Archiving South African digital research data: How ready are we?

Koopman, Margaret M.; Jager, Karin de

doi:10.17159/sajs.2016/20150316

Cited by 19 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite this, there is currently scant evidence of the willingness, extent, concerns and practices of sharing data by South African researchers (Patterton et al 2018). The few studies conducted in South Africa in this area focus on data sharing practices of certain disciplines (Koopman & de Jager 2016). The current study has a broader aim.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…However, data sharing is not only about publishing the research data for easy access. Several studies have shown that sharing research data via emails and portable devices such as memory sticks or CDs is still practiced (Wiley 2014;Koopman & De Jager 2016;JISC, 2016). This caused Michener (2015) to simple define data sharing as the practice of making one's research data available or accessible for use by others.…”

Section: What Is Research Data?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This statement, which became to be known as the NRF Open Access Statement came into effect in March 2015. It is generally seen as the biggest enabler of open science in the country (Koopman and De Jager 2016). Essentially, the statement mandates that research published using public funds must be made available in accredited open access repository.…”

Section: The Nrf Open Access Statement As An Enabler Of Data Sharingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Data Sharing Practices among Researchers at South African Universities

Bangani

Moyo

2019

CODATA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research data management practices have gained momentum the world over. This is due to increased demands by governments and other funding agencies to have research data archived and shared as widely as possible. This paper sought to establish the data sharing practices of researchers in South Africa. The study further sought to establish the level of collaboration among researchers in sharing research data at the university level. The outcomes of the survey will help the researchers to develop appropriate data literacy awareness programmes meant to stimulate growth in data sharing practices for the benefit of research, not only in South Africa, but the world at large. A survey research method was used to gather data from willing public universities in South Africa. A similar study was conducted in other countries such as the United Kingdom, France and Turkey but the Researchers believe that circumstances in the developed world may differ with the South African research environment, hence the current study. The major finding of this study was that most researchers preferred to use data produced by others but less keen on sharing their own data. This study is the first of its kind in South Africa which investigates data sharing practices of researchers from multi-disciplinary fields at the university level and will contribute immensely to the growing body of literature in the area of research data management.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: What Is Research Data?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Nrf Open Access Statement As An Enabler Of Data Sharingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Data Sharing Practices among Researchers at South African Universities

Bangani

Moyo

2019

CODATA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The general subject of scientific data archiving/sharing/ publication has been addressed. 9,[13][14][15] The Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) currently publishes just over 1 billion standardised biodiversity occurrence records, from about 39 000 data sets contributed by about 1000 data providers around the world (Figure 2). Of these, 77% are records of human observations, and only 15% are records of physical specimens.…”

Section: Box 1: Data Publicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing South African biodiversity research data: Meeting the challenges of rapidly developing information technology

Coetzer¹,

Hamer²

2019

S. Afr. J. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New developments in the funding requirements of biodiversity science as well as rapidly developing information technology warrant a sharper focus on the way in which biodiversity data are managed. We propose that an opportunity presents itself to develop a specific set of informatics skills among a new class of data analysts in the biodiversity science community. Our consideration of capacity development specifically emphasises the need for conceptual rigour, compliance with technical data standards and the culture of data publication or data sharing. There is a pressing need for data stewardship skills and positions in the South African biodiversity science community. We describe previous and current initiatives that may help to provide the context of, and develop skills and capacity for, effective management or stewardship of biodiversity research data. The overlapping competencies of data stewardship, data curation and data preservation include: processes and activities related to the organization and integration of data collected from various sources, annotation of the data, and publication and presentation of the data such that the value of the data is maintained over time, and the data remains available for reuse and preservation. 1 The role of the data steward can be distilled into the fundamental principles of findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability (the FAIR principles). 1 From where do biodiversity data originate? During the last 5 years, a significant component of funding for South African biodiversity science has been channelled through the Foundational Biodiversity Information Programme (FBIP). 2 The FBIP is funded by the South African Department of Science and Technology (DST) and administered by the National Research Foundation and the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI). The FBIP recognises the importance of biodiversity, not only in the narrower sense of a particular discipline of scientific research (e.g. taxonomy, systematics or ecology), but also in the broader context of the relevance of biodiversity to society. Four large, collaborative FBIP projects have been funded. These projects focus on marine biodiversity (the Seakeys Project), the effect of habitat fragmentation on the faunal diversity of Eastern Cape forests, filling gaps in biodiversity information to support decisions about the exploitation of shale gas in the Karoo (the Biogaps Project), and camera trapping of mammals to assess the status of species and populations inside and outside protected areas (the Snapshot Safari Project). In 2016, 20 smaller FBIP projects were undertaken to investigate a variety of subjects, including bat monitoring in the Kruger National Park, bryozoan e-taxonomy, and a number of applied projects, e.g. the use of polychaetes as bait, and a survey of earthworms and their use in vermicomposting. The FBIP explicitly requires researchers to generate and submit research data characterised as species occurrences, species attributes or population abundance records, or devel...

show abstract

“…The survey data is based on a survey of more than 500 scientists from more than 50 leading research universities in the US, Canada, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and Ireland. In work (Koopman, & de Jager, 2016), the features of storing and managing digital data on the example of institutions in South Africa have been explored. It turned out that, although some researchers were already engaged in digital archival data in storage facilities, neither researchers nor universities carried out systematic management of research data.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Model of Digital Research Universities

Sitnicki¹

2018

BJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The aim of the article is studying modern trends in digital development and developing a universal model of digital research universities. The methodology of the research is based on the use of methods: analysis and comparison for the study of scientific thought in the field of the introduction of digital technologies in the activities of research universities of systematization in the process of singling out the spheres of use of digital technologies in the activities of research universities; graphics for developing a model of digital research universities. The research results are manifested in the generalized development of global scientific thought for the period of 2011-2018. On the use of digital technologies in research universities in the United States, Britain, Germany, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Italy, South Africa, Brazil, Ireland, Finland, India. The results identify the current trends in global scientific research on the introduction of digital technologies concerning issues: the effectiveness of the formation of students' own curriculum; digitization of scientific information; the emergence and development of digital scholarships in scientific libraries; studying the correlation between the number of downloaded articles from the digital space and the number of new articles being written; a reappraisal of the revolutionary role of digital technologies in the social sciences; the rationale for American scientists to create a new model that provides access to the academic platform for a global society; intensification of the exchange of digital data; analysis and comparison of advantages and disadvantages of digital storages; search for new components of research tools based on the study of digital methods; the global development of digital technologies and the enhancement of the effectiveness of digital research cooperation; the widespread use of the Internet and other digital resources on the activities of research universities to improve the quality and semantic consistency of metadata, allowing to identify the digital preservation of research material. The proposed author's definition of "digital research university" harmonized the scientific categorical apparatus in accordance with modern trends in the development of digital technologies in research universities. The practical implications of introducing this category in widespread use will be reflected in the rethinking of the role of research universities and the search for new forms of introducing digital technologies. The difference between the proposed category and the term "digital university", already used in scientific consumption, is the wider coverage of the characteristics of research activities of research universities using digital technologies. The systematization of the use of digital technologies in research universities has made it possible to identify ten main areas: automation of the management systems of research universities digitizing literary sources in scientific libraries; automation of the educat...

show abstract

Archiving South African digital research data: How ready are we?

Cited by 19 publications

References 16 publications

Data Sharing Practices among Researchers at South African Universities

Data Sharing Practices among Researchers at South African Universities

Managing South African biodiversity research data: Meeting the challenges of rapidly developing information technology

Development of a Model of Digital Research Universities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About