Matthew Scott – DANTE 24 February 2010 Matthew.Scott@dante

1. View on eResearch 2020 studyDraft report on “The Role of e-Infrastructures in the Creation of Global Virtual Research Communities” Matthew Scott – DANTE 24 February 2010 Matthew.Scott@dante.net

2. Overall assessment • Interesting and valuable investigation bringing key issues and challenges to the fore • As a representative of the ‘supply’ side of e-infrastructure, some issues and recommendations have particular resonance • Accessibility • Reliability • Affordability • Engagement with Users • Recommendations for Roadmap to ‘Research Revolution’ • Wide ranging assessment of challenges to be met

3. Accessibility • Digital divide issues have to be resolved • not just about equal opportunity but also the need to maximise research potential across Europe • Ease of use (Openness) • Complexity can be a barrier – interoperability is vital • Consistent user interface, Common access policies and Standardisation

4. Reliability • Technical • to be fit for purpose any infrastructure must have • High availability and Low contention - able to cope with both everyday and exceptional demands and • Be ‘always there’ • Financial • To be reliable financially there must be • a predictable and stable cost model matched with • reliable and sustainable long term financing rather than short term ‘project’ based financing • Investment plus opex issues • Even if financing solved at EU level, unless 100% EU financed, issue remains for short term CO-financing

5. Reliability • Stable Structural/governance structures are also vital • ERICs are a positive and proactive measure by EC that appear a reasonable way forward • need one or two ‘pathfinders’ to encourage others

6. Affordability • Common shared solutions will leverage Economies of scale • Common fully centrally funded resource or (partially) funded by users at point of use? Different solutions may be applicable • Extra costs of using e-infrastructures often not foreseen in early budgeting plans of users • Do the users assume it will be there and ‘free’ to use? • Are such costs not considered or understood enough?

7. Engagement • Many research disciplines are not fully aware of potential of e-infrastructures to enhance their research • ‘early adopters’ are seeing great advances in productivity • ‘late adopters’ havent realised the potential benefits • Observation of User Engagement teams seem a very good way to communicate with ‘User communities’ but • The proposition has to be coherent ie • Accessible, easy to use, reliable and affordable • Education and training will encourage novel research possibilities

8. Some clarifications needed • Measurability and Metrics • Data collection tools are there (‘webometrics’) • Easy to support principles but statistics can be misleading! • Can there be standard ones centrally defined or should they be determined by individual projects? • More work needed in this area to ensure metrics are really valuable • Public private partnerships mentioned • Still at early stage conceptually • Some modelling needed to show benefit • What are lessons learned at National levels? • Removal of Barriers to participation by Industrial Research partners: • Yes but how and who ( decides who) participates? • Make results available in public domain

9. Summary • “Just get the users and we will figure out how to demonstrate the value of e-infrastructures” (page 221 of report) • Users will demonstrate the value • Sustainability of funding with coordinated and longer term investments in e-infrastructures is necessary…. • Is this a high risk strategy or actually a pre-requisite to achieve the ‘Research revolution’?