories
• promotes a culture of sharing, increased access
and better visibility of research data
Pampel, H. et al. (2013). Making Research
Data Repositories Visible: The re3data.org
Registry. PLOS ONE, 8(11), e78080.
http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078080

7. Schema
Vierkant, P., et al. (2014). Schema for the
Description of Research Data Repositories.
Version 2.2. http://doi.org/10.2312/re3.006
39Properties
2.2Version
Based on Analyses,
Feedback and
Experience

8. Icons
Vierkant, P., et al. (2014). Schema for the
Description of Research Data Repositories.
Version 2.2. doi:10.2312/re3.006
The research datarepository provides
additional information on its ser vice.
The research datarepository
provides open/restricted/closed
access to its data.
The terms of use and licenses
of the dataare provided by the
research datarepository.
The research datarepository
provides apolicy.
The research datarepository uses
apersistent identifier system to make its
provided data persistent,unique and citable.
The research datarepository is
either certified or suppor ts a
repository standard. RESEARCH
DATA
REPOSITORY
GENERAL
INFORMATION
POLICY
LEGAL
ASPECTS
TECHNICAL
STANDARDS
QUALITY
STANDARDS

9. Quality
Requirements:
• be run by a legal entity, such as a sustainable
institution (e.g. library, university)
• clarify access conditions to the data and repository as
well as the terms of use
• have focus on research data

10. Workflow

11. simple
search
box
filters
results
icons

16. RDR Typology
• Institutional
• Disciplinary
• Multidisciplinary
• Project

17. RDR indexed by re3data
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Aug-12
Sep-12
Oct-12
Nov-12
Dec-12
Jan-13
Feb-13
Mar-13
Apr-13
May-13
Jun-13
Jul-13
Aug-13
Sep-13
Oct-13
Nov-13
Dec-13
Jan-14
Feb-14
Mar-14
Apr-14
May-14
Jun-14
Jul-14
Aug-14
Sep-14
Oct-14
Nov-14
Dec-14
Jan-15
Feb-15
Mar-15
Apr-15
Indexed Research
Data Repositories

18. RDR by Country
48%
15%
13%
5%
4%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2% 2%
1%
US
GER
UK
CAN
FRAN
JPN
AUS
CH
IND
NED
CHN
DEN

19. Icons and numbers
From a total of 1260 RDR in re3data (June 2015)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Certification Open Access Persistent Id All Aspects

20. Champions by discipline
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
HSS Life Sciences Natural Sciences Engineering
From a total of 88 RDR (June 2015)

21. Integration of re3data in Guidelines
• Funder Example: European Commission
http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_en.pdf
• Institutional Example: Bielefeld University
• „Verzeichnisse, wie das DFG-geförderte "Registry of Research Data Repositories",
bilden die Grundlage für die Suche nach geeigneten Publikationsorten für die
Forschungsdaten. “
Universität Bielefeld (2011): Resolution zum Forschungsdatenmanagement. https://data.uni-bielefeld.de/de/resolution
• Publisher Example: Nature Publishing Group
• „Physics, astrophysics, astronomy and geoscience databases should be registered
with re3data.org.“
Scientific Data (2013): Data policies. http://www.nature.com/sdata/data-policies

22. Cooperation
• Deutsche Initiative für Netzwerkinformation (DINI)
• DataCite (MoU, April 2012)
• OpenAIRE (MoU, October 2013)
• BioSharing (MoU, November 2013)
• Databib (MoU, March 2014)
• DataCite (Formal cooperation, March 2015)

23. Dimensions of sustainability
TECHNICAL
LEGALFINANCIAL
ORGANISATIONAL

24. Organizational sustainability
• Merger with DataBib under the auspices of DataCite
• re3data.org working group within DataCite
• International Editorial Board
• Cooperations within Research
Data Alliance (RDA) and the
research data repository community
• Community building and feedback loops during RFC
phases (e.g. re3data.org schema)

25. Technical sustainability
• Open interfaces
• RESTful API
• OpenSearch
• Documentation: http://www.re3data.org/api/doc
• Used e.g. by OpenAIRE
• Open metadata
• Documentation: http://www.re3data.org/schema/
• Long-term hosting commitment by KIT

26. Legal sustainability
• Open licenses
• CC BY for the website
• CC 0 for metadata

27. Financial sustainability
• Technical maintenance financed by DataCite from 2016
• Further development managed by DataCite
• Further project funding

28. Thanks to the team
• Michael Witt
Purdue University, Distributed Data Curation Center (D2C2)
• Roland Bertelmann, Claudio Fuchs, Heinz Pampel
GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Library and
Information Services (LIS)
• Maxi Kindling, Jessica Rücknagel, Peter Schirmbacher,
Paul Vierkant
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin School of Library and
Information Science (BLIS)
• Hans-Jürgen Goebelbecker, Gabriele Kloska, Evelyn Reuter,
Edeltraud Schnepf, Angelika Semrau, Michael Skarupianski,
Robert Ulrich
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), KIT Library

29. info@re3data.org
http://re3data.org
With the exception of all photos and graphics, this slides are licensed under
the “Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)“ Licence:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/