fsd@uta.fi fsd.uta.fi

1. Sami Borg and Helena Laaksonen :Acquisition policies for a new data archiveIASSIST2005Edinburgh, May 2005 www.fsd.uta.fi fsd@uta.fihttp://www.fsd.uta.fi

2. Facts about FSD and the Finnish setting • FSD was established in 1999, at that time the number of permanent staff members was 10 • Most Finnish social scientists work at about 10 different universities, financed by the state • A great number of surveys are collected by projects and by organizations outside the academia (so-called sector research organizations, also the third sector share is important) • Popularity of quantitative research methods varies a lot by university and by discipline

3. Background • Appropriate acquisition policies support data sharing and open access to research data • What we should achieve are better research and science ethics, better quality of research and learning, and more efficient use of public funding • Acquisition policies and archival development must be adjusted to the mandate, mission, and resources of the archive, and to its operational environment • FSD has strong national mandate in national data archiving, but… • National culture for data sharing is weak

4. Developments in scope and coverage • In the beginning FSD’s focus was primarily on archiving quantitative social science data, mainly national and international surveys • Acquisition of qualitative data started some years ago, it needs more time and support • Now we are also trying to acquire more data from educational sciences and health sciences • Setting documentation levels to different types of data is in process

5. Criteria for evaluating data sets and deciding what to archive 1 • FSD has more or less the same criteria for evaluation as, for instance, the UK Data Archive • Key evaluation criteria are linked to the scope, to sufficient legal conditions, and to the re-use potential of the data in research and teaching • Data depositors can (but luckily seldom do) set different types conditions on the use of their data, and depositing data is NOT mandatory • For the moment, the basic data services are free of charge for data providers and end-users (extra services, like sending printed material, are charged) • Only in very few cases FSD has paid the costs of preparing data for archival

6. Criteria for evaluating data sets and deciding what to archive 2 • Emphasis has mainly been on data with wide geographical coverage • Time series and panel data are of great interest, but very few panel data sets has been archived so far • The present collection includes about 600 data sets, fully documented with the DDI • Work load from updating data and metadata not yet that heavy • We still hope to see a rapid increase on the number of archived data sets • Basically have not yet been very selective in data evaluation, if formal requirements have been ok

7. Acquisition in practice in FSD Reality: • Researchers seldom contact us to archive their data • The archive must be active and persistent

8. From localisation to archiving 1 Three stages of acquisition: • Localisation • Contacting the researchers • Receiving the data & other related material

9. From localisation to archiving 2 Focal points in establishing contacts: • ”Ok, I’ll give you my research data” • Making it really happen

10. Identifying contemporary data Sources: • Academic journals • News media • E-mail lists • Online publication catalogues of universities • Web sites of research funding bodies

11. Detective work to preserve older data Sources: • Literature • Older issues of academic journals • Most important: contacts with experienced academics

12. Contacting potential depositors • Localisation everyone’s business • Establishing contacts, main responsibility: Director, Information Officer & Senior Research Fellow, a specialist on research ethics and qualitative research

13. Acquiring data is a tough job 1 Several contacts before receiving the data • in an easy case: 5 – 10 e-mails & phone calls • In a tough case: after 20 contacts, still waiting to get the data

14. Acquiring data is a tough job 2 • Biggest negotiation challengeto persuade an individual researcher • Established contacts may ease the acquisition process • Medium-sized organisations easier than large ones

15. Acquiring data is a tough job 3 • Recently collected datasets, with primary analyses made and published, easier to acquire • Moments for success:when researchers are approaching retirement age, or when they move office

16. Temporal coverage of FSD’s data holdings (31 Dec. 2004)

17. PR and information services • Part of acquisition: making the archive known • Promoting a new culture of data sharing within the research community • Appeal to researchers’ own interests

18. Support from the funding organisations in Europe 1 • In all but one country at minimum one funding body has at least a recommendation to deposit data for archiving • In five countries more than mere recommendations • Ways of controlling not effective enough (except in the UK)

19. Support from the funding organisations in Europe 2 • Only in the UK: research projects apply for money to prepare data for archiving in most cases • In five countries the researchers apply funds for this purpose almost never or never • In one country they sometimes apply • In one country they seldom apply • Seven of our informants estimated: funding would usually be given to the projects when applied for • In three countries they would usually not get the money

20. High pressure over data acquisition 2 Contact: Plan Time Visit Call E-mail Document 1 Locate: Identify Monitor Locate Consult experts Read Document 3 Reach agreement: Inform Negotiate Persuade Appeal Convince Sell Convert (Buy / Bribe) (Blackmail) Sign 4 Acquire data and docs: Wait Remind Help Contact Repeat Appeal Institutional support: Archival resources Research agreements Research guidelines Data sharing decisions Etc.