|
Beagrie, N., Houghton J., Palaiologk A., & Williams P.
(2012). Economic Evaluation of Research Data Infrastructure.
|
Investigated the economic benefits of investments of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) in the Economic and Social Data Service (ESDS), a service that promotes use of research data and teaching in social sciences to ensure data availability. |
Performed analysis of existing evaluation literature and reports, looking at both methods and findings; examined results of KRDS and other studies; examined management and internal data collected by ESRC and ESDS such as user statistics, internal reports, and the ESDS Mid-Term Review; performed semi-structured interviews, case studies, and an online survey of ESDS users and depositors |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
Beagrie, N., & Houghton J.
(2013). The Value and Impact of the Archaeology Data Service: A Study and Methods for Enhancing Sustainability.
|
Investigated and attempted to measure the value and impact of the Archaeology Data Service (ADS) |
Reviewed value and impact evaluation literature; analyzed ADS reports and documentation; conducted 15 interviews with ADS stakeholders; conducted 2 online surveys, one of ADS data depositors and one of ADS users
Note: This study and the similar study of the British Atmospheric Data Centre (Node 34) both use the same value metrics framework |
Measurement, Metrics, Targeted |
|
Beagrie, N., & Houghton J.
(2013). The Value and Impact of the British Atmospheric Data Centre.
|
Surveyed and analyzed perceptions of the value of the digital collections held by the British Atmospheric Data Centre (BADC), and quantified the value and impact of those collections for BADC’s user community using a range of economic approaches; investigated the extension of the methodology used in Beagrie et al. 2012 and Beagrie and Houghton 2013a to the BADC.
Note: The results of Beagrie et al. 2012, Beagrie and Houghton 2013a and Beagrie and Houghton 2013b were summarized and collated in Beagrie and Houghton 2014. |
Similar to Beagrie et al. 2012 and Beagrie and Houghton 2013, methods included a combination of literature and documentation review, review of reports from BADC, 13 interviews of BADC users and depositors, and two online surveys, one of BADC data depositors and one of BADC users.
Note: This study and the similar study of the Archaeology Data Service (Node 33) both use the same value metrics framework |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
Beagrie, N., Semple N., Williams P., & Wright R.
(2008). Digital Preservation Study Policies.
|
Studied digital preservation policies to provide a model for policy development in Higher and Further Education Institutions; analyzed the role that digital preservation can play in supporting and delivering key strategies for these institutions |
Examined preservation policies, case studies, strategies and resources from a variety of sources; examined a sample of policies for research, teaching, and learning, and other relevant digital preservation literature and resources |
Measurement, Metrics, Targeted |
|
Fry, J., Lockyer S.., Oppenheim C.., Houghton J.W.., & Rasmussen B..
(2008). Identifying benefits arising from the curation and open sharing of research data produced within UK Higher Education and research institutes: exploring costs and benefits.
|
Investigated the benefits of the curation and open sharing of research data and the development of a methodology and model for estimating the benefits of data curation and sharing in UK higher education |
Performed a literature review to provide illustrative examples of reuse and the views of stakeholders in various disciplines towards data curation and sharing; conducted two case studies to identify and illustrate benefits and costs in these areas |
Measurement, Metrics, Wider |
|
Kejser, U. Bøgvad, Johansen K. Hougaard E., Thirifays A., Nielsen A. Bo, Wang D., Strodl S., et al.
(2014). 4C Project: Evaluation of Cost Models and Needs & Gaps Analysis.
|
4C Project: Analyzed research related to the economics of digital curation and cost and benefit modelling; investigated how well current models and tools meet stakeholders’ needs for calculating and comparing financial information; pointed out gaps to be bridged to increase the uptake of cost & benefit modelling and practices that will enable costing and comparison of the costs of alternative scenarios |
Evaluated and compared ten current and emerging cost and benefit models; performed consultations (in the form of a questionnaire) with 4C project stakeholders; 296 contacts were made and 164 responded (55% response rate) |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
Sveinsdottir, T., Wessels B., Smallwood R., Linde P., Kala V., Tsoukala V., et al.
(2013). Stakeholder values and relationships within open access and data dissemination and preservation ecosystems.
|
Identify and map the diverse range of stakeholder values in Open Access data and data dissemination and preservation; map stakeholder values on to research ecosystems using case studies from different disciplinary perspectives; conduct a workshop to evaluate and identify good practice in addressing conflicting value chains and stakeholder fragmentation. This work was conducted within the EU FP7 funded project RECODE, which focuses on developing policy recommendations for Open Access to Research Data in Europe. |
Conducted desk research, case study interviews, and a validation workshop |
Measurement, Metrics, Wider |
|
Kaur, K., Darby R., Herterich P., Schmitt K., Schrimpf S., Tjalsma H., et al.
(2013). Report on Testing of Cost Models and Further Analysis of Cost Parameters.
|
Test existing cost models and cost/benefit analyses for digital preservation against real-world examples; analyzed cost models in relation to ISO 16363 to identify gap areas not covered by the models |
Tested the cost models with data that had already been collected (e.g., as part of the development of the DANS cost model) |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
Beagrie, N., & Houghton J.
(2012). Economic Impact Evaluation of the Economic and Social Data Service.
|
Sought to (i) evaluate the economic benefits and impact of ESDS; and (ii) contribute to the further development of impact evaluation methods that can provide ESRC with robust estimates of the economic benefits of its data service infrastructure investments |
Conducted (i) desk-based analysis of existing evaluation literature and reports, looking at both methods and findings; (ii) existing data from KRDS and other studies; (iii) existing management and internal data collected by ESRC and ESDS such as user statistics, internal reports, and the ESDS Mid-Term Review; and (iv) original data collection in the form of semi-structured interviews, case studies, and an online survey of ESDS users and depositors |
Measurement, Metrics, Targeted |
