1 / 25

Policy and Strategy – a UK research funders perspective

Policy and Strategy – a UK research funders perspective. Curating our Digital Scientific Heritage: a Global Collaborative Challenge 11-13 December 2007 Drs. Astrid Wissenburg Director Communications and Information Economic and Social Research Council RCUK lead on open access

rsegal
Download Presentation

Policy and Strategy – a UK research funders perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Policy and Strategy – a UK research funders perspective Curating our Digital Scientific Heritage: a Global Collaborative Challenge 11-13 December 2007 Drs. Astrid Wissenburg Director Communications and InformationEconomic and Social Research Council RCUK lead on open access astrid.wissenburg@esrc.ac.uk www.rcuk.ac.uk/access

  2. Overview • Setting the scene - UK research funders landscape • Drivers for research funders • Challenges and opportunities for research funders

  3. Public research funding in the UK – dual support system • “quality-related” (QR) research funding from funding councils • Money distributed based on Research Assessment Exercise (peer review) / Research Evaluation Framework (metrics and peer review, 2010 onwards) to universities • Along side funding for teaching and knowledge transfer • science budget to the UK research councils (and others), which in turn distributes to researchers • in universities through competitions for specific research projects or programmes • directly to some research councils institutes

  4. Public research funding in the UK – dual support system UK public research funding (in £M)

  5. Research Councils UK • Strategic partnership of 7 research councils • Arts & Humanities RC • Biotechnology & Biological Sciences RC • Engineering & Physical Sciences RC • Economic & Social RC • Medical RC • Natural Environment RC • Science and Technology Facilities Council(merger of Central Laboratory of the Research Councils, and Particle Physics & Astronomy RC) • Operates through working groups • including the Research Outputs Group (ROG)

  6. Drivers for research councils • Value for money and generating impact: RC’s fund research which needs to be communicated and exploited through all its outputs, including data • Ensuring the health of the science base, which includes high-quality infrastructure to support research with no major access barriers, including to data • Exploiting the potential of technological developments, such as e-science • Stakeholder expectations and activities of other research funders

  7. Challenges • Coordination between 7 independent research councils and with other key stakeholders • Reflect appropriately the disciplinary differences in the academic communities with regard to ‘curation of digital scientific heritage’

  8. Coordination between research councils - differences • In size: both in terms of funding and academic communities • Affects the influence of funders over curation • In organisational culture and role within the academic community • Affects the desired role of funders with regard to curation • In funding models • Affects the control of funders curation • In research and user communities • Affects the origin and use of research outputs and inputs

  9. Opportunities • Strategy and policy coordination • at high level on common principles • differences in detailed policies • Supporting interdisciplinary research and associated research outputs and inputs • Learning across organisations

  10. RCUK open access principles • Ideas and knowledge derived from publicly-funded research must be made available and accessible for public use, interrogation and scrutiny as widely, rapidly and effectively as practicable • Effective mechanisms must be in place to ensure that published research outputs are subject to rigorous quality assurance, through peer review • The models and mechanisms for publication and access to research results must be both efficient and cost-effective in the use of public funds • The outputs from current and future research must be preserved and remain accessible not only for the next few years but for future generations

  11. Two examples • …EPSRC does not overly intervene in the research dissemination process and has no formal policy in this area. It encourages investigators to manage primary data as the basis for publications securely and for an appropriate time in a durable form under the control of the institution of their origin. …

  12. Two examples • …The ESRC’s formal Data Policy requires that all applicants for ESRC funding carry out a data review to ensure funds are not requested for data that are already available and all data generated as a result of ESRC funding must be offered to the UK Data Archive within 3 months of an ESRC award… • …Through its support for the work of the UK Data Forum and the development of a National Strategy for Data Resources for Social Research, the ESRC is seeking to work with other key stakeholders to provide a coherent framework for the development and maintenance of a robust data infrastructure, ensuring that relevant and timely data are available to inform and address future research priorities for both government and academic needs. …

  13. Coordination of a complex landscape • National requirements described in Developing the UK’s e-infrastructure for science and innovation • But requires coordination and clear roles and responsibilities across many partners, including research funders, service providers (such as repositories for research outputs) and the academic communities

  14. Disciplinary differences • What is ‘digital scientific heritage’, eg in terms of type and origin • Requires different methods and standards for curation • Requires different partnerships to ensure curation

  15. NERC Earth Observation DataAcquisition and Analysis Service

  16. Moving Here: 200 years of migration in England

  17. Disciplinary differences • What is ‘digital scientific heritage’, eg in terms of type and origin • Requires different methods and standards for curation • Requires different partnerships to ensure curation • Methodological differences • Affects how data is created • variation in governance requirements and access conditions • Longevity of information/knowledge affects methods of curation

  18. Data and Tissues Tool Kit : http://www.dt-toolkit.ac.uk

  19. Disciplinary differences • What is ‘digital scientific heritage’, eg in terms of type and origin • Requires different methods and standards for curation • Requires different partnerships to ensure curation • Methodological differences • Affects how data is created • variation in governance requirements and access conditions • Longevity of information/knowledge affects methods of curation • Cultural differences, eg in terms of traditions of data sharing • Difference in existing infrastructure for curation

  20. Opportunities • Learning across communities: • Integrated approach to use and exploitation of different types of ‘scientific heritage’ eg • Integration of data and publications • Citation and use of data sets • Exploitation within context of e-science / e-research developments • Experimentation with different curation models eg subject based repositories versus institutional repositories; data repositories versus research repositories • Supporting interdisciplinary research

More Related