Licenses in 4TU.ResearchData

4TU.Centre for Research Data has just released a new feature in the data archive by which depositors are able to choose a licence from a predefined list during the deposit process. This will increase the flexibility for depositors in choosing the appropriate licence for their data and is for end users easier to understand. A licence will define what others may or may not do with the data and is an important aspect in making sure the dataset meet the Reusability demands (R) in FAIR data management.

Data licences

4TU.ResearchData now offers the full range of Creative Commons licences. CC licences are the standard way to share open content with permission and under certain conditions, and are already commonly used for Open Access publications.

Guidance on all licence types offered can be found here.

4TU.ResearchData has adopted CC0 (Creative Commons Zero) as the default means for researchers to share their datasets to make its reuse as easy as possible without any legal barrier.

There are several reasons for choosing CCO:

  • We are promoting Open Science and FAIR data management, and in that respect we want to make the reuse of data as likely as possible. However, if there are reasons or circumstances when data can’t be shared with a CC0 licence, depositors can choose another, more appropriate licence for their data.
  • In many cases, it can be difficult to ascertain whether a dataset is subject to copyright law, as many types of data aren’t copyrightable in many jurisdictions. Putting a database or dataset in the public domain under CC0 is a way to remove any legal doubt about whether researchers can use the data in their projects. This leads to the enrichment of open datasets and further dissemination of knowledge.
  • Some journal publishers already require that authors make their dataset available under a CC0 licence. (see:
  • CC0 is a single mechanism that is both global and universal, covering all data and all countries. It is also widely recognized.

Software licences

CC licences are not recommended for licensing software or code. They do not contain specific terms about the source code distribution and do not address patent rights. To ensure the free reuse and modifiability of software, 4TU.ResearchData offers three open source licences: MIT license, Apache License 2 and the GNU GPLv3 license.

Data citation and attribution

Anyone using data from the 4TU.ResearchData archive, is expected to cite or reference this work as they would any other scientific research (even if the licence does not explicitly requires to do so). Citing data is considered good scientific practice and helps to avoid charges of plagiarism.

Visit this page for more information on our licences or contact us at when you have any questions. Please note that when you publish data online via 4TU.ResearchData, the chosen licence is permanent and cannot be adjusted afterwards



How to ensure that the costs of data management activities are budgeted in grant proposals?


Written by: Mary Donaldson and Vessela Ensberg

On the 21st February 2018, a Birds of a Feather session was held as part of the 13th International Digital Curation Conference in Barcelona on ‘Data management costing in grants’. The session was proposed and chaired by Marta Teperek of TU Delft.

The session proposal recognised that many research funders now require that research data is properly managed and shared. Consequently, many agree for the costs of data management to be budgeted in grant proposals. This is necessary for the sustainability of data management activities. So why is this not a normality yet?’

Identifying the problems

We identified two main sources for data management not being included in the grant proposal budget: lack of awareness among researchers as to what funds they can request and lack of available support at research institutions.

Researchers’ issues

Among all the usual suspects for the reasons why Research Data Management (RDM) activities are not costed into grant proposals

  • researchers prefer to ask for money for other purposes
  • researchers are not aware which costs are eligible
  • researchers believe that RDM costs should come from award overhead

Identifying solutions to researchers’ issues

Some of the RDM activities we identified as eligible for funding are

  • transcription of interviews
  • data anonymization
  • data curation assistance (outside of existing central posts)

We acknowledge that some of these activities are already included in research proposals as parts of the normal research process, and a specialist, such as a data curator, maybe difficult to hire for a less than full-time post. Growing the list of examples and viable options is likely key to having data management included in grant budgets.

Institutional issues

As we moved on from discussing why grants don’t often contain data management costing, we strayed into the related territory of institutional issues. Those included

  • worries about ‘double dipping’ for RDM costs, especially when trying to recover staffing costs
  • need for training for research admin staff who are directly involved in application processes; high staff turn-over in these positions
  • lack of a centralised system which tracks all grant applications or lack of communication between the Office coordinating the grant awards and RDM services
  • preservation costs being incurred after the award has been closed
  • lack of a pool of ‘expert’ staff which can be hired out to research projects

Identifying solutions to institutional issues

Institutional issues can be addressed by investment in the processes. In particular, Utrecht University and the University of Glasgow gave examples of addressing communication and training of research support staff. The RDM team at Glasgow investigating the possibility of adding a check-box to the central grant review system to indicate that funding for RDM has been costed and included in the application. Utrecht also provides consultations on data management costs and is experimenting with a pool of data managers who can be hired from the library for a certain amount of time to work on specific projects. The library is funding these positions but hopes to be able to recover up to 75% of the cost of each position from research projects in the future.

