Archived Posts from this Category
Archived Posts from this Category
Monday pm 20th February 2017
Workshop organisers: Neil Beagrie (Charles Beagrie Ltd) and Mike Priddy (DANS) and the Consortium of European Social Science Archives (CESSDA).
Description: At this half-day workshop attendees, will learn from Neil Beagrie and Mike Priddy about how to apply the Cost-Benefit Advocacy Toolkit, the Capability Development Model, and the Archive Development Canvas (a variant of the Business Model Canvas) developed by the CESSDA Strengthening and Widening Project (CESSDA-SaW). Although the CESSDA-SaW project work focuses on the social sciences, core elements are multi-disciplinary and relevant to a wide range of organisations at IDCC involved in development, funding, and advocacy for research data infrastructures and open access for data.
The workshop is free to attend but places are limited so early booking is advised.
CESSDA-SaW is a project funded by the Horizon 2020 programme. Its principal objective is to develop the maturity of data archive services that are aspiring to be, or are a part of the CESSDA community of social science data archives in a coherent and deliberate way towards the vision of a comprehensive, distributed and integrated social science data research infrastructure, facilitating access to social science data resources for researchers regardless of the location of either researcher or data. As part of the project, we have been developing the Cost-Benefit Advocacy Toolkit, the Capability Development Model, and the Archive Development Canvas to assist data archive services across Europe.
The broad outline for the workshop will be as follows:
The expected learning outcomes from the workshop are that all attendees will:
To register for the workshop see http://www.dcc.ac.uk/events/idcc17/workshops
If you are too late to book, I will maintain a short reserve list. Please contact me if you wish to be added to the list. Should anyone drop out and a place become available it will be offered to the reserves.
A set of 38 slides now on slideshare used for the Focus Group Cost-Benefit Funding Advocacy Program (Task 4.6) session at the CESSDA Saw Workshop in The Hague 16/17 June 2016.
This was an interactive focus group repeated over two parallel sessions. It was aimed at European social science data archive staff with responsibility for bidding for funding or promotion and advocacy of the archive to key stakeholders. The presentation covers some of the key ideas on how the CESSDA Saw funding advocacy toolkit will be structured, its components, and key facts and approaches it will include.
We expect the cost-benefit funding advocacy toolkit under development to support the negotiation with ministries and funding organisations across Europe.
The results of the toolkit user requirements survey with responses from 24 European social science archives were presented and discussed, together with suggested approaches and content for the toolkit. 22 people attended the two sessions overall, representing a mix of countries at different stages on the development path for social science archives (none, new/emerging, mature). There was strong interest and support for the emerging toolkit together with open discussion of how it can be applied in the specific political and administrative context of different European countries.
The slide set presented here is an extended version including a number of hidden background/ reference slides not used in the presentation. The focus group is one of a series guiding further development of the toolkit and its adoption being given to either: (a) social science data archive staff or (b) their key stakeholders (senior management in their universities, research councils and academies, funding ministries, national statistics offices, research users and depositors).
CESSDA is the Consortium of European Social Science Data Archives. The CESSDA SaW project “Strengthening and widening the European infrastructure for social science data archives” is funded by the European Commission as part of its Horizon2020 programme.
Originally published in 2001 as a paper edition, ‘Preservation and Management of Digital Materials: a Handbook’ was the first attempt in the UK to synthesise the diverse and burgeoning sources of advice on digital preservation. Demand was so great that in 2002, a free online edition of the Handbook was published by the newly established Digital Preservation Coalition.
After more than a decade, in which digital preservation has been transformed, the Handbook remains among the most heavily used area of the DPC website.
Funders and organisations are collaborating on re-designing, expanding and updating the Handbook so it can continue to grow as a major open-access resource for digital preservation. The DPC and Charles Beagrie Ltd have been engaged on a major re-working of the Digital Preservation Handbook for release as a new edition over 2015/2016. The National Archives (our Gold Sponsor) working together with other stakeholders including Jisc, the British Library, and The Archives and Records Association (our Silver Sponsors), and the National Records of Scotland (our Bronze Sponsor) is supporting the Digital Preservation Coalition in updating and revamping the Handbook. Many individuals and organisations are also contributing to this work through book sprints, peer review, project and advisory boards.
The revision, guided by the user feedback and consultation (see Report on the Preparatory User Consultation on the 2nd Edition of the Digital Preservation Handbook), is modular and being undertaken over a two year period to March 2016.
