研究问题：解决本土开放数据平台建设问题的措施

结论：

I am honoured to introduce this year's State of Open Data report.  Research data is the new currency in the research landscape.  This data, the building blocks on which publications are based, can now be made available for sharing and re-use as open data alongside the publication which references it.  As the LERU Open Science Roadmap1 makes clear, embracing open science requires a culture change in the way research is undertaken, shared, published, evaluated, rewarded and curated.  This change in the production and dissemination of research outputs represents a fundamental movement in the research landscape and the State of Open Data report is an important milestone in measuring progress along this road.

It has been a really important year for research data management in my own institution, University College London (UCL) in the UK.  In June this year,

we launched our Research Data Repository (RDR)2 using Figshare as the underlying infrastructure following a competitive tender.  UCL already had repositories for personal and sensitive data, and a storage service for data produced in the course of funded project work.  What was needed was a repository for the long-term curation of data, and this is what RDR provides.  The motivation was partly compliance with funder requirements, however UCL was keen to ensure that, where possible, research data should be as open as possible as this is good research practice.  RDR is also the repository UCL hopes can interact with the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC).3  The EOSC has been a slow starter in terms of developing rules of engagement for universities to adopt.  That needs to change if Europe is to develop its position as a world leader in research data management.

Fundamental to good research data management is the concept of FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) data.4  It is a challenge to introduce FAIR principles at individual researcher level in universities.  There is a need for co-ordinated skills development to train researchers in what is needed to deliver FAIR data and, indeed, in adopting open data as the norm.  Is there a need for a new profession of data curators who can take on this role for research groups?  This was the recommendation of the first High Level Expert Group on the EOSC, of which I was privileged to be a member.  Their report 5 stressed the need for hundreds of thousands of data experts to be trained by 2020, and for each Member State to have at least one certified institute to support the introduction of data management across disciplines.  2020 will soon be upon us, but this ambitious goal has not yet been reached.  The costs of such developments and the culture change needed to embed such practice at university level mean that it will not be delivered quickly.

Nonetheless, the opportunities presented by open data are enormous. The accumulated cost savings for the Member States in 2020 are forecast to equal 1.7 billion euros.6 The study which has produced this figure, Creating Value through Open Data, also looked at a number of case studies and found, for example, that applying open data in traffic can save 629 million hours of unnecessary waiting time on the road in the EU. Open data also has the potential of saving 1,425 lives a year (i.e. 5.5% of the European road fatalities).7

One of the key requirements of the change of culture needed to deliver open and FAIR data is a change in the university reward and incentive system. Current practice is focused on publications and, in many cases, the impact factor of the journals in which articles are published. There is little room for research data in this model. Professor Bernard Rentier and a Working Group of the European Commission have recently presented a report entitled Evaluation of Research Careers fully acknowledging Open Science Practices.8 This report identifies 23 rounded criteria for reward, of which datasets is one. No university in Europe has yet introduced this complete matrix, but UCL has already modified its academic promotions framework to acknowledge openness as a criterion for reward.9

Open data is a key component of open science, but cultural change needs to happen for open science to become the norm in research practice. The research community has started this journey and, with regular reports

on The State of Open Data, it is possible to measure the pace of this fundamental transition.

建议：

I am honoured to introduce this year's State of Open Data report.  Research data is the new currency in the research landscape.  This data, the building blocks on which publications are based, can now be made available for sharing and re-use as open data alongside the publication which references it.  As the LERU Open Science Roadmap1 makes clear, embracing open science requires a culture change in the way research is undertaken, shared, published, evaluated, rewarded and curated.  This change in the production and dissemination of research outputs represents a fundamental movement in the research landscape and the State of Open Data report is an important milestone in measuring progress along this road.

It has been a really important year for research data management in my own institution, University College London (UCL) in the UK.  In June this year,

we launched our Research Data Repository (RDR)2 using Figshare as the underlying infrastructure following a competitive tender.  UCL already had repositories for personal and sensitive data, and a storage service for data produced in the course of funded project work.  What was needed was a repository for the long-term curation of data, and this is what RDR provides.  The motivation was partly compliance with funder requirements, however UCL was keen to ensure that, where possible, research data should be as open as possible as this is good research practice.  RDR is also the repository UCL hopes can interact with the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC).3  The EOSC has been a slow starter in terms of developing rules of engagement for universities to adopt.  That needs to change if Europe is to develop its position as a world leader in research data management.

Fundamental to good research data management is the concept of FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) data.4  It is a challenge to introduce FAIR principles at individual researcher level in universities.  There is a need for co-ordinated skills development to train researchers in what is needed to deliver FAIR data and, indeed, in adopting open data as the norm.  Is there a need for a new profession of data curators who can take on this role for research groups?  This was the recommendation of the first High Level Expert Group on the EOSC, of which I was privileged to be a member.  Their report 5 stressed the need for hundreds of thousands of data experts to be trained by 2020, and for each Member State to have at least one certified institute to support the introduction of data management across disciplines.  2020 will soon be upon us, but this ambitious goal has not yet been reached.  The costs of such developments and the culture change needed to embed such practice at university level mean that it will not be delivered quickly.

Nonetheless, the opportunities presented by open data are enormous. The accumulated cost savings for the Member States in 2020 are forecast to equal 1.7 billion euros.6 The study which has produced this figure, Creating Value through Open Data, also looked at a number of case studies and found, for example, that applying open data in traffic can save 629 million hours of unnecessary waiting time on the road in the EU. Open data also has the potential of saving 1,425 lives a year (i.e. 5.5% of the European road fatalities).7

One of the key requirements of the change of culture needed to deliver open and FAIR data is a change in the university reward and incentive system. Current practice is focused on publications and, in many cases, the impact factor of the journals in which articles are published. There is little room for research data in this model. Professor Bernard Rentier and a Working Group of the European Commission have recently presented a report entitled Evaluation of Research Careers fully acknowledging Open Science Practices.8 This report identifies 23 rounded criteria for reward, of which datasets is one. No university in Europe has yet introduced this complete matrix, but UCL has already modified its academic promotions framework to acknowledge openness as a criterion for reward.9

Open data is a key component of open science, but cultural change needs to happen for open science to become the norm in research practice. The research community has started this journey and, with regular reports

on The State of Open Data, it is possible to measure the pace of this fundamental transition.