What have we learned about how people share data?

1. What have we learned about how people share data? Kathy Brasier, Kirk Jalbert, Abby Kinchy, & Colleen Unroe Shale Network 2014 Workshop May 12-13, 2014

2. Agenda • How does cooperation in water quality monitoring happen? • Who is sharing data in the Shale Network? • What are motivations for sharing data? • What are barriers to sharing data? • Implications for future of Shale Network

3. Who is Sharing data in Shale network? • Groups: • Government entities • 11 volunteer groups • Researchers, university groups • NG consultants • School groups • 1,031,802 data values (observations) for 25,054 sites

4. Motivations for sharing data • Scientific motivations • Contribute to basic knowledge • Reproduce/verify results • Allow others to ask new questions • Ability to see broader trends, comparisons • Desire for improved management of natural resources • Share and analyze shared data can create greater impact than individual data series • Contribute to decision-making, policy, regulation • Contribute local knowledge to regional or state conversations • Data transparency; public accessibility • Become part of a broader community with similar interests

5. Barriers by sector

6. Barriers to Sharing Data By SEctor • Citizen Scientists • Lack of time, resources (volunteers, equipment, expertise) • Need for training, meeting standards of data quality • Differing motivations • Emphasis on “red flag” monitoring • Use for advocacy, local efforts • Desire to maintain independence • Past experience • Others don’t trust data; why bother? • Scientists unwilling to collaborate • Scientific jargon • Security of volunteers for future monitoring activities • Preservation of access points

7. Barriers to Sharing Data By SEctor • Academic Researchers • Professional reward systems • Value publishing primary data • Do not reward publishing data sets • Create fear of “being scooped” • Do not reward time spent on metadata • Competition for resources drives need to hold data, justify research program • Preference for own data management systems, models rather than shared • Openness to working with others, esp. citizen scientists • Fear of being viewed as activist

8. Barriers to Sharing Data By SEctor • Private Individuals/Homeowners • Privacy • Preservation of home values • Industry Researchers • Liability • Competition • Threat to revenue, future business opportunities • Government agencies • Broad scope of responsibilities • Lack of personnel, resources to make data useable, available • Computing limitations • Limits on public release (to maintain privacy)

9. Barriers to sharing data • Data and data sharing Issues: • Data quality, consistency • Differences in indicators chosen, protocols, definitions • Interpretation of “change” in parameters (differences across time, geology) • Lack of standardization and consistent metadata • Technical skills and computing systems to enter, share, manage data • Accessibility and usability of shared data • Is what is being monitored and shared the most important data? • What are implications of making data public? • Credibility of data, use in resource management • Confidentiality of volunteers, landowners, firms • Concerns about liability, property values • Potential for controversy

10. Effects of shale Network? • To what extent has Shale Network managed these barriers? • Increasing conversations among participants with differing backgrounds? • Developing community of interest? • Enhancing citizen scientists’ data management, resources, technical issues? • Facilitating sharing of data across sectors? • Increasing ability of government to make data available? • Improving views of data quality and credibility? Standardization of metadata? Interpretation of data? • Enhancing data accessibility for all participants? • Providing analysis of data, analysis that influences regulatory and policy system? • Addressing privacy, confidentiality?

11. Effects of Shale Network? • Shale Network as both set of social relationships and data infrastructure • Can network be leveraged for additional activities? • Are there new collaborations among Shale Network participants? • New groups monitoring? Changes to or new monitoring systems? • Increased “reach” of individual groups, especially monitoring agencies? • Broader community engagement? Stronger volunteer groups? • Can data infrastructure be extended to monitor other important indicators? • Do participants feel connected to larger group? Feel contributing to natural resource management, data transparency, scientific knowledge? • What role does sharing data have for public engagement in relation to Shale Energy development? Feel they are contributing to a larger conversation?

12. Thank you!