Research is in transition. What are the conflicts of interests for the main stakeholders: Academia, Society, Industry. What is the role of the European Commission? What are the technical and legal issues? Presented as an honors college at Hanzehogeschool Groningen, January 4 2016.

1. Responsible research:
professionalism and integrity.
The practical, legal and technical bucket list.
honours college, Hanzehogeschool Groningen, 4 januari 2016
Marlon Domingus

2. Science in transition
Source: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/open-science

3. Open Access -> Open Science
Source: http://www.slideshare.net/OpenAccessEC/ten-years-of-open-
access-in-the-european-commission-20062015

4. Open Access / Open Science
Source: http://www.slideshare.net/RightToResearch/daniel-spichtinger-
open-access-in-a-european-policy-context-opencon

5. Science 2.0 / Open Science
Source: http://www.slideshare.net/RightToResearch/daniel-spichtinger-
open-access-in-a-european-policy-context-opencon

6. Open Data
Source: http://www.slideshare.net/OpenAIRE_eu/sharing-data-an-
introductory-workshop-from-openaire-and-foster

7. Open for whom?
Source (pg 149):
http://ec.europa.eu/COMMFrontOffice/PublicOpinion/index
.cfm/ResultDoc/download/DocumentKy/57445

8. Barriers
Source (pg 18):
https://ec.europa.eu/research/
swafs/pdf/pub_archive/survey-
on-scientific-information-
digital-age_en.pdf

9. Rules and Principles
Storage and openness of research data needs a systematic Quality
Assurance (QA) approach. We label this the Quality Assurance
Research Data (QARD). This QARD approach is preferably built on a
set of agreed principles (principle driven, not rules driven) and driven by
researcher ownership and academic governance.
QARD cannot be a ‘one size fits all’ activity and is not aimed to create an
administrative process as an end in itself, it is a means to become more
excellent and reputable in research. QARD is meant to strengthen the
focus on high quality standards with regards to research data.
The principles are based on VSNU [2014]: The Netherlands Code of
Conduct for Academic Practice. Principles of good academic teaching
and research.
The QARD framework was developed in November 2015 by Wilfred Mijnhardt (Erasmus University Rotterdam)
and Marlon Domingus ((Erasmus University Rotterdam).

10. Rules and Principles
1: Fields and traditions matter
There are a variety of fields and research traditions at Erasmus
University; for example, from philosophy to econometrics, from
qualitative to big data, from empirical to more normative. Forcing al
researchers to comply to the same rules, would mean unproductive and
senseless bureaucracy for those involved.
QARD needs to be able to accommodate for variety in:
- The nature of the research (quantitative / qualitative)
- The nature of the methodologies (case study / longitudinal study / big
data)
- The nature of the data (use of data or not), (sensitive or not), (self
generated or externally bought)

11. Rules and Principles
2: Context is key
The context of the research implicates the level of strictness in the
QARD guidelines. Levels of transparency and openness of data,
protocols and publications varies in different contexts. A context can be a
field, a method, the nature of the data or the requirements by the
university, institutes, publishers or research funders.
Openness of research data is also context dependent in relation to the
context of the purpose, the audience and the nature of the data.
We propose to distinguish at least 4 relevant contexts for research data
storage and openness:
(International) Grants
Publishing (Journals/Publishers)
Academic Re-use (f.e. Replication)
Business/Societal (f.e. Policy)

12. Rules and Principles
3: Flexibility for collaboration
An important feature of the research at Erasmus University is that we
are able to collaborate with international peers in a flexible and
professional way. This makes researchers from Erasmus University
attractive partners for top research. This is why QARD needs to be
flexible and agile, with empathy for the relevant ‘context of collaboration’.

13. Rules and Principles
4: Multilevel: QA programme and RDM projects
We propose to work from a two level approach: programme (long term
logic) and project (short term logic and make these two aligned in a
sensible way.
We propose to see the QARD programme as an institutional journey,
with 5 levels of achievements developed from a long term determination
for excellence in research. We propose a programme perspective to
cover the next 10 years (see example of the maturity levels model)

14. Maturity Model
Quality Assurance of
Research Data is a maturity
process. It is an institutional
journey with levels of
achievements. For this the
Research Data Management
Framework: Capability
Maturity Guide, as developed
by the Australian National
Data Service (ANDS) is
leading.
See online:
http://ands.org.au/guides/dmf
ramework/dmf-capability-
maturity-guide.html

15. Rules and Principles
5: Academic governance, professional support
Governance of the QARD initiative is placed under the recently
appointed Vice Rector Research and organized with excellent
academics in the lead. The QARD has an academic advisory board.
The University Library unit for Academic Services will be enabled to
deliver the expertise for the organizational and technical support of the
QARD and plan development and maintenance for the project-level
RDM. The Academic service unit will collaborate with relevant internal
and external experts for the delivering of their services.

