Report on Knowledge Exchange workshop Price of keeping knowledge: financial streams for digital preservation

In contrast to cost modeling activities, the pricing of services must be simple and transparent. Calculating and thus knowing price structures, would not only help identify the level of detail required for cost modeling of individual instititutions, but also help develop a ”public” market for services as well as clarify the division of task and the modeling of funding and revenue streams for data preservation of public institutions. This workshop has built on the results from the workshop ”The Costs and Benefits of Keeping Knowledge” which took place 11 June 2012 in Copenhagen. This expert workshop aimed at: •Identifying ways for data repositories to abstract from their complicated cost structures and arrive at one transparent pricing structure which can be aligned with available and plausible funding schemes. Those repositories will probably need a stable institutional funding stream for data management and preservation. Are there any estimates for this, absolute or as percentage of overall cost? Part of the revenue will probably have to come through data management fees upon ingest. How could that be priced? Per dataset, per GB or as a percentage of research cost? Will it be necessary to charge access prices, as they contradict the open science paradigm? •What are the price components for pricing individual services, which prices are currently being paid e.g. to commercial providers? What are the description and conditions of the service(s) delivered and guaranteed? •What types of risks are inherent in these pricing schemes? •How can services and prices be defined in an all-inclusive and simple manner, so as to enable researchers to apply for specific amount when asking for funding of data-intensive projects?Please

Report on Knowledge Exchange workshop Cost models for keeping knowledge: economic models for digital preservation

Organised by Knowledge Exchange & the Nordbib programme 11 June 2012, 8:30-12:30, Copenhagen Adjacent to the Nordbib conference 'Structural frameworks for open, digital research' Participants in break out discussion during the workshop on cost modelsThe Knowledge Exchange and the Nordbib programme organised a workshop on cost models for the preservation and management of digital collections. The rapid growth of the digital information which a wide range of institutions must preserve emphasizes the need for robust cost modelling. Such models should enable these institutions to assess both what resources are needed to sustain their digital preservation activities and allow comparisons of different preservation solutions in order to select the most cost-efficient alternative. In order to justify the costs institutions also need to describe the expected benefits of preserving digital information. This workshop provided an overview of existing models and demonstrated the functionality of some of the current cost tools. It considered the specific economic challenges with regard to the preservation of research data and addressed the benefits of investing in the preservation of digital information. Finally, the workshop discussed international collaboration on cost models. The aim of the workshop was to facilitate understanding of the economies of data preservation and to discuss the value of developing an international benchmarking model for the costs and benefits of digital preservation. The workshop took place in the Danish Agency for Culture and was planned directly prior to the Nordbib conference 'Structural frameworks for open, digital research'

Knowledge Exchange study: How Research Tools are of Value to Research: Use Cases and Recommendations

Research tools that are freely available and accessible via the Internet cover an emergent field in the worldwide research infrastructure. Clearly, research tools have increasing value for researchers in their research activities. Knowledge Exchange recently commissioned a project to explore use case studies to show research tools’ potential and relevance for the present research landscape. Makers of successful research tools have been asked questions such as: How are these research tools developed? What are their possibilities? How many researchers use them? What does this new phenomenon mean for the research infrastructure? Additional to the Use Cases, the authors offer observations and recommendations to contribute to effective development of a research infrastructure that can optimally benefit from research tools. the Use Cases are: •Averroes Goes Digital: Transformation, Translation, Transmission and Edition •BRIDGE: Tools for Media Studies Researchers •Multiple Researchers, Single Platform: A Virtual Tool for the 21st Century •The Fabric of Life •Games with A Purpose: How Games Are Turning Image Tagging into Child’s Play •Elmer: Modelling a Future •Molecular Modelling With SOMA2 •An Online Renaissance for Music: Making Early Modern Music Readable •Radio Recordings for Research: How A Million Hours of Danish Broadcasts Were Made Accessible •Salt Rot: A Central Space for Essential Research •Cosmos: Opening Up Social Media for Social Science A brief analysis by the authors can be found: •Some Observations Based on the Case Studies of Research Tools

Knowledge Exchange meeting on Research tools

Knowledge Exchange investigated the diversity and complexity of research tools, techniques and researchers' behaviours to identify how and where the initiative can eliminate barriers to cooperation between different parts of the whole system. Experts from the partner organisations and beyond exchanged knowledge and experiences, during our meeting on Research Tools which took place on 27 June 2012, in Utrecht, the Netherlands. Experts considered ‘the use of digital technologies in research' or ‘digital research tools' with a view to informing future Knowledge Exchange activities.

