FAIR-Data-EG / Action-Plan

Interim recommendations and actions from the FAIR Data Expert Group
Other
5 stars 1 forks source link

Rec. 15: Policy harmonisation #15

Open sjDCC opened 6 years ago

sjDCC commented 6 years ago

Efforts should be made to align and consolidate FAIR data policy, reducing divergence, inconsistencies and contradictions.

marcrr commented 6 years ago

I would suggest including scientific publishers in the stakeholders of this recommendation.

hollydawnmurray commented 6 years ago

F1000 position: Agreed with @marcrr above. Engaging publishers in a shared dialogue early on will allow them time to adapt to support the harmonised policy, should they wish to. Neglecting publishers from this conversation runs the risk that they will need to play catch up, or worse, be unable to support the policy. We continue to see a similar situation among some publishers with gold OA policies today.

holubp commented 6 years ago

BBMRI-ERIC Position: Policies need to be carefully aligned with the legal requirement, namely requirements on data protection.

katerbow commented 6 years ago

DFG position: In principle, the DFG supports the recommendation on harmonising data policies on an international level. It needs to be stressed, though, that such harmonization must not be an objective in itself, yet must be regarded as prerequisite for fostering international and cross-disciplinary research. Thus, it has to be ensured that harmonising efforts are not affecting or restricting the scientific work procedures. Scientific communities should approve any amendments planned to existing policies.

ScienceEurope commented 6 years ago

Science Europe is currently working on the alignment of funders’ policies (core requirements for DMPs and criteria for Trusted Repositories). These policies take all aspects of FAIR data into account and even go beyond those. These policies will be finalised and published by the end of 2018.

pkdoorn commented 6 years ago

Thumbs up. See my remarks under Rec. #12 : Data Management via DMPs #12.

mromanie commented 6 years ago

ESO position We support this recommendation to the extent in which it doesn't over-constrain the individual disciplines and projects.

carrd commented 6 years ago

Wellcome Trust position: Agree with the recommendation for alignment where this makes sense, and also that publishers are key stakeholders here - as perhaps are institutions?

npch commented 6 years ago

SSI position:

We agree with the general intention of this recommendation to reduce divergence and contradictions, so as to improve adoption.

We urge that work in this area also includes feedback from a cross-disciplinary set of researchers who can ensure that policies are not streamlined in such a way as they become a burden or unimplementable in real life.

Organisations focusing on research software (such as the Software Sustainability Institute) should be part of the stakeholder group for effort in this area related to the harmonisation of data-specific policies with software policies, which will be required due to the intrinsic link between software and research data.

fniccolucci commented 6 years ago

Fully agree with the above. For example, DMPs help research, they are not Yet Another Bureaucratic Obligation, perhaps harmonised. So research communities should be involved in this process. As done for other recommendations, I maintain also here that harmonisation must not kill multilingualism.

gtoneill commented 6 years ago

Fully support harmonisation for implementing FAIR Data policies and the FAIR Data Action Plan. It is crucial that researchers are involved in the development of FAIR Data policies before harmonisation.