We have provided updates at regular intervals to inform the community on progress with the project and with this final February update we are delighted to announce a number of key developments.
The 2nd edition of the Handbook had a partial “soft launch” in October 2015 and approximately 2/3rds is online and publicity accessible at http://www.dpconline.org/advice/preservationhandbook
This partial release will be further enhanced by additional functionality when a new platform for the website focused on ‘responsive design’ is brought on stream by the DPC in 2016. This will provide an updated design and improved user experience on mobile and tablet devices, compared to the current site templates that are optimised for viewing on a desktop screen. We will also add the facility to generate PDFs. In the interim some functionality and content will remain “works in progress” but the community have gained early access to a significant new resource.
The remaining 14 sections to complete the Handbook have now been written, edited and are in peer review (see Handbook contents page for coming soon sections). We are aiming to complete this work and revise content for publication by the end of March 2016. The Handbook is now live so we will need to close and update section by section for these 14 remaining updates, hopefully in the final week of March and/or early April 2016. Watch this space for future announcements!
NRS joins funding group
The Digital Preservation Coalition was delighted to announce this month that The National Records of Scotland (NRS) had come on board as a ‘Bronze Sponsor’ for the eagerly anticipated second edition of the ‘Digital Preservation Handbook’. As of February 2016, with the addition of the NRS we have raised 93% of estimated funding required for the Handbook revision. We have prioritised content creation, scaled back some events, and adjusted budgets to ensure completion within a very tight funding profile.
Slideshare from Handbook Workshop at DCDC15
A workshop on the Digital Preservation Handbook was run at the DCDC15 conference in early October. Powerpoint slides from the Handbook presentation are now available on Slideshare. They provide a detailed overview of the new edition Handbook and work in progress. To date, there have been over 2,000 views of the slides.
A short set of 4 powerpoint slides summarising the findings on the economic impact of the European Bioinformatics Institute with extensive accompanying slides notes, all CC-BY licensed, have been placed on Slideshare.
The European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL- EBI), located on the Wellcome Genome Campus in Hinxton, UK, manages public life-science data on a very large scale, making a rich resource of information freely available to the global life science community. EMBL-EBI is one of a handful of organisations in the world involved in global efforts to exchange information, set standards, develop new methods, and curate complex genome information.
We published a full report this week with the results of a quantitative and qualitative study of the Institute, examining the value and impact of its work. Our focus is the economic impact and can be seen as complementary to traditional academic measures, such as citation counts.
The summary slides show the quantitative economic approaches used included: estimates of access and use value, contingent valuation using stated preference techniques, an activity-costing approach to estimating the efficiency impacts of EMBL-EBI data and services, and a macro-economic approach that seeks to explore the impacts of EMBL-EBI use on returns to investment in research. These approaches allowed us to develop a picture, beginning with estimates of minimum direct values for the EMBL-EBI’s user community and moving progressively toward approaches that measure wider social and economic value.
We are pleased to announce a new report: The Value and Impact of the European Bioinformatics Institute.
In 2015, Charles Beagrie Ltd was commissioned by the European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), to study and analyse its economic and social impact.
The EMBL- EBI, located on the Wellcome Genome Campus in Hinxton, near Cambridge in the UK, manages public life science data on a very large scale, making a rich resource of genome information freely available to the global life science community.
The full report published today presents the results of the quantitative and qualitative study of the Institute, examining the value and impact of its work. The report highlights key findings, including that EMBL-EBI data and services made commercial and academic R&D significantly more efficient. This benefit to users and their funders is estimated, at a minimum, to be worth £1 billion per annum worldwide – equivalent to more than 20 times the direct operational cost of EMBL-EBI.
A press release with further information is available on the EMBL-EBI website at http://www.ebi.ac.uk/about/news/press-releases/value-and-impact-of-the-european-bioinformatics-institute
The Full Report is available online in printable format at http://www.beagrie.com/EBI-impact-report.pdf
A short Executive Summary version of the report is available online in printable format at http://www.beagrie.com/EBI-impact-summary.pdf
I have just posted the final instalment of a personal selection of 12 presentations drawn from events and topics over the last 20 years in digital preservation, which I hope will be of interest.
They are taken from events on four different continents including the first iPres conference and cover themes such as personal archiving, research data management, e-journals, the digital preservation lifecycle model, national and institutional strategies and collaboration, costs/benefit/economic impacts of digital preservation, the establishment of the Digital Preservation Coalition, and the development of the online Digital Preservation Handbook. I hope there will be something in there for everyone.
