Access to Digital Research Data from Public Funding:

towards Principles and Guidelines from OECD 

 Peter Schröder

Ministry of Education, Culture and Science -The Netherlands

ASIDE:

The unbearable lightness of IPR policy making and legislation?

Policy making and legislation: Trying to cope with powerful natural and social processes

A balancing act of governments, somewhere between:

• Active steering and

• Passive codification of real life

Policy making and legislation: Trying to cope with powerful natural and social processes

A balancing act of governments, somewhere between:

• Protecting vested interests and

• Promoting innovation

Example:Protecting The Netherlands

located below sea level

- Traditional reactive measures: physical coercion against waves by dykes

- Looking for active alternatives: developing a mix of advice, incentives and new rules to be adopted by waves.

Experiment: Ruling the waves

Wave motion & Information Revolution

The effectiveness of the US DMCA and the EU Database Directive regimes on the newly emerging Information relations

comparable toThe effectiveness of the innovative wave

motion measures on the raising see level ?

Access to Digital Research Data from Public Funding:

towards Principles and Guidelines from OECD 

WhatWhyWhenWhereWhom ?

Reports from US National Research Council:

• Bits of Power (1997)

• A Question of Balance (1999)

• The Digital Dilemma (2000)

Principles and Guidelines from National Institutes of

Health

• Sharing of Research Tools (2001)• Sharing of Research Data (2003)

14 March 2000Clinton-Blair statement

To realize the full promise of genome research, raw

fundamental data on the human genome, including the human

DNA sequence and its variations, should be made freely available to

scientists everywhere.

December 2000 Amsterdam:Global Research Village

Conference

Busquin (EC Commisioner Research)

Johnston (OECD Secretary General)

Haank (Elsevier)

Bajcsy (NSF)

Van Duinen (ESF)

Drenth (Allea)

December 2000 Amsterdam:Global Research Village

Conference

Limits on access to:

Network infrastructures

Electronic publications

Digital research data

b

What was wrong?

Inaccessibility of digital research data

Digital research data:

digitised factual records used as sources in scientific research

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

Human resources + facilities (instruments) processing Data into Information and

Knowledge

Yesterday’s scientists studied nature

Today’s scientists study digital data

Inaccessibility of digital data

Background

• Use of ICT has raised capacity of digital data processing

- Spectacular growth of demand & supply of digital data

- Friction in institutional framework • (problems of upscaling; pressures to

redesign research?)

December 2000 Amsterdam:Global Research Village

Conference

Conference Recommendations:CSTP, in accordance with ESF, NSF and

CODATA, :

Establish international guidelines for access to publicly funded research data

March 2001 CSTP Working Group

Co-chaired by

Peter Arzberger (University of San Diego)

and Peter Schröder (OcenW)

(membership from SF, Can, DK, PL)

Participation from ESF and CODATA

Policy Studies

NIWI Studies 1.

Quick Scan of US legislation and Regulation

Mini Survey among ESF members, and funding agencies in Canada, Australia and Japan

June 2002 Outcome NIWI Studies 1

1. DataAccess recognised as a major issue in science policy among ESF members

2. US Legislation and regulation decisive in US access (FOIA, BAYH-Dole Act)

In what fields of research?

1 Scientific research in general

2 Specific areas

- Life sciences

- Health sciences

- Atmospheric sciences

- Social sciences

October 2002:

Final Arzberger Report submitted at CSTP October meeting

Unnecessary Obstacles

Bottom line:flaws in data access causing:

• Diminishing return on scientific and social investments

• Insufficiencies in- Stewardship of public knowledge- Value chain of innovation- Creation of value from international

scientific co-operation

Within the science system: Technical and procedural

complications

• Interoperability (technical, methodological standards)

• Cost distribution (business models, avoiding free riding)

• Legal complications (privacy, national security, IPR)

(Within the science system)

Policy and management complications

• Upscaling and rising cost of research • Organisational problems • Rules on funding • Cultural problems • Attitudes towards sharing in the

communities, the profession• Monopolies as a result of

(lack of) funding rules

Socio-political (value chain) complications

• Aspects of public good vs. proprietary knowledge?- Open research / commercial

excludability- Network economy,

property/access- Commercial monopolies

Who should act? (1)

• Actors responsible for science policy and innovation

• Inter governmental organisations (UN, OECD)

• National governments

Who should act ? (2)

• Actors responsible for the allocation of public research funds

• Research funding organisations

• Research institutes, universities

- Regulation on funding

Who should act? (3)

• Actors responsible for the scientific norms and values

• Professional scientific organisations• Research communities

- Professional ethics- Co-operative arrangements- Disciplinary standards- Scientific methods and techniques

Towards What? Data Access Regimes

• An appropriate mix of incentives in policy making and research management conducive to additional

- Advisory support

- Funding conditions (grants etc.)

- Investment in durable infrastructural facilities

Principles for Data Access Regimes

• Core Principle:

OPEN ACCESS

• Publicly funded research data should be openly availbale to society subject only to legitimate restrictions

Open Access

General Principles to establish specific Data Access Regimes

1.I. Transparency

Systematic visibility and traceability of data

II. Legal conformity

Lawful use, respecting National Security, Privacy and Trade Secrets

III Formal Responsibility

Explicit institutional rules on data management

General Principles to establish specific Data Access Regimes

2.IV. Professionalism

Building on the values and standards of the communities

V. Respecting Intellectual Property

Arranging IPR to realise Open Access

VI. Interoperability

Meeting technical requirements for multiple use

General Principles to establish specific Data Access Regimes

3VII. Quality

Explicit control of data quality in terms of Autheticity, Integrity and Security of data

VIII. Efficiency

Promoting cost effectiveness in data management and support servives

IX. Accountability

Rendering public account for the performance of data access regimes.

Risks?(when not acting)

1 Inefficiencies in the research production- Unnecessary duplication as well as scarcity

of resources

2 Loss of quality- Insufficient validation- Unnecessary limits in scope and depth- Barriers to multidisciplinary co-operation

October 2002:CSTP Drafting Group

- CSTP assigns Drafting Group to prepare the access issues for the Ministerial in

2004- Group chaired by (NL) Broesterhuizen,

with membership from US, UK, F, D, Jap, B, S, Can, Aus, SA, P.

NIWI Studies 2

Case studies:

CERN

EMBL

Neuroinformatics

Biodiversity

2003

February - Global Science Forum workshop Tokyo

March – NIWI Studies 2.March - Draft Principles at CSTP March

meeting May – MERIT/NWO Expert Meeting Data

EconomiesSeptember- Final draft Guidelines

2003-2004

Drafting Group:

Consensus Engineering in formulating Principles and Guidelines

Balancing general guidelines with contextual specifics

Balancing legislation with self regulation

Proposal for Ministerial Declaration

Example 2:governing sunset

• Another interesting regulatory experiment:

• Governmental control over the time of sunset

Sunset Control