Technology transfer and true transformation: Implications for open data

被引:3
作者
Bezuidenhout L. [1 ]
机构
[1] University of Oxford, United Kingdom
关键词
Data sharing; Low/middle-income countries; Pace; Research; Technology;
D O I
10.5334/dsj-2017-026
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
When considering the “openness” of data it is unsurprising that most conversations focus on the online environment - how data is collated, moved and recombined for multiple purposes. Nonetheless, it is important to recognize that the movements online are only part of the data lifecycle. Indeed, considering where and how data are created - namely, the research setting - are of key importance to Open Data initiatives. In particular, such insights offer key understandings of how and why scientists engage with in practices of openness, and how data transitions from personal control to public ownership. This paper examines research settings in low/middle-income countries (LMIC) to better understand how resource limitations influence Open Data buy-in. Using empirical fieldwork in Kenyan and South African laboratories it draws attention to some key issues currently overlooked in Open Data discussions. First, that many of the hesitations raised by the scientists about sharing data were as much tied to the speed of their research as to any other factor. Thus, it would seem that the longer it takes for individual scientists to create data, the more hesitant they are about sharing it. Second, that the pace of research is a multifaceted bind involving many different challenges relating to laboratory equipment and infrastructure. Indeed, it is unlikely that one single solution (such as equipment donation) will ameliorate these “binds of pace”. Third, that these “binds of pace” were used by the scientists to construct “narratives of exclusion” through which they remove themselves from responsibility for data sharing. Using an adapted model of technology first proposed by Elihu Gerson, the paper then offers key ways in which these critical “binds of pace” can be addressed in Open Data discourse. In particular, it calls for an expanded understanding of laboratory equipment and research speed to include all aspects of the research environment. It also advocates for better engagement with LMIC scientists regarding these challenges and the adoption of frugal/responsible design principles in future Open Data initiatives. © 2017 The Author(s).
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 16 条
[1]  
Bezuidenhout L., Ethics in the minutiae: Examining the role of the physical laboratory environment in ethical discourse, Science and Engineering Ethics, 21, pp. 51-73, (2015)
[2]  
Bezuidenhout L., Kelly A., Rappert B., Leonelli S., Beyond the Digital Divide: Towards a Situated Approach to Open Data
[3]  
Bezuidenhout L., Leonelli S., Kelly A., $100 is Not Much to You, (2016)
[4]  
Bezuidenhout L., Rappert B., What Hinders Data Sharing in African Science? Presentation and Paper at Fourth Codesria Conference on Electronic Publishing, (2016)
[5]  
Bull S., Ensuring Global Equity in Open Research, (2016)
[6]  
Fine J., Investing in STI in Sub-Saharan Africa: Lessons from Collaborative Initiatives in Research and Higher Education, (2007)
[7]  
Gerson E., Resituating New Data Collection Technologies, (2015)
[8]  
Harle J., Growing Knowledge: Access to Research in East and Southern African Universities, (2010)
[9]  
Neylon C., Willmers M., King T., Illustrating Impact. Applying Altmetrics to Southern African Research, (2014)
[10]  
OECD Principles and Guidelines for Access to Research Data from Public Funding, (2007)