We also looked for lessons learned from the Open Access for publications. Funders have experimented with different models to pay for the more mature requirement for open access to publications in recent years. We explored whether these models could be adapted to help with the requirement for data management and sharing of research data. The first model we discussed was the FP7 pilot for open access where eligible projects were entitled to apply to a central pot of money, provided certain conditions were met. This pilot is due to end this week (28th Feb 2018), and has encountered administrative issues. In the UK, Research Councils UK (RCUK) have provided large research-intensive institutions with a block grant award to pay for Open Access charges for eligible articles. At the end of the pilot, RCUK will accept longer embargo periods. While we felt that centralized pots of money might work to support data management, the administrative burden of this funding is high.

To summarize, institutions can consider the following options to boost up data management inclusion in the grant budget.

  1.      An institution should have a centralized grant administration system. These systems can be adapted to ensure data management is included in the budget.
  2.      RDM should provide more advocacy with researchers using vocabulary the researchers understand and relate to. RDM should match researchers with resources to support costing of RDM activities.
  3.      Providing seed funding to researchers for legacy projects. These might help researchers engage better with RDM and consider their needs earlier in the process on subsequent projects.
  4.      Institutions should consider having a core team of RDM specialists (data curators, statisticians etc) whose time can be bought out by grants, in the way that technicians already are in the life sciences.
  5.      Provide in-depth training for technical or other support staff to enable them to deliver data management for a project. This would provide regular subject-specific RDM support for projects and help build capacity in departments.

However, despite all the ways in which institutions could help improve and support costing for RDM activities, we felt that tackling funders to better support this process would be more effective than each institution having to develop their own solutions. We also thought that funders should be alerted that in cases in which they only require an outline plan at the time of application, by the time the award is made and a more detailed plan is developed, the opportunity to identify and cost data management activities has passed

Proposed funder interventions

  1.       Improve review process for data management plans. Check for discrepancies between the RDM activities promised and the resources requested.
  2.       Provide a clear statement with examples about acceptable and fundable data management activities.
  3.       Indicate the proportion of each grant award expected to be spent on RDM activities.

This could be expressed as a percentage, or a range (to avoid the figure itself from becoming a point for argument) and would signal to researchers that funders don’t see RDM as a waste of money that could better be spent on generating more research data.

  1.       Make it clear who in the funding body is the person /role to contact to discuss RDM issues. RDM requirements are still new enough that clarification is regularly required.
  2.       Fund more data re-use.

For researchers, the cost/benefit analysis of making research data available is difficult to assess. Issuing calls specifically to encourage re-use of datasets would improve the understanding of data re-use and drive demand for shared datasets, helping tip the scales in favour of sharing data.

Ultimately, better alignment of funder RDM requirements would make it simpler for researchers to comply. It was mentioned that Research Data Alliance RDA had tried to get a funder working group together. Perhaps this is something Science Europe could also be involved with.

Future work

Jisc have funded a project in the UK to produce centralised guidance by July on the following:

  •         What do different funders require in terms of RDM?
  •         What do different funders require in terms of data sharing?
  •         What are different funders willing to pay for?
  •         How should funding for RDM be justified in grant applications?
  •         How can funds for RDM be used by institutions?

Useful links

Book Sprint – Open Science Training Handbook

Mid-February 2018 a group of 14 authors and 3 facilitators gathered in the Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB) in Hannover, Germany to create an open living handbook on Open Science Training.

All authors are all experts in Training and/or Open Science, coming together to write the 1st Open Science Training Handbook!!

As you can see from the list of authors, it was an international group of authors. So we had also to overcome cultural differences, which was sometimes a real challenge.

Many Open Science trainers ask for training resources to support them in teaching Open Science.
This Open Science training handbook will be a key resource and a first step towards developing Open Access and Open Science curricula and pedagogies. Supporting and connecting an emerging Open Science community that wishes to pass on their knowledge as multipliers, the handbook will enrich training activities and unlock their full potential.

