Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Data management practises
• In Finland there is no central national data centre.
• The data is stored at the research institutes and universities which are doing research there: Finnish Meteorological Institute, Finnish Geodetic Institute, Geological Survey of Finland, University of Helsinki: Dept. of Geophysics, Dept. of Geology and Institute of Seismology, University of Oulu and University of Lapland
Antarctic research in Finland
• The funding for the Antarctic research comes through the Academy of Finland funded by the Ministry of Education and Culture.
• The current period 2013-2016 (2.5 millon € for research, funding for logistics comes is separate from this).
• During last season three scientific research gruops did fieldwork at the Antarctica.
Research projects during 2013-2016
Atmospheric Composition and Processes relevant to climate change in Antarctica (ACPANT), University of Helsinki
Variation of Antarctic sea ice thickness and its effect on the load level of ice navigating, AALTO University, Meteorological Institute
Cosmic Rays in Polar Atmosphere (CRIPA), University of Oulu
Antarctic Meteorology and its Interaction with the Cryosphere and Ocean (AMICO), Finnish Meteorological Institute
Atmospheric Composition and Processes relevant to climate change in Antarctica (ACPANT), Finnish Meteorological Institute
Metadata holdings
• number of records: 44
• number of distinct metadata providers: 25
• known gaps in the holdings: -
• existing important metadatasets not available through the GCMD: no information on these
Data holdings
• are the metadata records linked to actual data? No - data is delivered according to requests
• which data types are made available?
• How many datasets badged for the Polar Information Commons? None
• Are there issues with badging the data (CC0 and CC-BY)? None
Funding situation
• core funding and source: core funding for managing the data is in the budget of the institutes doing Antarctic research. Finnish Meteorological Institute is funding Arctic Centre with a small sum to participate in the work of SCADM and to be the contact to researchers/institutes to have DIFs.
• own resources invested (monetary; in kind; FTE): some in kind resources from the Arctic Centre
• What do you see as your scope? To ensure that the Antarctic data and metadata collected by Finnish researchers is well managed according to recommendations by SCAR/SCADM. Also to increase knowledge of the importance of proper data management and give support and tools for sharing data.
Problems encountered
• Financial: universities lack consistent data management policies and resources for that.
• Technical: sharing Antarctic data from large closed institutional databases is problematic.
• Political: institutions holding Antarctic data do not have much interests in investing resources to share data
• Role of funding agencies: nowadays they demand a data management plan including sharing and long-term preservation plans.
• Possible role of SCADM/SCAR/ATCM/National Committees?
Technical
• Take-up of GCMD: generally well received among researchers
• GCMD API: has not been applied
• Priorities to extend DIF format? No priorities to this
Highlights of recent developments
• Data storage infrastructure for universities improved significantly by a new service provided by CSC – IT Center for Science.
• Important for the universities
Recent developments
More information
• www.antarctica.fi
• gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/KeywordSearch/Home.do?Portal=amd_fi
Thank You!
