scholarly journals Digital Research Infrastructure

2021 ◽  
pp. 67-76
Author(s):  
Maik Stührenberg ◽  
Oliver Schonefeld ◽  
Andreas Witt
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Information Infrastructure ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
It Infrastructure ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Social Infrastructure ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Legal Infrastructure ◽  
Digital Research

AbstractDigital research infrastructures can be divided into four categories: large equipment, IT infrastructure, social infrastructure, and information infrastructure. Modern research institutions often employ both IT infrastructure and information infrastructure, such as databases or large-scale research data. In addition, information infrastructure depends to some extent on IT infrastructure. In this paper, we discuss the IT, information, and legal infrastructure issues that research institutions face.

scholarly journals Biological & Geological Collections as a Research Infrastructure: A Dutch case

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olaf Banki ◽  
Letty Stupers ◽  
Marijn Prins
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Natural Science ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
Data Types ◽  
Digital Collections ◽  
Biodiversity Research ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Biodiversity Information

Within the Netherlands, large scale digitization efforts of natural science collections have taken place in recent years. This has led to a wealth of digital information on natural science collections. Still, large quantities of collection data remain untapped and undigitized. The usage of all these digital collections data as driver for science and society remains underexplored. Especially important, is the opportunity for such data to be combined and/or enriched with other data types with the aim to empower different user groups. A consortium of Dutch partners has committed themselves in working together to make biological and geological collections into a joint research infrastructure, underpinning other research infrastructures and scientific uses also beyond the biodiversity research domain. This consortium combines the Dutch contribution to the Distributed Systems of Scientific Collections (DiSSCo), LifeWatch, the Catalogue of Life and the Global Biodiversity Information facility, under the coordination of the Netherlands Biodiversity Information Facility. As part of a preparatory project for DiSSCo, funded by the Dutch science council, we connected the different users groups of collection managers (data providers), scientists (end-users), IT-specialists and policymakers. With collection managers we explored how to move towards an overview of all natural science collections in the Netherlands. In addition, we studied to what extent collection holdings of different musea could be combined, managed, and shared into one research infrastructure. Using a research data management cycle perspective, we surveyed and interviewed the Dutch research community for the barriers and opportunities in using natural science collections and related data. The outcomes of the project should lead to the next steps in creating a more comprehensive and inclusive biodiversity research data infrastructure in the Netherlands that interacts seamlessly with existing international research infrastructures, including DiSSCo.

GERI – The emerging Global Ecosystem Research Infrastructure

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaana Bäck ◽  
Werner Kutsch ◽  
Michael Mirtl
Keyword(s):  
Global Economy ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Anthropogenic Activities ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
Ecological Processes ◽  
Unique Challenge ◽  
Ecosystem Research ◽  
Decadal Scale ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Access To Data

<p>Ecosystem Research Infrastructures around the world have been designed, constructed, and are now operational as a distributed effort. The common goal is to address research questions that require long-term ecosystem observations and other service components at national to continental scales, which cannot be tackled in the framework of single and time limited projects.  By design, these Research Infrastructures capture data and provide a wider range of services including access to data and well instrumented research sites. The coevolution of supporting infrastructures and ecological sciences has developed into new science disciplines such as macrosystems ecology, whereby large-scale and multi-decadal-scale ecological processes are being explored. </p><p>Governments, decision-makers, researchers and the public have all recognized that the global economy, quality of life, and the environment are intrinsically intertwined and that ecosystem services ultimately depend on resilient ecological processes. These have been altered and threatened by various components of Global Change, e.g. land degradation, global warming and species loss. These threats are the unintended result of increasing anthropogenic activities and have the potential to change the fundamental trajectory of mankind.  This creates a unique challenge never before faced by society or science—how best to provide a sustainable economic future while understanding and globally managing a changing environment and human health upon which it relies.</p><p>The increasing number of Research Infrastructures around the globe now provides a unique and historical opportunity to respond to this challenge. Six major ecosystem Research Infrastructures (SAEON/South Africa, TERN/Australia, CERN/China, NEON/USA, ICOS/Europe, eLTER/Europe) have started federating to tackle the programmatic work needed for concerted operation and the provisioning of interoperable data and services. This Global Ecosystem Research Infrastructure (GERI) will be presented with a focus on the involved programmatic challenges and the GERI science rationale.</p>

DARIAH(-DE): Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities — Concepts and Perspectives

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (supplement) ◽  
pp. 47-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Henrich ◽  
Tobias Gradl
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Interdisciplinary Research ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
Application Domain ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Arts And Humanities ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Digital Research

DARIAH (Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities) is part of the European Strategy on Research Infrastructures. Among 38 projects originally on this roadmap, DARIAH is one of two projects addressing social sciences and humanities. According to its self-conception and its political mandate DARIAH has the mission to enhance and support digitally-enabled research across the humanities and arts. DARIAH aims to develop and maintain an infrastructure in support of ICT-based research practices. One main distinguishing aspect of DARIAH is that it is not focusing on one application domain but especially addresses the support of interdisciplinary research in the humanities and arts. The present paper first gives an overview on DARIAH as a whole and then focuses on the important aspect of technical, syntactic and semantic interoperability. Important aspects in this respect are metadata registries and crosswalk definitions allowing for meaningful cross-collection and inter-collection services and analysis.

What are Research Infrastructures?