All authors brought together methods, techniques, and practices. All that is needed for a training on Open Science. From the introduction to Open Science to all kinds of organizational details. All you need to think of in planning an Open Science training. It will be available for everyone and will be appreciated by those involved in Open Science Training. The Handbook is now open for review, the handbook aims at supporting educators of Open Science. Addressing challenges and giving solutions it will strengthen the community of Open Science trainers who are educating, informing and inspiring themselves. Main topics are Open Science and the Practical Guidance.
The new training resource will be accessible online.

List of authors:

  • Sonja Bezjak (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia)
  • April Clyburne-Sherin (Sense About Science USA & SPARC, USA)
  • Philipp Conzett (UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Norway)
  • Pedro Fernandes (Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência, Portugal)
  • Edit Görögh (University of Göttingen, Germany)
  • Kerstin Helbig (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany)
  • Bianca Kramer (Utrecht University, Netherlands)
  • Ignasi Labastida (Universitat de Barcelona, Catalonia/Spain)
  • Kyle Niemeyer (Oregon State University, USA)
  • Fotis Psomopoulos (Center for Research and Technology Hellas, Greece)
  • Tony Ross-Hellauer (Know-Center GmbH, Austria)
  • René Schneider (Geneva School of Business Administration, Switzerland)
  • Jon Tennant (Open Science MOOC, Germany)
  • Ellen Verbakel (4TU.Centre for Research Data, Netherlands)


  • Helene Brinken
  • Lambert Heller
  • Gwen Franck





We are hiring (again!) – Data Steward position at TU Delft


We have an exciting job opening for a Data Steward at TU Delft at the Faculty of Architecture & Built Environment and the Faculty of Industrial Design (joint appointment):

  • Closing date: 15 March 2018
  • Salary: up to € 4084/month
  • We are looking for individuals enthusiastic about data management and who have a PhD degree in the relevant subject area (or equivalent experience).

This is a great chance to join the dynamically growing team of Data Stewards at TU Delft and to contribute to a cultural change in research data management in a disciplinary manner. The job is really about inspiring the research community and improving day to day practices, and not about policy compliance.

All informal inquiries can be directed to me:

TU Delft Library’s response to the public consultation on draft version of VSNU Code of Conduct for Research Integrity

Authors: Alastair Dunning, Marta Teperek, Anke Versteeg, Wilma van Wezenbeek

This is a joint response from TU Delft Library to the public consultation on the draft version of the VSNU Code of Conduct for Research Integrity.


General Points

  • The focus on the relationship of research data to research integrity is welcomed.
  • There are some inconsistencies in good practice in data management that need to be ironed out.
  • The VSNU may need to consider the implications of researchers that frequently work with companies that do not have equivalents to this code.
  • Reporting on research is increasingly done via other channels than traditional journals, e.g. via platforms, preprint servers or blogs. The paragraphs on assessment and reporting are still very much focused on the traditional ways of communicating about research.
  • With the upcoming GDPR, is there enough being said about the need for researchers to be increasingly aware of their own role in how they share their own personal information and what tools or applications they use and share this information with?
  • The document currently does not discuss the importance of management and sharing of source code used to create, process or analyse the data. However, most research projects have now a computational element and the ability to validate and reproduce research results often relies on the availability of the supporting source code. Results of a recent survey revealed that 92% of academics use research software in their research. Therefore, if the Code of Conduct is to be relevant and applicable to the current research practices, the issues associated with managing and sharing software/code need to be addressed.
  • Terms such as “data”, “research material” and “sources” need to be defined.

Specific Notes

1. Preamble; paragraph 4 Remove “large” in “the growing importance of the way large data files are used and managed” – this is applicable to all data files, and not only to big data.

2.2.7 Many private institutions will not have subscribed to the code, and may not even have these guarantees in place. It is good that this issue is mentioned in the code, but it will have implications for universities and their researchers that work with private companies, particularly smaller companies.

2.3.9 The reference to Citizen Science seems rather cavalier, and perhaps deserves more detail. Research projects can involve thousands of citizen scientists; sometimes they may come from non-western countries, with different ethical expectations/norms etc.

2.4, footnote 7 – Students (such as masters’ students) are excluded from this code of research. But what happens if work done by masters’ student (eg preliminary data collection) is integrated into research?

4.2 Overarching comments to the section on “design” standards:

  • Make extra emphasis on transparency by design and the need for planning data management and sharing from the start.
  • The ethical and societal issues of fair use and access to research results need to be addressed at the design stage of research experiments. As discussed in the recent issue of Science magazine, research should aim to “ensure that those societies providing and collecting the data, particularly in resource-limited settings, benefit from their contributions”.

