Feasibility study Open Knowledge Base - version for consultation

Commissioned by the VSNU (the Association of Universities in the Netherlands) and the Dutch Taskforce on Responsible Management of Research Information and Data (click here for more information about the taskforce) we investigate the feasibility of a so-called Open Knowledge Base. At the moment, Dutch universities and knowledge institutions each individually keep records of the activities of their own researchers. This may involve publications (journals, books, conferences, etc.), datasets, grants, but also collaboration partners. However, the (CRIS-)systems of the various institutions are not linked, each institution consequently only has insight into its own activities and cannot see this in a broader context. For example, it is a challenge for researchers who change universities several times to construct an integrated overview of their own activities. Another example is that it is a challenge to get a (good) overview of all Dutch research activities in a given domain. The VSNU and the taskforce are investigating whether it is possible to develop a national infrastructure in which such information can be maintained and enriched, so that services can be developed that could make the above questions, among others, possible.

Dialogic is investigating the characteristics of such an infrastructure, also known as an Open Knowledge Base, and the consequences of design choices for development and maintenance costs, the quality and usability of metadata, and the positioning of the Netherlands in the international research community. To this end, we conduct interviews with those involved in national science policy, university policy, international infrastructure projects, private service developers and researchers.

With this version for consultation we welcome feedback, particularly on the following questions:

1. For whom is an Open Knowledge Base (OKB) needed (related to support level, see Chapter 2)?

2. Are the identified core values and use cases sufficient to render an OKB necessary (see Chapter 2)?  

   • If you answer is no: which other (more) important arguments should be considered?

3. Which identified use case(s) should be prioritized, and why (see section 2.2)?

4. What governance model is preferred? A) One operational team with resources and mandate, B) networked governance with allocated time, resources and mandate (secondment), or C) otherwise (see section 3.1.1)?

   • What is the preferred role of private parties in this (e.g., public- private governance)?

5. Should an OKB include tools and services? Why (not)? (see section 3.1.7)

Please provide feedback before 13 January 2021 to Max Kemman (kemman@dialogic.nl)