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 4-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Anderson
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
Infrastructure Development ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
The Real ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Real Work ◽  
Digital Research

This paper reflects on what research infrastructures are, suggesting that there are two dominant themes – one arising from the funding bodies postulating that research infrastructure development offers unprecedented opportunities to drive forward that which is new, which is innovative, and which drives competition and success; the other which suggests that infrastructure is subordinate, a substrate that supports the real work of research, and which becomes a thing that shifts into the background and is invisible. This paper argues that neither of these positions is wholly true or particularly helpful as we move to invest significant sums of money in digital research infrastructures. Instead, I propose that we need to view infrastructure as a material and experiential presence that is embedded in the practices and experience of research, which builds on and enhances that which already exists, that unites scholars with archivists, librarians, and museum curators, and that also finds a place for the amateur. Finally, and most importantly, I wish to argue that we must foreground the ‘research’ in ‘research infrastructures’. concentrating less on the component parts of infrastructure and instead focusing on its relationship to research practices.

Structuring a research infrastructure: A study of the rise and fall of a large-scale distributed biobank facility

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 196-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Larsson ◽  
Carl Savage ◽  
Mats Brommels ◽  
Pauline Mattsson
Keyword(s):  
Power Analysis ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
Analysis Tool ◽  
Parallel Processes ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Prior Literature ◽  
National Champions ◽  
The Eu

This study analyses the perceived key interests, importance, influences and participation of different actors in harmonizing the processes and mechanisms of a distributed research infrastructure. It investigates the EU-funded initiative, BioBanking and Molecular Resource Infrastructure in Sweden (BBMRI.se), which seeks to harmonize the biobanking standards. The study interviews multiple actors involved throughout the development process. Their responses are analysed via a framework based on the IIED Stakeholder Power Analysis Tool. The BBMRI.se formation was facilitated by two parallel processes, with domestic and European/foreign origin, with leading scientists becoming ‘National Champions’. The respondents joined the organization under the premise that it would be a collaborative endeavour, but they were disappointed to learn the deliberative elements were more prevalent. In conclusion, the resulting autonomous structure caused disarray, while also fuelling interpersonal differences, ultimately leading to the closure of the infrastructure. Hence, it is necessary to clearly identify potential collaborative and deliberative elements already at the outset while also securing wider forms of communication between the participating actors, when establishing distributed research infrastructures. Moreover, while prior literature suggests that research infrastructures counteracts fragmentation, these results illustrate that this is not the case for this distributed research infrastructure.

scholarly journals Critical aspects in research infrastructure management

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 63
Author(s):  
Irakleitos Souyioultzoglou
Keyword(s):  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Research Infrastructure ◽  
Infrastructure Management ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Oriented Research ◽  
Critical Aspects ◽  
Digital Research

As the scholarly communication landscape is constantly evolving, the development of an ecosystem of infrastructures supporting digitally-oriented research practices becomes a necessity. This paper is a contribution to the ongoing discussion on the sustainability of digital research infrastructures∙ it describes four key operating principles and their interrelationships.

Creating a local food procurement community of practice: The Alberta Flavour Learning Lab

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Anne Beckie ◽  
Leanne Hedberg ◽  
Jessie Radies
Keyword(s):  
Community Of Practice ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Food System ◽  
Local Food ◽  
Provincial Government ◽  
Local Foods ◽  
Social Infrastructure ◽  
City Region ◽  
Physical Scale ◽  
Common Framework

In order for local food initiatives (LFIs) to have a transformative effect on the larger food system, greater levels of economic, organizational and physical scale are needed. One way for LFIs to reach the scale necessary to generate a more significant impact is through increased institutional procurement of local foods. But how do people and organizations come together to generate the social infrastructure required to shift food purchasing practices and processes? This field report shares the story of an innovative community of practice consisting of institutional food buyers, large-scale distributors, regional retailers, processors, producers, researchers, municipal and provincial government representatives within the Edmonton city-region that formed for the express purpose of “creating a positive community impact by getting more local foods on more local plates”. In describing the formation and first three years of the Alberta Flavour Learning Lab we examine the unique characteristics of this community of practice that has aided the development of a common framework for learning, understanding and joint action. In addition to the accomplishments to date, we also discuss the challenges faced by the Learning Lab and the strategies used to overcome them.  

scholarly journals Quality Assessment for the Sustainable Provision of Software Components and Digital Research Infrastructures for the Arts and Humanities

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Buddenbohm ◽  
Markus Matoni ◽  
Stefan Schmunk ◽  
Carsten Thiel
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Digital Humanities ◽  
Scientific Practice ◽  
Software Components ◽  
Good Scientific Practice ◽  
Arts And Humanities ◽  
Research Publications ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Research Infrastructures ◽  
Digital Research

AbstractInfrastructure for facilitating access to and reuse of research publications and data is well established nowadays. However, such is not the case for software. In spite of documentation and reusability of software being recognised as good scientific practice, and a growing demand for them, the infrastructure and services necessary for software are still in their infancy. This paper explores how quality assessment may be utilised for evaluating the infrastructure for software, and to ascertain the effort required to archive software and make it available for future use. The paper focuses specifically on digital humanities and related ESFRI projects.

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

2016 ◽  
Vol Volume 112 (Number 7/8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret M. Koopman ◽  
Karin de Jager ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
South African ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Digital Data ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Data Archiving ◽  
Research Data Management ◽  
The University ◽  
Digital Research

Abstract Digital data archiving and research data management have become increasingly important for institutions in South Africa, particularly after the announcement by the National Research Foundation, one of the principal South African academic research funders, recommending these actions for the research that they fund. A case study undertaken during the latter half of 2014, among the biological sciences researchers at a South African university, explored the state of data management and archiving at this institution and the readiness of researchers to engage with sharing their digital research data through repositories. It was found that while some researchers were already engaged with digital data archiving in repositories, neither researchers nor the university had implemented systematic research data management.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document