16. Rules and Principles
6: Evaluation for Continuous Improvement
The QARD is monitored for continuous improvement by annual and 5-
annual assessments.
To assess the annual progress of the QARD professionalization journey,
an annual meta analysis is performed on the progress, performed in
accordance with relevant international standards.
Every 5 year the QARD performs a “SEP-like” self assessment report
and external IPR assessment report to the Executive Board EUR on the
progress of the quality assurance in according to international standards

17. Rules and Principles
7: Standard EUR practice: Integrity pledge
Responsible research data management is a matter of attitude, of
underlying principles and compliance with specified standards within a
specific context. Compliance depends on context and sometimes even
means compliance to applicable laws and regulations and compliance to
requirements from publishers or research funders are examples of the
latter.
It is standard EUR practice that faculty sign the scientific integrity
pledge, and act, in principle, in accordance with the Netherlands Code of
Conduct for Academic Practice, as defined by the VSNU.

18. Rules and Principles
To give an overview of the complexity of the QARD, we show how
different aspects of data can be identified to be documented in different
stages of the research life cycle. The following provides a visual
representation of the possible data elements that can be identified

19. Rules and Principles
The minimum protocol lists what all scientific and scholarly disciplines
have in common and what at least and in general should be properly
stated and documented for compliance to the quality assurance of data.
Compliancy to the Quality Assurance of Research Data.

20. Elsevier RDM roadmap
Source: https://www.elsevier.com/connect/10-aspects-of-highly-effective-research-data

21. IT at Academia: bimodal IT
Source: http://www.slideshare.net/vashistvishal/2-speed-it-matt

22. IT at Academia: Bimodal IT
Think: Shared Service Center IT Think: Research IT
Source: https://www.mendix.com/blog/mit-sloan-cio-symposium-bimodal-it-agile-and-speed/

23. Legal Matters - complexiteit
1. de complexiteit van wet- en regelgeving zelf die in een bepaald geval tegelijk van
toepassing is (bijvoorbeeld bij internationale onderzoeksprojecten met verschillende
wetgeving),
2. het juridisch kader dat varieert, afhankelijk van de aard van de data (bijv.
auteursrecht bij beeldmateriaal, geen bescherming bij meetgegevens),
3. het feit dat de wet- en regelgeving niet voor elke situatie direct toepasbaar is, maar
interpretatie vergt,
4. het feit dat verschillende belangen voor de verschillende partijen dienen te worden
geborgd (bijvoorbeeld bij publiek / private samenwerking) in onderhandelingen hierbij
rekening houdend met soms elkaar conflicterende geldende wet- en regelgeving en
bepalingen in standaardcontracten en agreements.
5. en tenslotte het feit dat wet- en regelgeving met enige regelmaat zelf aan
verandering onderhevig is (zie bijvoorbeeld m.b.t. privacy de meldplicht datalekken
en de nieuwe Europese Privacy Verordening).

24. Legal Matters – risico’s
1. Instelling /onderzoeker kan aansprakelijk worden gesteld
2. Belang van instelling / de onderzoeker / het onderzoek wordt niet
gediend
3. Risico van niet toegekende onderzoeksgelden (3e geldstroom)
4. Reputatieschade instelling / onderzoeker
5. Efficiëntie

25. Legal Matters

26. Legal Matters – landelijke werkgroep
Landelijk Coördinatiepunt Research Data Management [LCRDM]:
werkgroep juridische aspecten research data management
Doelstelling: Teweeg te brengen dat in een goede samenwerking tussen
de instellingen juridische expertise wordt ontwikkeld en gedeeld, op
basis waarvan binnen de instelling zelf goed advies kan worden
gegeven over de juridische aspecten aangaande research data
management, op zo’n manier dat juridische risico’s worden
geminimaliseerd en deze geen obstakel vormen voor onderzoek, het
delen van onderzoeksgegevens of de
valorisatie van deze
onderzoeksgegevens.
Kernteam werkgroep:
Esther Hoorn (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen)
Melika Nariman (Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam)
Marlon Domingus (Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam)
LCRDM:
Ingeborg Verheul (SURF)
Paul van den Brink (SURF)

27. Legal Matters: privacy
Source: http://docs.oasis-open.org/pbd-se/pbd-se/v1.0/pbd-se-v1.0.pdf

28. Further Information
drs. Marlon Domingus
project manager
Research Support Office
Erasmus University Rotterdam
+31 10 4088006
domingus@ubib.eur.nl