|
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 |
|
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 |
|
Houghton, J., & Gruen N.
(2014). Open Research Data Report.
Report to the Australian National Data Service (ANDS). |
Estimated the value and benefits to Australia of making publicly-funded research data freely available; examined the role and contribution of data repositories and associated infrastructure; explored the policy settings required to optimize research data sharing, and thereby increase the return on public investment in research |
Used and modified Solow-Swan model and extrapolated from results of other studies, primarily in the UK, to estimate the implied value of increased access to Australian public research data |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
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 |
|
Kroll, S., & Forsman R.
(2010). A Slice of Research Life: Information Support for Research in the United States.
|
Investigated use of tools and services that support of all stages of the research life cycle in institutions of higher education in the U.S. |
Conducted a literature review and interviews with researchers, research assistants, graduate students, grant and other research administration specialists, and university administrators at four prominent US research institutions |
Measurement, Wider |
|
Manyika, J., Byers A. Hung, Chui M., Brown B., Bughin J., Dobbs R., et al.
(2011). Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity.
156. |
Examined the potential value that big data can create for organizations and sectors of the economy; sought to illustrate and quantify that value; explored what leaders of organizations and policy makers need to do to capture it; investigated amount of data stored by enterprises and consumers in 2010 |
Examined types and amounts of data generated, compute resources, and trends that will drive data growth in different sectors and regions throughout the world; examined the impact of IT on labor productivity, techniques and technologies for analyzing big data, and the transformative potential of big data in terms of efficiency, productivity, trust, profit, and other factors in five domains: Healthcare, Public Sector, Retail, Manufacturing, and Telecommunications; also examined the changes necessary (investments, incentives, skills development, policy development and others) to attain these benefits; specific methodologies to gather supporting data are listed in the paper |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
Manyika, J., Chui M., Groves P., Farrell D., Van Kuiken S., Doshi E. Almasi, et al.
(2013). Open data: Unlocking innovation and performance with liquid information.
103. |
Identified ways open data can create economic value in terms of revenue and savings and economic surplus (e.g., time savings that commuters gain when they avoid congestion); estimated potential annual value that use of open data could bring in seven domains: education, transportation, consumer products, electric power, oil and gas, health care, and consumer finance |
Quantified (in monetary terms) the potential value of using open data in seven “domains” of the global economy: education, transportation, consumer products, electricity, oil and gas, health care, and consumer finance; identified “levers” through which open data can create economic value and explored the barriers to adoption and “enablers” for capturing value by making data more open; provided examples of uses of open data that have a significant impact |
Measurement, Metrics, Targeted |
|
Sunlight Foundation, & Keserű J.
(2015). We're still looking for open data social impact stories!.
Sunlight Foundation. |
Built a list of examples of how open data and transparency projects are having an impact on society |
Gathered approximately 150 stories through an open Google spreadsheet. |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
Berman, F., Lavoie B., Ayris P., G. Choudhury S., Cohen E., Courant P. N., et al.
(2008). Sustaining the Digital Investment: Issues and Challenges of Economically Sustainable Digital Preservation.
72. |
"To sample and understand best and current practices for digital preservation and access, and to begin to synthesize major themes and identify systemic challenges." Focused on two questions: How much does it cost? and Who should pay? |
Conducted a literature review and invited 16 speakers "representing a variety of domains and areas of expertise" to address five questions: 1) What is the nature of the materials being preserved; 2) Who are the stakeholders for these materials?; 3) What is the "value proposition" for this preservation effort?; 4) What are the key features of long-term preservation for these materials?; 5) What are the "economic aspects" of digital preservation? |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
Turner, V., Reinsel D., Gantz J. F., & Minton S.
(2014). The Digital Universe of Opportunities: Rich Data and the Increasing Value of the Internet of Things.
|
Investigated size and rate of expansion of the digital universe worldwide in 2013; investigated business opportunities to use data in new ways and extract value from the digital universe |
Analyzed 60 streams of data comprising the digital universe (11 streams were added to the 49 in the 2007 study); analyzed ways in particular that the Internet of Things is creating business opportunities; developed 5 criteria to identify “target rich” or valuable data in the digital universe; identified information technology prerequisites to being able to take advantage of the value of data; identified business steps enterprises must take to leverage data value |
Measurement, Metrics, Targeted |
|
Vickery, G.
(2011). Review of Recent Studies on PSI Re-use and Related Market Developments.
|
Investigated the value of Public Sector Information (PSI) reuse in Europe |
Conducted a review of the findings of studies on PSI reuse and assess and changes or development since 2006 |
Measurement, Targeted |
|
Finn, R., Wadhwa K., Taylor M. J., Sveinsdottir T., Noorman M., & Sondervan J.
(2014). Legal and ethical barriers and good practice solutions.
|
Identify legal and ethical issues relevant to open access to research data in Europe, identify examples that illuminate these issues, and identify potential solutions currently being used to address these issues |
Conducted a literature review, five disciplinary case studies, and a validation workshop |
Measurement, Wider |
|
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 |
|
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 |
