Managing scientific data as public assets: Data sharing practices and policies among full-time government employees

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 65, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 251-262

  Douglass, Kimberly ^a   Allard, Suzie ^a   Tenopir, Carol ^a   Wu, Lei ^a   Frame, Mike ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; PORTALS;

CRITICAL DATA; DATA DECISION; DATA-SHARING PRACTICES; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES; SCIENTIFIC DATA; TECHNICAL INFRASTRUCTURE; WILLINGNESS TO SHARE; DATA DOCUMENTATION;

PORTALS; PUBLIC POLICY;

DOCUMENTATION; EXERCISE; FUNDING; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; SCIENTIST;

EID: 84896494052     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.22988     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Abbott, M. (2009). Scientific infrastructure: A new path for Science? In T. Hey, S. Tansley, & K. Tolle (Eds.), Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery (pp. 111-116), Redmond Washington: Microsoft Research.
2. Acar, S., & Gardner A. (10 September 2008). US Federal Enterprise Architecture Data Reference Model (FEA DRM): Managing data as a national asset. Philadelphia: Data Management International (DAMA).
3. Alliance for Taxpayer Access. (6 November 2009). An open letter to the U. S. Congress signed by 41 Nobel Prize winners. Available from: http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/supporters/scientists/nobelists-2009.shtml
4. Bertzky, M., & Stoll-Kleeman, S. (2009). Multi-level discrepancies with sharing data on protected areas: What we have and what we need for the global village. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 8-24.
5. Borgman, C., Wallis, J., & Enyedy, N. (2007). Little science confronts the data deluge: Habitat ecology, embedded senor networks, and digital libraries. International Journal of Digital Libraries, 7, 17-30.
6. Brown, B. (March 2010). Environmental and alternative energy information sources. Searcher, 18(2), 12-49.
7. Carroll, B., & Kandish, J. R. (29 June 2010). Landscape of current scientific data policies and plans in federal agencies: Results of the participant survey. In Harnessing the power of digital data: Taking the next step. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). CENDI (Federal STI Managers Group), Interagency Working Group on Digital Data (IWGDD). Workshop held June 29 to July 1, 2010. Washington, DC.
8. Chigbu, P., Strange, T., Gordon, S., Baham, J., Young, J., Hughes, R.,... (December 2006). NSDI opportunities for sharing: a decision support tool for shellfish management in the Mississippi Sound. Journal of Shellfish Research, 25(3), 1091-1099. (Pubitemid 46025297)
9. Cragin, M., Palmer, C., Carlson, J., & Witt, M. (2010). Data sharing, small science and institutional repositories. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, A 4023-4038.
10. Craig, W. (2005). White knights of the spatial data infrastructure: The role and motivation of key individuals. Journal of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA), 16(2), 5-13. (Pubitemid 43074412)
11. Elwood, S. (January 2008). Grassroots groups as stakeholders in spatial data infrastructures: challenges and opportunities for local data development and sharing. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 22(1), 71-90.
12. Fernandez-Carro, R. (June 2007). A principal-agent model of public research with a retrospective payoff rule. Science and Public Policy, 34(5), 317-328. (Pubitemid 47412329)
13. Gardner, W. (2004). Compelled disclosure of scientific research data. The Information Society, 20(2), 141-146. (Pubitemid 38614689)
14. Geza, M., & Gray, J. (August 2008). Effects of social data research on SWAT Model stream flow and water quality predictions. Journal of Environmental Management, 88(3), 393-406. (Pubitemid 351696572)
15. Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2004). Information technology policies and standards: A comparative review of the states. Journal of Government Information, 30, 548-560. (Pubitemid 40045849)
16. Harvard Law Review. (March 2010). State action and the public/private distinction. 123(5), 1248-1314.
17. Harvey, F., & Tulloch, D. (August 2006). Local-government data sharing: Evaluating the foundations of the spatial data infrastructure. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20(7), 743-768. (Pubitemid 44559854)
18. Heidorn, B. (2008). Shedding light on dark data in the long tail of science. Library Trends, 57(2), 280-299.
19. Hey, A., Tansley, S., & Tolle, K. (eds). 2009. The fourth paradigm: Dataintensive scientific discovery. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Research.
20. Hunt, J. R., Baldocchi, D. D., & Van Ingen, C. 2009. Redefining ecological science using data. In T. Hey, S. Tansley, & K. Tolle (Ed.), The Fourth Paradigm, data-intensive scientific discovery (pp. 21-26). Redmond, WA: Microsoft Research.
21. Irwin, A., Rothstein, H., Yearley, S., & McCarthy, E. (1997). Regulatory science-towards a sociological framework. Futures, 29(1), 17-31.
22. Koontz, L. (10 June 2003). Geographic information systems: Challenges to effective data sharing. Washington, DC: US General Accounting Office. From Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and the Census, Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives. GAO-03-874T.
23. Kundra, V. (10 November 2010). M-11-03 Memorandum to heads of executive departments and agencies. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget. Washington, D. C. 20503.
