A presentation on my research context presented at the Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford as part of the DPhil Doctoral Seminar Series on Nov. 22, 2017. This early-stage presentation provides some background and context and introduces my research topic. This presentation is licensed for re-use under Creative Commons CC-BY license. Please cite the following DOI: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1066021 https://www.zenodo.org/record/1066021#.WhgWnVVl_cs

1. Webs of Life and Data:
Impacts of open and networked data on
scientific practices in biodiversity studies
(in natural history museum collections)
Sarah A. Stewart, Doctoral Student, Oxford Internet Institute,
University of Oxford
Supervisors: Eric Meyer, Kathryn Eccles
Twitter: @Biostew
D.Phil Seminar, Wednesday Nov. 22, 2017. 41 St. Giles

2. Stated Research Aim:
‘The proposed doctoral dissertation work will investigate the impact of
open and networked digital data on biodiversity research, focussing on
data discovery and search, data sharing, and data communication
within the context of natural history museum collections.’

3. A Bit of Background:

4. Biodiversity: Knowledge of Life on Earth
• ‘Study of the variety of life on earth,
ranging from gene-level differences to
ecosystems’ – E.O. Wilson (The
Diversity of Life, 2001).
• Taxonomy and Systematics: One of the
most ‘informational’ branches of the
biosciences
• Heterogenous data types, ranging
from historical documents (field
notebooks, artworks) to physical
specimens and genetic and genomic
sequences and ecological data

5. Scientific Practices in Biodiversity Studies
• Science as the ‘adventure of the
interlocking of representing and
intervening’ (Ian Hacking, 1983)
– data creation through
specimen collecting,
identification/comparison with
‘type’ or designation as ‘type’,
and display/archiving.
• Data dissemination and
communication - publication
• Sociotechnical factors?

6. A Long-Tail Science: ‘Science of the Archive’
• Biodiversity studies are a ‘science
of the archive’ (Daston, 2012) in
that they rely on collections of
specimens and data both to
produce a science with a long
disciplinary memory and to inform
future researchers in the discipline.
• Many historical transitions in
scientific Practices and knowledge-
production, changing with new
developments in technology for
study and communication.

7. Wunderkammer: ‘Cabinets of Curiosity’ and
‘Tomes’ of Beasts and Plants

8. Natural History as an Enlightenment Science
• ‘Organisation of Nature’
• Collections and Exploration, eg.
Sir Hans Sloane (founder of the
British Museum)
• Classification and taxonomy
schemes such as the (currently
accepted) Linnean taxonomy of
bi-nomial Latin nomenclature
and nested, hierarchical
classification
Linneaus’ Systema Natura (1758, 10th Ed)

9. 19th Century: Darwinian Evolution and
‘Indexed’ Nature
• Concept of ‘species’ and
evolutionary descent, natural
history, systematics and
taxonomy as a formal science.
• Classification and taxonomy
‘refined’
• ‘Amateur’ Naturalists
• Foundation of many of the
world’s great Natural History
Museums

10. Classification and Indexing:
Natural History Collections
NHM Mineralogy Gallery, 1881 NHM Mineralogy Gallery, 2000s

11. Natural History as a ‘CyberScience’
• Computers and ICT and their
impact on a previously ‘analog’
scientific discipline.
• Christine Hine – Ethnographic
study of the impact of ICTs on
scientific practice (2008).
• Findings: New technological
developments do not make science
more ‘efficient’, but rather are
highly discipline-specific, Complex
considerations impacting on
scientists in their research
practices.

12. ‘Informational Crisis’ in Biodiversity Studies
• Rich data available in the form of museum collections, yet
‘informational crisis’ exists
• Data sources are disparate and distributed.
• Difficult for users (scientists) and endusers (eg. Policy makers) to
access and use biodiversity data
• UK House of Lords Reports (1992, 2002, 2008) lack of informational
integrity and communication.

13. Beyond CyberScience: The ‘Data Paradigm’
• Digitization of museum collections, data and metadata
• Creation of ‘Data Portals’ and online digital collections – not merely
catalogues
• Rise of Biodiversity Informatics

14. Biological Entity to Data?

15. The (Typical) Research Data Lifecycle

16. Data Types and Uses (Borgman, 2008)

17. Natural History Museum Data Portal (2014)

18. Smithsonian Data Portal
(Tropical Research Institute)

19. iDiv (Germany) Data Portal

20. Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle (Paris)

21. OneZoom Tree of Life

22. Open and Networked Data impacting on
Scientific Practice?
• Has open, networked data (such as data portals and digitized
collections) changed the way that data is gathered in the course of
research?
• How are digital data ‘discovered’ for use and re-use?
• What are the data sharing practices employed by researchers in
biodiversity studies, and have these changed with the advent of the
‘data paradigm’?

23. ‘Knowledge Machines’
• Meyer and Schroeder (2015) –
‘Digital tools and data, used
collaboratively and in distributed
mode’ has transformed how
research is done and how
researchers do their work.
• Online ‘knowledge machines’
are the result of changing
practices in how knowledge is
produced.

24. Biodiversity Studies as an ‘Emergent
Knowledge Machine?’
• Is biodiversity being transformed by the application and embedding
of networked data and can it be considered to be a ‘knowledge
machine’ (sensu Meyer and Schroeder)?
• Has the development of global networked data resources for
biodiversity research enabled greater use and exploration of natural
history collections, not only by research practitioners in the discipline,
but also by others, such as policy makers or citizen scientists?

25. Why does this matter?
• Biodiversity Data is not only used by scientists – It is used by policy
makers, conservationists, environmentalists and in other fields such
as surveying and agriculture.
• Data can be political.

26. Censorship/Erasure of ‘Political’ Climate
Change Data (US EPA Website)

27. Democratizing Data: Openness Matters!
• Many research funders now see
data generated in scientific
research as a ‘public good’ which
should be made openly
available.
• Most of the world’s biodiversity
is in the Global South.
• Most funding and research
infrastrcutures are in the Global
North.

28. Citizen Science

29. Thank You! Questions?
Sarah A. Stewart, Doctoral Student, Oxford
Internet Institute, University of Oxford
sarah.stewart@sant.ox.ac.uk
Twitter: @Biostew
Supervisors:
Dr. Eric T. Meyer,
Dr. Kathryn Eccles