|
Beagrie, N., Chruszcz J., & Lavoie B.
(2008). Keeping Research Data Safe: A Cost Model and Guidance for UK Universities.
|
Investigated the medium to long term costs to Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) of the preservation of research data and developed guidance on these issues, including a framework for determining costs |
Mapped the OAIS reference model against the LIFE cost model and NASA’s Cost Estimation Toolkit; evaluated transferable practice and relative strengths and weaknesses for each; aligned the resulting model with the TRAC model; researched literature on preservation costs and reports and documentation from UK data services and funders; conducted 12 interviews to supplement and validate researched information; conducted three case studies to validate the developed methodology and illustrate the variety of costs and community and service requirements for research data. |
Measurement, Metrics, Targeted |
|
Jerrome, N., & Breeze J.
(2009). Imperial College Data Audit Framework Implementation: Final Report.
|
To pilot the Digital Asset Framework Methodology; evaluate the scale and scope of research data; and make recommendations accordingly |
Used a modified form of the Digital Asset Framework in multiple departments: used the audit framework in a first phase of investigation, then conducted an online survey and follow up interviews. |
Measurement, Wider |
|
Pronk, T. E., Wiersma P. H., van Weerden A., & Schieving F.
(2015). A game theoretic analysis of research data sharing.
PeerJ. 3, |
Used a game theory model to investigate the costs and benefits of sharing data to researchers |
Created a model and ran simulations using different parameters to analyze implications for sharing in a variety of scenarios |
Measurement, Metrics, Targeted |
|
Noorman, M., Kalaitzi V., Angelaki M., Tsoukala V., Linde P., Sveinsdottir T., et al.
(2014). Institutional barriers and good practice solutions.
|
Investigated challenges faced by institutions, such as archives, libraries, universities, data centres and funding bodies, in making open access to research data possible. 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, Wider |
|
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 |
|
Dallmeier-Tiessen, S., Guercio M., Helin H., Herterich P., Kaur K., Lavasa A., et al.
(2014). Exemplar Good Governance Structures and Data Policies.
|
Investigated the level of preparedness for interoperable governance and data policies for different groups (memory institutions, universities and research institutions, funders and policy-makers) in Europe "and beyond" |
Performed desktop research and conducted an online survey |
Measurement, Targeted |