4.2.9 What is meant by “joint research”? Should this not apply to any funded or commissioned research?

4.2.12 The research should not be accepted if agreements outlined in point 4.2.9 are not defined and signed by all partners.

4.3.21 “To your discipline” is a bit weak. Consider “appropriate for your discipline and methodology” instead.

4.3.22 Emphasise that all data underpinning an article should be FAIR. The statement is weak at the moment.

4.4 Given that source code is often necessary for validation and reproducibility of research results, it is crucial that availability of source code used to create, process or analyse data is also discussed.

4.4.26 Given the fact that we want all contributors to be acknowledged properly (“author” is not always the right word for this), could we add “and processing” before the data?

4.4.30 Methods and protocols necessary to verify and reproduce research results should be made available.

4.4.37 Rephrase to “Always provide references and attribution when reusing research materials, including research data and code”. It is crucial that any reused research outputs are properly cited and the original authors properly attributed. In addition, the phrasing “that can be used for meta-analysis or the analysis of pooled data” was limiting the scope of the reuse and should be omitted.

4.4.40 More emphasis is needed to ensure that research data and code supporting your findings are available for scrutiny. In addition, emphasise that research outputs should be made as open as possible, as closed as necessary.

5.4 As discussed before, ensure that good practices for managing and sharing research software are also discussed.

5.4.12 Research Infrastructure is the wrong phrase. Rather: “Ensure that proper data management is embedded in the research lifecycle and that the necessary support is provided.”

5.4.13 & 5.4.14 These need clarification. At present they are contradictory (ie should data be stored permanently vs data should be stored for a period appropriate for the discipline. Again, the appeal to disciplinary practice might be incorrect, eg one can have very different data in the same discipline. “Archived in the long term” would be a better phrase than stored permanently.

5.14.15 There is an appeal to the FAIR principle earlier in the document. It should be repeated here.

5.5.17  Does this refer to commercial funders/industry partners as well?

6.3 Under “other measures”, if a retraction would be valid as measure, this should also apply to the underlying data.

How to make the most out of a conference?


Going to a conference is always an excitement and fun: one can connect with like-minded individuals and exchange stimulating ideas. However, in order to make the most out of a conference, a lot of hard work is needed before, during and after the meeting. This blog post provides a checklist of things to do before, during and after a conference.


Before the conference:

  • Contribute to the programme (if possible)
  • Prepare and practise your talk
  • Upload your slides to a repository and add a DOI to your presentation
  • Schedule Tweets with the link to your talk
  • Arrange networking meetings
  • Take your business cards with you
  • Add information about your contribution to your out of office message

During the conference:

  • Make use of the networking opportunities
  • Make a good use of Twitter
  • Share note-taking
  • Look out for spontaneous discussion sessions
  • Acknowledge the contribution of others
  • Sleep well (try to) and drink a lot (of water)
  • Bring a treat to your colleagues from work

After the conference:

  • Reconnect with the people you have met
  • Make notes on business cards
  • Share your findings with your colleagues
  • Reflect on what could be done better next time

Before the conference

Hurray! You are going to that conference you were really hoping to attend. So now the hard work begins to ensure that you can make the most out of the meeting (and that your employer has no doubts that it was an excellent decision to send you there).

1. Contribute to the programme (if possible)

Ideally, it is good to decide about attending a conference as early in advance as possible. This usually allows one to contribute to the overall programme of the conference by suggesting a session topic or by proposing a workshop. Think about this carefully: is there a problem related to the conference theme that you are struggling to solve? Is it likely that this problem might be shared by more members of your community? If so, you are likely to have identified an interesting session proposal.

If it is too late to propose a dedicated session, have a look at the call for papers and see where your work would best fit in. Presenting your work at a conference is always an excellent idea. No matter if it is preliminary or more advanced, you will always receive lots of feedback from other experts in the field.

If the conference does not accept papers, or if the call for papers is closed, it might be still not too late. Be creative: have a look at the topics. Is there something that closely matches the work you are doing? If so, approach the organisers, tell them about your work and ask if it might be possible for you to present. Similarly, perhaps there is a workshop on a topic of your interest, where you could facilitate a session, or lead a breakout discussion?

2. Prepare and practise your talk

If your paper got accepted, you will need to prepare your talk. Do it well in advance, and ensure to ask your colleagues and people involved in your project for your feedback. Not only you will receive useful suggestions on how to improve your talk, but this might also create an opportunity to get more co-workers interested in your work. It might be a good idea to organise a meeting to practise your talk and to invite people to come along. This will allow you to precisely time your talk and to get feedback from the others on the clarity of your messages.

