Report Open Access
Study on the readiness of research data and literature repositories to facilitate compliance with the Open Science Horizon Europe MGA requirements
Jahn, Najko;
Laakso, Mikael;
Lazzeri, Emma;
McQuilton, Peter
This report and associated repository inventory represent the output of a study conducted between March and October 2022 by a group of independent experts and commissioned by the European Research Council Executive Agency (ERCEA). In this study we assess and analyse the readiness of research data and literature repositories to facilitate compliance with the Open Science requirements in the Horizon Europe Model Grant Agreement (HE MGA) (European Commission, 2022a). This study also takes current repository choice practices of ERC-funded researchers into account.
This study aims to:
- create a better general understanding of the availability and nature of repositories in different fields of research, for both literature and research data;
- identify trusted repositories across different fields of research, and highlight those that are most widely used by ERC-funded researchers;
- assess to what degree the identified trusted repositories facilitate compliance with the HE MGA requirements related to Open Science, in particular with regard to the metadata of deposited research outputs;
- enable the ERC Scientific Council to provide well-founded guidance to ERC grantees as to which repositories will allow them to fulfil the Open Science related obligations of their HE grant agreement.
In this study we analysed 220 repositories and, via a structured methodology, we identified 165 trusted repositories and tested their readiness to facilitate the compliance with the HE MGA Open Science requirements.
We show that it is not straightforward to assess whether a given repository is suitable to facilitate compliance with the HE MGA requirements. This is mainly due to varying interpretations of definitions and requirements, whether information on repository specifications is publicly available, and the high level of technical expertise needed to assess all requirements.
We highlight that repository registries, such as FAIRsharing, re3data or the CoreTrustSeal (CTS) website, are not sufficient on their own to assess the readiness of repositories to facilitate compliance with the HE MGA requirements, as the definition of what constitutes a trusted repository is subtle and varied and needs to be carefully interpreted and applied to repositories. This is also the case for related concepts such as community endorsement or for policy requirements in terms of preservation, curation and security of the repository contents.
We found that current certification is not always in line with funder requirements as many repositories that hold a certification do not meet all the essential characteristics criteria for trusted repositories set out in the HE Annotated Model Grant Agreement.
Only three repositories identified as trusted in this study also fulfil all the mandatory requirements for metadata, whereas none meet all the mandatory and recommended metadata requirements as they are set out in the HE MGA.
Two of such trusted repositories have international coverage. One of them is for books and the other one is of a ‘catch all’ type.
Repositories are defined as catch-all when they can host digital content independently of their nature (data, literature, etc.).
This study has given us the opportunity to deeply analyse a set of repositories, their technical characteristics, policy framework and usage information. From our work, we can see that data repositories, as opposed to literature repositories, appear to be more ready to facilitate the compliance of the grantees with the HE AGA definition.
| Name | Size | |
|---|---|---|
|
ANNEX 1 - Inventory of identified trusted repositories.xlsx
md5:81823d35ab1000846dea7c6e09107bad |
72.5 kB | Download |
|
ANNEX 2 - Survey.pdf
md5:4049aefcd272483038e00b2e0654a625 |
55.6 kB | Download |
|
ANNEX 3 - Study curated data.xlsx
md5:cc18f7af0628be40bdbce5ed2e60d4c0 |
77.6 kB | Download |
|
ERC Study on repositories - final report.pdf
md5:5dd6f5e049f1abb590316a873ef7785a |
1.3 MB | Download |
Cannon, M. et al. (2021). Repository Features to Help Researchers: An invitation to a dialogue. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4683794
Corrado, E. M. (2019). Repositories, Trust, and the CoreTrustSeal. Technical Services Quarterly, 36(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2018.1532055
Devaraju, A., Huber, R., Mokrane, M., Herterich, P., Cepinskas, L., de Vries, J., L'Hours, H., Davidson, J., & Angus W. (2020). FAIRsFAIR Data Object Assessment Metrics (0.5). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6461229
Drysdale, R., McEntyre, J., Durinx, C., and Blomberg, N. (2018). The Process for the Selection of ELIXIR Core Data Resources [version 1; not peer reviewed]. F1000Research 2018, 7(ELIXIR):1712 (document) https://doi.org/10.7490/f1000research.1116248.1
European Commission (2017). H2020 Programme Guidelines to the Rules on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Open Access to Research Data in Horizon 2020 - Version 3.2, 21 March 2017. https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_en.pdf
European Commission (2021). Horizon Europe (HORIZON) - Annotated Model Grant Agreement. Version 0.2, 30 November 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/common/guidance/aga_en.pdf
European Commission (2022a). Horizon Europe (HORIZON) - Model Grant Agreement. Version 1.1., 15 April 2022. https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/common/agr-contr/general-mga_horizon-euratom_en.pdf
European Commission (2022b). European Research Data Landscape: final report, Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/3648
