1. Data Archiving and Networked Services
Research data management, data archiving and data dissemination. The roles of a Trustworthy Digital Repository (TDR): The case of DANS
Kees Waterman
Data Archiving and Networked Services
Séminaire DRTD-SHS
Les données de la recherche dans les humanités numériques
Journée 3: Maîtriser les technologies pour valoriser les données
Lille, 21 avril 2015

2. Topics for today DANS Trusted Digital Repository
Research Data Management (RDM)
Depositing data
requirements
possibilities
Data reuse
Expanding Trust
projects
infrastructures
certification

3. Research Data Lifecycle

4. DANS?
First predecessor dates back to 1964 (Steinmetz Foundation), and Historical Data Archive 1989
Institute of Dutch Academy of Sciences and National Funding Organisation (KNAW & NWO) since 2005
Mission: promote and provide permanent access to digital research information

5. DANS core services Long-term data archive
EASY: Electronic Archiving System for self-deposit
Long-term data archive
Short& Mid-term storage (current research)
National information portal to data + e-pubs + researchers + projects
As of 5/2014: Dutch Dataverse Network
NARCIS: Gateway to scholarly information In the Netherlands

6. Training & Consultancy
Additional services
Persistent Identifier
URN:NBN resolver
Common metadata harvester
Training & Consultancy

7. EASY: Electronic Archiving SYstem
datasets archived
Metadata in 6 tastes/variaties

8. Geodata in data archive

9. Persistent Identifier

10. Dublin Core Metadata
Hyperlinks possible to other (geo)data and publications

11. Depositing data (1) Basic requirements
sufficient metadata (Dublin Core)
research documentation
question, methodology
variables (code book !)
questionnaires, surveys (consent forms !)
anonymize your data !
data in preferred / accepted formats

12. Depositing data (2) Access and agreements Persistent Identifier
4 access categories
embargo is an option
license and user agreement
Persistent Identifier
Data processing
privacy
using established protocol [OAIS / TDR]
Publishing

13. So… are we successful ?

14. Datasets in EASY, by year (deposit)
November 2010: 1 million data files
March 2013: 2 million data files (25,000 data sets)

15. Datasets in EASY, by size
1,8% of datasets > 2 GB
2,8% of datasets > 1 GB
The long tail of research data

16. Reuse of datasets EASY 2005-2014

17. 2012

18. 2014

19. Datasets, by type of access

20. OAIS – Open Archival Information System
SIP = Submission Information Package
AIP = Archival Information Package
DIP = Dissemination Information Package

21. 1 DSA in France, CINES www.cines.fr
Centre Informatique National de l’Enseignement Supérieur

22. 1 CESSDA centre in France, Réseau Quetelet www.reseau-quetelet.cnrs.fr
Consortium of European Social Science Data Archives

23. 1 CESSDA centre in France, Réseau Quetelet Membership and types of data

24. Additional roles and responsibilities
As an organization
publish and maintain Preservation Policy
support RDM (dataverse, brochure for DMP*)
data archive certified
As partner in Dutch association - RDNL
actively develop a federated data infrastructure
support RDM (training)
build relationships with universities etc., ’front office-back office’ model[data supporters]

25. Additional roles and responsibilities
Participate in Dutch and international projects on Research Infrastructures surveydata.nl – longitudinal research EHRI – holocaust studies CARARE – visualization & presentation ARIADNE – metadata standardization EUDAT – European data services

26. Additional roles and responsibilities
Develop national e-depots for specific disciplines EDNA – archaeology DANS promotes and sustains the certification of repositories (‘e-depots’) as contribution to further development of TRUST in sustainable archiving and consultation of ‘data’.

27. http://www.dans.knaw.nl http://www.edna.nl https://easy.dans.knaw.nl
Retrospective archiving of datasets
Ongoing archiving and publication of datasets
‘Grey’ literature scanning project
National regulation in KNA
(Quality Norm Archaeology)
Embedding in DANS EASY
Odyssee project
CARARE project
Ariadne project
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014+

28. 2004-present
NWO-funded Odyssee-project ( )
=>Project database for undeveloped research
Improving accessibility through various projects
Ongoing archiving and publication of datasets

29. 1. CARARE plot (Europeana)

30. Challenges in sharing data
Technical challenges: standardisation, accessibility, discoverability, preservation and curation, data security, etc.
Legal and ethical challenges
Cultural challenges

31. Why not share? Those data are mine! Discredit my findings
Still analyzing the data
I cannot trust the data produced somewhere else

32. Riding the Wave (10/2010)
1st recommendation: Develop an international framework for a Collaborative Data Infrastructure

33. Federated data-infrastructure in the Netherlands

34. Services in the FOBO model
Information and awareness raising on data management and curation
Training (data experts at FOs and researchers)
Storage (during and after the research)