There are accompanying blog narratives which set the presentations into context and the powerpoint presentations themselves on Slideshare. Details and web links to them are as follows:
2007 – Digital Preservation: Setting the Course for a Decade of Change (evolution or revolution?), keynote presentation to the Belgian Association for Documentation (ABD-BVD), Brussels Belgium slides narrative
2005 – Plenty of Room at the Bottom? Personal Digital Libraries and Collections, keynote presentation to European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries (ECDL), Vienna Austria slides narrative
This is a baker’s dozen as there is a also bonus presentation from 2015 on slideshare covering the latest work on The Digital Preservation Handbook (new edition for full release in March 2016).
The background and narrative blog for this personal selection of presentations is also available.
This slideshare, The Value and Impact of Research Data Infrastructure, was given at the Preservation and Archiving Special Interest Group (PASIG) meeting in September 2014 held at Karlsruhe, Germany. It is the final instalment of 12 presentations I have selected to mark 20 years in Digital Preservation. It demonstrates the value of preservation and re-use of research data.
Between 2011 and 2014, Charles Beagrie Ltd and John Houghton completed three major studies on the economic value and impact of the Archaeology Data Service, the British Atmospheric Data Centre, and the Economic and Social Research Data Service, and a synthesis of the three studies. In these studies, we developed and refined qualitative and quantitative methodologies to measure the value and impact of research data and associated services and tools.
This combination of methods has broken new ground in approaches to assessing the value and impact of major research data services and provided a strong evidence base and compelling outcomes. In a recent review of the international state of the art as regards the relationships between large-scale science facilities and innovation performance, our work was one of 3 studies highlighted to UK Department of Business, Innovation and Skills as being particularly good examples of ‘good practice’ in the measurement of economic impacts.
The presentation focuses on these studies, with the study of the Archaeology Data Service given as a detailed example. It has a UK Focus but the research and lessons are international. These studies are also three of the few quantitative studies of the value and impact of digital preservation currently available.
A fourth study on the value and impact of the EMBL European Bioinformatics Institute has since been completed by Charles Beagrie Ltd and John Houghton and should be available in 2016.
We have produced a new resources pages on our website describing all the outputs we have produced which are publicly available and accessible on open access to students and practitioners interested in our work. Areas described include Cost/Benefit, Impact, Technology Watch, Digital Preservation Policies and Strategies. Conference presentations, and other digital preservation resources. These are linked either to outputs on our website or on the websites of clients and partners. An extract of the page is shown below.
Keeping Research Data Safe (KRDS), a workshop presentation from 2010 available now on Slideshare, is the ninth of 12 presentations I have selected to mark 20 years in Digital Preservation. The remaining two to come will be published at monthly intervals over November and December 2015.
This presentation was given as part of the KB Experts Workshop on Digital Preservation Costs, held at The Hague in the Netherlands in 2010.
Although very small in terms of budget, the KRDS projects were terrific examples of collaboration to achieve influential results and the pleasure and value of working with colleagues from many disparate fields and organisations. I’ve selected it as an example of doing great things on small budgets if you have the right people, and for its influence on subsequent work both by me (e.g. impact studies) and on the field generally. For me, in terms of personal follow-up and later projects, the costs element of KRDS has been less important than the benefits side which has led to a series of project on impact with John Houghton (more on this in the final Slideshare in December).
The KB requested a briefing document on each cost model presented at the workshop in the form of responses to their set questions. I have reproduced mine for the KRDS presentation below – it captures lots of interesting context for the slides. I have added links to the KRDS Factsheet and KRDS costs data survey to it.
THE KEEPING RESEARCH DATA SAFE MODEL
1. General presentation of the cost model
What is the purpose of the cost model? The KRDS model aims to support the costing of digital preservation of research datasets and assessment of the benefits of preservation. A significant proportion of its work is also focussed on identification of preservation cost data sources and methods which could support any model. It is currently primarily a set of tools and methods to construct a localised model rather than a pre-developed generic costing tool. Further information on findings from the KRDS projects is available in the KRDS Factsheet.
Who are the users? – The primary audience is research organisations in the UK but organisations in other countries and sectors can adopt parts of the model and its methodologies.
What preservation strategies does it handle? – It can accommodate any preservation strategy or service strategy (e.g. outsourcing or shared services as well as preservation in-house).
What is the target data? – Research data from the sciences, social sciences, or arts and humanities.
What time perspective does it cover? – Any time period.
2. What method is the cost model based on?
What reference is the model based on? – The model uses OAIS with extensions and adaptations by the project team.
What financial principles is it based on? – It is modelled to adopt the Transparent Approach to Costing (TRAC) a full economic costs (FEC) model approved by UK research funders and universities.
Which costing approach have you adopted?– We use an activity based costing approach supported by a Benefits Taxonomy for assessing benefits.
What implementation have you chosen? – N/A
3. Which challenges do you currently see in relation to cost modelling?
Special issues – General cost model challenges? –
Primarily a lack of good quality preservation cost data from a range of different types of archive and data types (see our KRDS costs data survey) which can be used to underpin and develop models.
Secondly an excessive focus on costs (rather than cost/benefits) and also sometimes a too limited focus on costs of preservation strategies rather than preservation service costs as a whole.
Occasional over-reliance on research project or start-up cost data which will not be representative of operational preservation costs.
The degree of confidence that can be placed in results from cost models. How reliable is any cost prediction for a model and how does that change over time or other variables?
4. What are the opportunities for standardisation of cost models and collaboration between projects?
Possible standardisation and alignment of cost models? – I think cost models always need to be tailored to some degree to different audiences/sectors and prospects for standardisation and alignment may be variable. Some areas e.g. digital storage costs may be more promising than others.
Collaboration? – I can see beneficial opportunities for both formal and informal partnerships between projects and organisations. There may be opportunities for European and international collaboration.
5. What are your initial comments and feedback on the draft decision tree appended below?
A decision tree could start much earlier and involve different decisions on the cost model itself e.g. scope of activities, level of detail, and sources of data.
6. Please provide a short one paragraph biography for yourself
Neil Beagrie is director of consultancy at Charles Beagrie and principal investigator for the JISC Keeping Research Data Safe project which has investigated the costs and benefits of digital preservation for research data. He is an experienced senior consultant and an internationally recognised expert with extensive experience in information management, digital preservation, and developing access to digital collections.
The Warwick3 Workshop: Digital Preservation and Curation Summing up + Next Steps available now on Slideshare is the eighth of 12 presentations I have selected to mark 20 years in Digital Preservation. The remainder will be published at monthly intervals over 2015.
I have chosen it as it briefly allows us to look back at aspirations and achievements in Digital Preservation over a 20 year period from the very first (and seminal) Warwick 1 workshop held in 1995 to today. The first Warwick workshop considered the Long Term Preservation of Electronic Materials and a UK response to the final report of the RLG/CPA Task Force on Digital Archiving. Two further Warwick workshops followed in 1999 and 2005 to review progress and set a forward agenda.
The two-day workshop that took place over 7 – 8 November 2005 at the University of Warwick aimed for the first time to address digital preservation issues for both scientific data and cultural heritage and to map out a future research agenda for them. Sponsored by JISC, the Digital Curation Centre (DCC), the British Library and the Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils (CCLRC), the invitation-only event drew a wide range of national and international experts to explore the current state of play with a view to shaping future strategy. The slides are from my summing up and conclusions at the workshop close.
Part of my conclusions (slides 12-13), outlined the recommendations of the previous Warwick workshop held in 1999 and reviewed the progress that had been made in implementing them over the subsequent five years with a very subjective level of achievement √ (some) to √ √ √ (good) as follows:
√ √ √ DPC advocacy, EU council, UNESCO, CODATA, ICSTI, NSF,RCUK
Encourage cross-sectoral communication
√ √ Established Digital Preservation Coalition 2001 – now 27 members
√ √ Preservation Management Handbook, Curation Manual, Cornell tutorial
Preservation Centre/Network of centres
√ √ Digital Curation Centre, British Library, The National Archives
√ RLG/NARA checklist (TRAC)
Checklist to determine complexity and cost
√JISC 04/04 funding programme (LIFE project, assessment tool project)
New research – emulation, dynamic data
√Camileon project, JISC 04/04 programme, DCC research agenda
So how have we done 10 years further on? Overall, OK I think with the caveat progress in digital preservation can take a long time. Perhaps I would raise the achievement levels if doing this exercise again in 2015 for “Encourage cross-sectoral communication”, “Checklist to determine complexity and cost”, and “New research”. However I would probably move Raise Awareness down one level. The others would probably be about the same. How about you?