European Research Council Scientific Council (2022). Open Research Data and Data Management Plans, Information for ERC grantees, Version 4.1, 20 April 2022. https://erc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/document/file/ERC_info_document-Open_Research_Data_and_Data_Management_Plans.pdf
Eve, M. P. (2014). Open Access and the Humanities. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781316161012
Ferguson, C., Araújo, D., Faulk, L., Gou, Y., Hamelers, A., Huang, Z., Ide-Smith, M., Levchenko, M., Marinos, N., Nambiar, R., Nassar, M., Parkin, M., Pi, X., Rahman, F., Rogers, F., Roochun, Y., Saha, S., Selim, M., Shafique, Z., … McEntyre, J. (2020). Europe PMC in 2020. Nucleic Acids Research, 49(D1), D1507–D1514. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkaa994
Fraser, N., Brierley, L., Dey, G., Polka, J. K., Pálfy, M., Nanni, F., & Coates, J. A. (2021). The evolving role of preprints in the dissemination of COVID-19 research and their impact on the science communication landscape. PLOS Biology, 19(4), e3000959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000959
Gentil-Beccot, A., Mele, S., & Brooks, T. C. (2009). Citing and reading behaviours in high-energy physics. Scientometrics, 84(2), 345–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0111-1
Ginsparg, P. (1994). First Steps Towards Electronic Research Communication. Computers in Physics, 8(4), 390. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4823313
Hoy, Matthew B. (2020). Rise of the Rxivs: How Preprint Servers are Changing the Publishing Process, Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 39:1, 84-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2020.1704597
Kindling, M., Pampel, H., van de Sandt, S., Rücknagel, J., Vierkant, P., Kloska, G., Witt, M., Schirmbacher, P., Bertelmann, R., & Scholze, F. (2017). The Landscape of Research Data Repositories in 2015: A Re3Data Analysis. D-Lib Magazine, 23(3/4). https://doi.org/10.1045/march2017-kindling
Larivière, V., Sugimoto, C. R., Macaluso, B., Milojević, S., Cronin, B., & Thelwall, M. (2014). arXiv E-prints and the journal of record: An analysis of roles and relationships. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(6), 1157–1169. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23044
Lin, D., Crabtree, J., Dillo, I., Downs, R. R., Edmunds, R., Giaretta, D., ... & Westbrook, J. (2020). The TRUST Principles for digital repositories. Scientific Data, 7(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0486-7
Manghi, P., Atzori, C., Bardi, A., Baglioni, M., Schirrwagen, J., Dimitropoulos, H., La Bruzzo, S., Foufoulas, I., Mannocci, A., Horst, M., Czerniak, A., Kiatropoulou, K., Kokogiannaki, A., De Bonis, M., Artini, M., Ottonello, E., Lempesis, A., Ioannidis, A., Manola, N., & Principe, P. (2021). OpenAIRE Research Graph Dump (4.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5801283
Mannocci, A., Baglioni, M., & Manghi, P. (2022). "Knock knock! Who's there?" A study on scholarly repositories' availability. 26th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries, Padua, Italy. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.12879
Manola, N., Papageorgiou, H., Grypari, I., & Lempesis, A. (2021a), Monitoring the open access policy of Horizon 2020: final report. Publications Office, 2021, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/268348
Manola, N., Papageorgiou, H., Grypari, I., & Lempesis, A. (2021b). MOAP Horizon 2020 database [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4899767
Mugabushaka, A.-M., Baglioni, M., Bardi, A., & Manghi, P. (2021). Scholarly outputs of EU Research Funding Programs: Understanding differences between datasets of publications reported by grant holders and OpenAIRE Research Graph in H2020. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2109.10638
Öchsner, A. (2013). Introduction to Scientific Publishing - Backgrounds, Concepts, Strategies. SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38646-6
Office of The Director, National Institutes of Health (2020). Supplemental Information to the NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing: Selecting a Repository for Data Resulting from NIH-Supported Research. Notice Number: NOT-OD-21-016. Release Date: October 29, 2020. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-21-016.html
Pinfield, S., Salter, J., Bath, P. A., Hubbard, B., Millington, P., Anders, J. H. S., & Hussain, A. (2014). Open-access repositories worldwide, 2005-2012: Past growth, current characteristics, and future possibilities. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(12), 2404–2421. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23131
Van de Sompel, H. & Lagoze, C. (2000). The Santa Fe Convention of the Open Archives Initiative. D-Lib Magazine, 6(2). https://www.dlib.org/dlib/february00/vandesompel-oai/02vandesompel-oai.html
Vines, T. H., Albert, A. Y., Andrew, R. L., Débarre, F., Bock, D. G., Franklin, M. T., ... & Rennison, D. J. (2014). The availability of research data declines rapidly with article age. Current biology, 24(1), 94-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.014
Wilkinson, M., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. et al. (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data 3, 160018. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18
| All versions | This version | |
|---|---|---|
| Views | 5,718 | 5,718 |
| Downloads | 6,835 | 6,835 |
| Data volume | 2.2 GB | 2.2 GB |
| Unique views | 4,775 | 4,775 |
| Unique downloads | 4,030 | 4,030 |
- Publication date:
- March 21, 2023
- DOI:
-
- Keyword(s):
- repositories trusted repository open science open access Horizon Europe
- License (for files):
- Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International