Why it takes a village to manage and share data
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Implementation plans for the National Institutes of Health policy for data management and sharing, which takes effect in 2023, provide an opportunity to reflect on the stakeholders, infrastructures, practice, economics, and sustainability of data sharing. Responsibility for fulfilling data sharing requirements tends to fall on principal investigators, whereas it takes a village of stakeholders to construct, manage, and sustain the necessary knowledge infrastructure for disseminating data products. Individual scientists have mixed incentives, and many disincentives to share data, all of which vary by research domain, methods, resources, and other factors. Motivations and investments for data sharing also vary widely among academic institutional stakeholders such as university leadership, research computing, libraries, and individual schools and departments. Stakeholder concerns are interdependent along many dimensions, seven of which are explored: what data to share; context and credit; discovery; methods and training; intellectual property; data science programs; and international tensions. Data sharing is not a simple matter of individual practice, but one of infrastructure, institutions, and economics. Governments, funding agencies, and international science organizations all will need to invest in commons approaches for data sharing to develop into a sustainable international ecosystem.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 3 Sep 2021.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2.
2 papers.
- 2024Benchmark Data Repositories for Better Benchmarkingcited by 10
- 2024A Systematic Review of NeurIPS Dataset Management Practicescited by 2
- 2024A Systematic Review of NeurIPS Dataset Management Practices31 Oct 2024
- 2024Benchmark Data Repositories for Better Benchmarking31 Oct 2024