3. Upload your slides to a repository and add a DOI to your presentation

Once your talk is ready and you are happy with the content, upload your slides to a suitable repository (for example, Zenodo). Uploading your slides into a repository not only allows you to get a DOI for your presentation and to track the mentions and citations of your work but, more importantly, allows others to re-use your slides. There is nothing more encouraging and rewarding than seeing one’s slides and ideas re-used by others. Could one possibly receive a better sign of appreciation for one’s work? Sharing slides in a repository should be accompanied by a choice of an appropriate licence, to ensure that potential re-users know what can and what cannot be done with your slides.

Once you have shared your presentation in a repository, add the DOI link to your presentation to the slide version you will be presenting at the conference. I like to mention that the slides are available online at the beginning and at the end of my slides. In addition, ensure that your contact details (including Twitter handles if you have a Twitter account) are provided – ideally also at the beginning and at the end of your presentation.

4. Schedule Tweets with the link to your talk

Once you have the DOI to your presentation, the time comes to schedule tweets about your talk. Easy scheduling of tweet messages is possible with platforms such as Tweetdeck. Find out the exact time of your talk and schedule a tweet with the DOI link to your slides soon after the beginning of your talk. In addition, it might be worthwhile scheduling tweets with some key take-home messages. And remember to figure out in advance the hashtag of the conference you will be attending and add the hashtag to all your tweets – in that way all conference participants will be able to find your messages.

5. Arrange networking meetings

Next, focus on arranging networking meetings. Have a detailed look at the programme. Which talks and sessions look particularly relevant to you and to your work? Who would you like to speak with? Reach out to these people and ask them to meet with you for a coffee, lunch, breakfast or dinner. Not only you will have the chance to have dedicated one-to-one discussions with people of similar interests, but in addition, the people you approach will know that their work is valued.

6. Take your business cards with you

With all this arranged, remember to also take some of your business cards with you. Might be a good idea to also leave out some of your business cards in the venue where you will be giving your talk so that people could pick them up and connect with you afterwards.

7. Add information about your contribution to your out of office message

Finally, before hitting the road set out your out of office message. It is a good idea to include information about the conference you are attending as well as adding a DOI link to your talk. In that way, people who will email you will not only get to know that you are away at a conference, but will also have the opportunity to look at your presentation and learn more about your work.

During the conference

While the preparatory work for the conference is usually stretched over the period of several weeks, the work during the conference itself is limited to the actual time of the meeting, and thus tends to be very intense.

8. Make use of the networking opportunities

During the conference try to make a good use of all the networking opportunities – try talking to various people and to speakers who inspired you. And, while it is sometimes hard, try to resist the temptation of hanging around with the people you already know well (or with your co-workers). While meeting new people, exchange business cards, and contact details – otherwise it is easy to forget all the new names.

9. Make a good use of Twitter

Make a good use of Twitter at conferences. Lots of interesting discussions and debates now happen on Twitter. Follow the people who inspired you – that’s yet another way of keeping in touch for long after the conference. Finally, some people use Twitter for note-taking at conferences. They simply Tweet about all their main observations and key messages of the talks they attend. One can even capture all (or selected Tweets) and incorporate them into stories with the use of dedicated tools.

10. Share note-taking

If you are lucky and more colleagues from your team are attending the same meeting, use the opportunity to take notes collaboratively. With the use of Google docs, several people can be contributing to the same document simultaneously.

11. Look out for spontaneous discussion sessions

Many conferences offer possibilities of more spontaneous focus group discussions, similar to Birds of a Feather sessions organised by the International Digital Curation Conference. If the conference that you are attending offers such opportunities, think about the recent problem you have been trying to solve and propose it for a public discussion. With a bit of luck, the topic you proposed might get selected and you might be lucky to get people brainstorming to find a solution to this problem.

12. Acknowledge the contribution of others

This sounds trivial, but it might be important to stress that especially while at conferences, it is really important to acknowledge people’s contribution. For example, by saying to someone that you liked their talk, or that they have facilitated a good discussion, or perhaps because you liked the questions they have asked the speakers. Or you might be grateful to people who provide you with feedback on your talk. In all these situations it is always good to thank the contributors and to tell them you valued what they did. This encourages those who contribute to continue engaging. In addition, those who are new to the community will get the impression that comments and active participation are welcome.