35. Back office: roles and responsibilities
Focus on expertise and long term storage:
Expertise and innovation in the area of data curation, data management and re-use of data
Providing expertise to the research community: contributions to FO training courses for researchers
Providing expertise to the front office: training courses for data experts, consultancy, contact persons
Long term preservation of data in a trustworthy digital repository (certification; at least Data Seal of Approval)

36. Challenges
Expanding the model over all universities (institutional agreements)
Creating one single back office “desk” (RDNL)
Creating a technical infrastructure for automatic data ingest
Developing a business model to cover the costs

37. RDNL
National and international funders are developing open data policies
Researchers must be able to comply with these policies through awareness raising, RDM training, high quality and reliable storage facilities
Federated data-infrastructure to enable stakeholders to collaborate, coordinate activities and divide roles and tasks based on their specific expertise (economies of scale, selection of data).
Small country
The total picture is far more complex: international and discipline specific infrastructures

38. Long-term preservation for a specific sub-discipline: surveydata.nl

39. EASY for long-term preservation

40. Layer 1
Search portal
Dedicated Questasy servers
Layer 2
Archive for long-term preservation
Layer 3

41. The federated data infrastructure: a collaborative framework
Trust
Data Curation
User functions: data capture and transfer
Data Generators
Data Users
Front offices:
Local Data Facilities (University Libraries)
Domain-Specific Research Infrastructures
Community Support Services
Back Offices:
DANS, 3TU.Datacentrum, …
Common Data Services: Archiving, Access, …
Basic Technical Infrastructure:
SURFsara, Target, …
Common Data Services: Storage, Backups, …

42. Trust comes on foot, but leaves on horseback
Trust in research data
Trust is at the very heart of storing and sharing data
Trust involves:
Data creators
Data users
Data repositories
Funders
It is clear that trust is at the very heart of storing and sharing research data. And this is so for a number of stakeholders, all for different reasons:
The users of data from a digital repository have questions like:
Have the data been preserved properly?
Are they of high quality?
Have they been changed in some way?
Does the pointer get me to the right object?
The depositors of data want to be sure that in the digital repositories their data are safe and remain accessible, usable and meaningful over time.
Finally the funders,
They want the reassurance that their investment in the production of valuable research data is no waisted but will remain also in the future; re-use of data will give them a higher return on their investment
Trust comes on foot, but leaves on horseback

43. What is trust built on? Dedicate yourself (mission statement)
Do what you promise (stable, sincere and competent reputation)
Be transparent (peer review, get certified)

44. The need for trusted digital repositories
A brief history
1996, Open Archival Information System - OAIS
2002, ISO 14721
Independent auditing was deemed necessary to certify OAIS-compliance and thus engender trust.
2003 development of OAIS auditing metrics begun
2007 Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification (TRAC)
2012 ISO for Trusted Digital Repository (TDR)

45. Certification Standards: Data Seal of Approval (DSA)
DANS initiative (2005/6)
International Board
16 guidelines
Self assessment
Transparency
35 seals awarded since 2010
The research data:
can be found on the Internet
are accessible (clear rights and licenses)
are in a usable format (interoperable)
are reliable
can be referred to (persistent identifier)
There has long been a demand for some way to evaluate, to assess the quality of the services of a digital repository.
Over the last few years a number of evaluation guidelines are becoming available.
Slide
DSA can be seen as an entry point which requires limited effort from the repositories
Data producers are responsible for the quality of research data, repositories for storage and long-term access, and users for correct use of data

46. European Framework for Audit and Certification
3. Formal certification: DSA + full external audit
and certification based on ISO 16363* or DIN 31644**
2. Extended certification: DSA + structured, externally
reviewed and publicly available self-audit
based on ISO 16363* or DIN 31644**
1. Basic certification: Data Seal of Approval (DSA)
*ISO Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories
**DIN Information and Documentation - Criteria for Trustworthy Digital Archives
DSA can be used on it’s own but it is also the first step in a European framework being set up for Audit and certification.
Because DSA has taken the DIN and ISO on board it can be used as a stepping stone towards more rigorous levels of audit and certification.
It depends on the repository and their stakeholders which level of certification they would like to pursue.
Simple and easy method to get into audits an certification of you repository and now let’s have a look at the online tool it self.
Short presentation not live because the change of failure is proportional to the amount of people watching this presentation. I will be having a poster session later this afternoon and you are more then welcome to have a look at the live system.

47. Survey of 30 Institutions for Highest Priority in Data Policies
Policy
Importance
Integrity
217
Preservation
150
Access control
126
Provenance
108
Data Management plans 99
Publication 75
Replication 66
Data staging 52
Federation 37
Metadata sharing 23
Regulatory 16
Collection properties 7
Identifiers
Data sharing
Versioning
Licensing 6
Format
Data Life Cycle
Arrangement 5
Processing
Based on RDA Working Group: Practical Policy. Rainer Stotzka, Reagan Moore, Presentation for Plenary 3, March 2014 (

49. Thank you for your attention
Contact: