A hydrologist's guide to open science

Abstract

Abstract. Open, accessible, reusable, and reproducible hydrologic research can have a significant positive impact on the scientific community and broader society. While more individuals and organizations within the hydrology community are embracing open science practices, technical (e.g., limited coding experience), resource (e.g., open access fees), and social (e.g., fear of weaknesses being exposed or ideas being scooped) challenges remain. Furthermore, there are a growing number of constantly evolving open science tools, resources, and initiatives that can be overwhelming. These challenges and the ever-evolving nature of the open science landscape may seem insurmountable for hydrologists interested in pursuing open science. Therefore, we propose the general “Open Hydrology Principles” to guide individual and community progress toward open science for research and education and the “Open Hydrology Practical Guide” to improve the accessibility of currently available tools and approaches. We aim to inform and empower hydrologists as they transition to open, accessible, reusable, and reproducible research. We discuss the benefits as well as common open science challenges and how hydrologists can overcome them. The Open Hydrology Principles and Open Hydrology Practical Guide reflect our knowledge of the current state of open hydrology; we recognize that recommendations and suggestions will evolve and expand with emerging open science infrastructures, workflows, and research experiences. Therefore, we encourage hydrologists all over the globe to join in and help advance open science by contributing to the living version of this document and by sharing open hydrology resources in the community-supported repository (https://open-hydrology.github.io, last access: 1 February 2022).

Where should hydrology go? An early-career perspective on the next IAHS Scientific Decade: 2023-2032

“…Science can be made more open and reproducible by sharing data on public repositories, using open software, by sharing preprints and negative results, and by having an open-peer review process. OS increases accessibility to fellow scientists and the public, improves reproducibility, transparency, and collaboration, and credits original ideas and work properly (Gil et al, 2016;Hall et al, 2022;van Emmerik et al, 2018). Moreover, OS can bridge the global North-South research divide leading to increased inclusivity in science practices (Adcock and Fottrell, 2008;Tennant et al, 2016).…”

“…Some journals require both data and code to be Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR standards, (Stall et al, 2017;Wilkinson et al, 2016)). In turn, hydrological researchers are raising awareness by sharing guidelines like the "Open Hydrology Practical Guide" (Hall et al, 2022).…”

“…Financially, OA involves fees, and storing research data is expensive. Timewise, publishing reproducible code and data is more labour-intensive than storing code and data for personal use (Hall et al, 2022). Moreover, not all observations are quantifiable and transferable (Blume et al, 2018).…”

Improving the design and implementation of sediment fingerprinting studies: summary and outcomes of the TRACING 2021 Scientific School

“…Therefore, the objective of this section is to propose concrete strategies to improve data sharing in the future. A similar initiative has recently been taken in the hydrological science community (Hall et al 2021 ). This approach is not only virtuous for our research practice but it is also often imposed by law (e.g., INSPIRE Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament).…”

“…Beyond the scientific interest, this database would allow making the sediment fingerprinting technique better known and more visible to federate a community while raising awareness on the issue of soil erosion to a wider audience. To go one step further in the transition to “open, accessible, reusable, and reproducible research,” the reader is referred to the recently published hydrologist’s guide to open science (Hall et al 2021 ).…”