24. Lord, P., & Macdonald, A. (2005). Malaria plasmodium falciparum genome. In Large-scale data sharing in the life sciences: Data standards, incentives, barriers and funding models (the Joint Data Standards Study). The Digital Archive Consultancy (DAC); Bioinformatics Research Centre (BRC), University of Glasgow; The National e-Science Centre (NeSC).
25. Molholm, K. (29 January 2003). Getting a handle on information: Part of a federal information infrastructure. In Getting a handle on federal information: Persistent identification using HANDLES: A CENDI Workshop. Hosted by the National Library of Medicine, Lister Hill Auditorium, Building 38A; Bethesda, MD.
26. National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII). (8 December 2004). Framework: Functional requirements document. US Geological Survey.
27. National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII). Archived (5 January 2012) NBII archived homepage. Available from: http://wayback.archive-it. org/2361/20120105233133/http://www.nbii.gov/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID= 236&mode=2&cached=true. The Fugitive Agencies Collection at the Stanford University Social Sciences Resources Group.
28. National Research Council (NRC). (2002). Access to research data in the 21st Century: An ongoing dialogue among interested parties report of a workshop. Science, Technology, and Law Panel. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
29. National Research Council (NRC). (2005). Expanding access to research data: Reconciling risks and opportunities. Panel on Data Access for Research Purposes. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
30. National Science Foundation. About the national science foundation: NSF at a glance. Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/about
31. National Science Foundation. (April 2011). Empowering the nation through discovery and innovation. Arlington, VA. NSF-11-047.
32. National Science and Technology Council. (January 2009). Harnessing the power of digital data for science and society. Report of the Interagency Working Group on Digital Data to the Committee on Science of the National Science and Technology Council.
33. Obama, B. (9 March 2009). Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies. The White House Office of the Press Secretary. Washington, DC. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/Memorandum-for-the- Heads-of-Executive-Departments-and-Agencies-3-9-09
34. O'Leary, M. (April 2008). New portals enrich STM menu. Information Today: The Newspaper for Users and Producers of Electronic Information Services, Product and News Reviews Section (p. 33-34).
35. Pardo, T., Cresswell, A., Dawes, S., & Burke, B. (2004). Modeling the social and technical processes of interorganizational information integration. IEEE Proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (pp. 1-8).
36. Pisani E., & Abou Zahr, C. (2010). Sharing health data: Good intentions are not enough. Bulletin of the World Health Organ, 88, 462-466.
37. Snyder W. M., & Wenger E. C. (2000). Communities of practice: the organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review. 78(1), 139-145.
38. Tenopir, C., Allard, S., Douglass, K., Aydinoglu, A. U., Wu, L., Read, E.,... (U. S. Geological Survey). (June 2011). Data sharing by scientists: Practices and perceptions? Public Library of Science (PLOS), 6 (6).
39. Torkington, N. (9 March 2010). Truly open data. Available from: http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/03/truly-open-data.html
40. Uhlir, P., & Schroder, P. (17 June 2007). Open data for global science. Data Science Journal, 6(17), 36-53.
41. Union of Concerned Scientists. (2009). Voices of federal scientists: America's health and safety depend upon independent science. Cambridge, MA. Available from: http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific-integrity/ Voices-of-Federal-Scientists.pdf
42. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (4 April 2006). Enterprise architecture governance procedure. CIO 2122-P-01.0 (no former number). Washington, DC.
43. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (January 2009). US EPA information access strategy. EPA 240-R-09-001. Washington, DC.
44. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Research Development (ORD) and Office of Scientific Information Management (OSIM). (30 April 2010). Survey of EPA and other federal agency scientific data management policies and guidance.
45. United States Government Accountability Office. (September 2007). Climate research: Agencies have data sharing policies but could do more to enhance the availability of data from federally funded research. Report to Congressional Requesters. GAO-07-1172.
46. Wood, S., Long, R., Borkowski, L., & Michaels, D. (March 2010). Strengthening science in government: Advancing science in the public interest: The Scientists in Government Project. The Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy at the George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services. Washington, DC.
47. Zetter, K. (19 March 2009). Officials hoard valuable databases funded by taxpayers. Wired.com. Available from: www.wired.com/print/politics/onlinerights/ news/2009/03/sunshine
48. Zhong, B., & Xu, X. (2011). Scale effects of geographical soil datasets on soil carbon estimation in Louisiana USA: A comparison of STATSGO and SSURGO. Pedosphere, 21(4), 491-501.