IPR POLICY AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE REPORT FOR SCIENTIFIC POLICY MAKERS

The report provides recommendations to policy makers in science and scholarly research regarding IPR policy to increase the impact of research and make the outcomes more available. The report argues that the impact of publicly-funded research outputs can be increased through a fairer balance between private and public interest in copyright legislation. This will allow for wider access to and easier re-use of published research reports. The common practice of authors being required to assign all rights to a publisher restricts the impact of research outputs and should be replaced by wider use of a non-exclusive licence. Full access and re-use rights to research data should be encouraged through use of a research-friendly licence.

KE Workshop report: Report Knowledge Exchange workshop Making data count - Research Data and Research Assessment

The possibilities of digital research have altered the production, publication and use of research results. Academic research practice and culture are changing or have already been transformed, but to a large degree the system of academic recognition has not yet adapted to the practices and possibilities of digital research. This applies especially to research data, which are increasingly produced, managed, published and archived, but play hardly a role yet in practices of research assessment. The aim of the workshop was to bring experts and stakeholders from research institutions, universities, scholarly societies and funding agencies together in order to review, discuss and build on possibilities to implement the culture of sharing and to integrate publication of data into research assessment procedures. The report 'The Value of Research Data - Metrics for datasets from a cultural and technical point of view' was presented and discussed. Some of the key finding were that data sharing should be considered normal research practice, in fact not sharing should be considered malpractice. Research funders and universities should support and encourage data sharing. There are a number of important aspects to consider when making data count in research and evaluation procedures. Metrics are a necessary tool in monitoring the sharing of data sets. However, data metrics are at present not very well developed and there is not yet enough experience in what these metrics actually mean. It is important to implement the culture of sharing through codes of conducts in the scientific communities. For further key findings please read the report.

Knowledge Exchange Institutional Repository Workshop

The workshop took place on 16-17 January in Utrecht, with Seventy experts from eight European countries in attendance. The workshop was structured in six sessions: usage statistics research paper metadata exchanging information author identification Open Archives Initiative eTheses Following the workshop, the discussion groups were asked to continue their collaboration and to produce a report for circulation to all participants. The results can be downloaded below. The recommendations contained in the reports above have been reviewed by the Knowledge Exchange partner organisations and formed the basis for new proposals and the next steps in Knowledge Exchange work with institutional repositories. Institutional Repository Workshop - Next steps During April and May 2007 Knowledge Exchange had expert reviewers from the partner organisations go though the workshop strand reports and make their recommendations about the best way to move forward, to set priorities, and find possibilities for furthering the institutional repository cause. The KE partner representatives reviewed the reviews and consulted with their partner organisation management to get an indication of support and funding for the latest ideas and proposals, as follows: Pragmatic interoperability During a review meeting at JISC offices in London on 31 May, the expert reviewers and the KE partner representatives agreed that ‘pragmatic interoperability' is the primary area of interest. It was also agreed that the most relevant and beneficial choice for a Knowledge Exchange approach would be to aim for CRIS-OAR interoperability as a step towards integrated services. Within this context, interlinked joint projects could be undertaken by the partner organisations regarding the areas that most interested them. Interlinked projects The proposed Knowledge Exchange activities involve interlinked joint projects on metadata, persistent author identifiers, and eTheses which are intended to connect to and build on projects such as ISPI, Jisc NAMES and the Digital Author Identifier (DAI) developed by SURF. It is important to stress that the projects are not intended to overlap, but rather to supplement the DRIVER 2 (EU project) approaches. Focus on CRIS and OAR It is believed that the focus on practical interoperability between Current Research Information Systems and Open Access Repository systems will be of genuine benefit to research scientists, research administrators and librarian communities in the Knowledge Exchange countries; accommodating the specific needs of each group. Timing June 2007: Write the draft proposal by KE Working Group members July 2007: Final proposal to be sent to partner organisations by KE Group August 2007: Decision by Knowledge Exchange partner organisations.

Study into licences used by Open Access journals

The Knowledge Exchange Licensing Expert Group has commissioned a study which examined which licences or licence provisions are being used by open access and hybrid publishers when making their publications available in open access. The study intended to identify a ‘best practice’ licence model framework and to formulate recommendations with respect to an OA licence structure, taking into account the commercial and non-commercial needs of authors as well as the publishers. The study was undertaken by Maverick Outsource Services Ltd. This led to the following recommendations for an optimum licence in an open access journal: The author retains copyright; The author or rightholder grants to all users a free, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual right of access to the work, and besides a licence to copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works in any digital medium for any reasonable purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship; A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials is deposited immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository. This includes the permission as stated under 2, in a suitable standard electronic format; The copyright holder can retain the right to restrict commercial use if they wish; The copyright holder provides the publisher with permission to publish, subject to open accessibility of the work in online published form.