13. Sleep well (try to) and drink a lot (of water)

One important matter to realise is that our bodies need to physically cope with the intensity of a conference. So, while this might be difficult (if not impossible) with the amount of networking and with the necessity to catch up with some of the urgent matters at work, try to sleep well. If you have a chance to stay at a hotel close to the conference venue, it will offer you a couple of minutes of extra sleep.

In addition, it is good to think about hydrating your body. While talking, interacting, drinking an endless amount of tea and coffee, one tends to forget about drinking water. So it might be a good idea to always ask for a glass of water alongside your tea or coffee.

14. Bring a treat to your colleagues from work

While this is of course entirely optional, try to bring a treat to your colleagues from work. Be it a box of chocolates, or a local snack, it might be nice to share something with your fellow colleagues who were not able to attend the meeting.

After the conference

And so the conference is over. However, there still some extra work to do after the end of the meeting, which will help you get even more out of it.

15. Reconnect with the people you have met

As soon as possible after coming back from a meeting, reconnect with the people you have met. Add them on LinkedIn and/or send them personal e-mail messages. It can be as simple as thanking them again for the nice chat you had, good talk they gave or for the feedback they provided you with. This will remind them of you and will help you maintain the connection.

If you agreed on something, follow up on your actions: send that paper you promised to send; connect the person with your colleague; make a note about the future project you discussed etc. The important thing is to do it quickly and to keep the momentum going.

16. Make notes on business cards

If you have been offered any business cards, make notes on them. Add information about the occasion on which you have met the person and what you have spoken about. While this might seem silly to do, it might come in very handy in a year or two, when the memory fades and when you want to reach out to someone from a certain organisation and you will realise that you have actually spoken to one of their representatives at a meeting.

17. Share your findings with your colleagues

It might be also useful to share your lessons learnt with others. Be it an official presentation or a reporting meeting, or a less formal chat with your colleagues. In addition, it is a good idea to write a blog post with your key findings and observations. This will be useful not only to your colleagues, and to other people who were not able to attend the meeting, but also to the people who attended the meeting with you – they might find your notes and reflections inspiring.

If you write a blog post and you mention some contributions specifically, it might be a good idea to let these people know that you acknowledged them in your writing – they will be surely happy to hear that and this will further help you keep the connection alive.

Finally, if you are writing a blog post, let the conference organisers know – they might be interested in re-blogging it and in further publicising your work.

18. Reflect on what could be done better next time

Finally, reflect on what you did well and what could be improved next time. It might be also a good idea to speak about this to other colleagues who have experience of attending conferences and are effective at doing so – they might be willing to share good suggestions with you.

Work in progress

This blog post is a work in progress. This list is surely not complete and the ideas and the checklist will evolve and change as new tools and new modes of engagement become available. Therefore, if you have any suggestions of what might be worth adding to this list, please add your comments below.


I have been always very lucky to be surrounded by people who were very generous in sharing their good advice about active conference participation. I am therefore extremely grateful for all the good advice which was shared with me and which helped me write this blog post. I am particularly grateful to Dr Danny Kingsley and to Alastair Dunning, as their tips and tricks inspired the vast majority of this conference checklist.

How does a data archive remain relevant in a rapidly evolving landscape: the case of the 4TU.Centre for Research Data

This week, we are presenting at the International Digital Curation Conference 2018 in Barcelona.

This presentation can be downloaded from Zenodo.

The pre-print version of the practice paper accepted for the conference is available on OSF Preprints.

Title: From Passive to Active, From Generic to Focused: How Can an Institutional Data Archive Remain Relevant in a Rapidly Evolving Landscape?

Authors: Maria J. Cruz, Jasmin K. Böhmer, Egbert Gramsbergen, Marta Teperek, Madeleine de Smaele, Alastair Dunning

Abstract: Founded in 2008 as an initiative of the libraries of three of the four technical universities in the Netherlands, the 4TU.Centre for Research Data (4TU.Research Data) provides since 2010 a fully operational, cross-institutional, long-term archive that stores data from all subjects in applied sciences and engineering. Presently, over 90% of the data in the archive is geoscientific data coded in netCDF (Network Common Data Form) – a data format and data model that, although generic, is mostly used in climate, ocean and atmospheric sciences. In this practice paper, we explore the question of how 4TU.Research Data can stay relevant and forward-looking in a rapidly evolving research data management landscape. In particular, we describe the motivation behind this question and how we propose to address it.