Support Us

You are browsing the archive for Working Groups.

New Open Knowledge Initiative on the Future of Open Access in the Humanities and Social Sciences

Jonathan Gray - October 21, 2014 in Open Access, Open Humanities, Open Research, WG Humanities

This post is part of our Open Access Week blog series to highlight great work in Open Access communities around the world.

Screen Shot 2014-10-21 at 11.57.15

To coincide with Open Access Week, Open Knowledge is launching a new initiative focusing on the future of open access in the humanities and social sciences.

The Future of Scholarship project aims to build a stronger, better connected network of people interested in open access in the humanities and social sciences. It will serve as a central point of reference for leading voices, examples, practical advice and critical debate about the future of humanities and social sciences scholarship on the web.

If you’d like to join us and hear about new resources and developments in this area, please leave us your details and we’ll be in touch.

For now we’ll leave you with some thoughts on why open access to humanities and social science scholarship matters:

“Open access is important because it can give power and resources back to academics and universities; because it rightly makes research more widely and publicly available; and because, like it or not, it’s beginning and this is our brief chance to shape its future so that it benefits all of us in the humanities and social sciences” – Robert Eaglestone, Professor of Contemporary Literature and Thought, Royal Holloway, University of London.

*

“For scholars, open access is the most important movement of our times. It offers an unprecedented opportunity to open up our research to the world, irrespective of readers’ geographical, institutional or financial limitations. We cannot falter in pursuing a fair academic landscape that facilitates such a shift, without transferring prohibitive costs onto scholars themselves in order to maintain unsustainable levels of profit for some parts of the commercial publishing industry.” Dr Caroline Edwards, Lecturer in Modern & Contemporary Literature, Birkbeck, University of London and Co-Founder of the Open Library of Humanities

*

“If you write to be read, to encourage critical thinking and to educate, then why wouldn’t you disseminate your work as far as possible? Open access is the answer.” – Martin Eve, Co-Founder of the Open Library of Humanities and Lecturer, University of Lincoln.

*

“Our open access monograph The History Manifesto argues for breaking down the barriers between academics and wider publics: open-access publication achieved that. The impact was immediate, global and uniquely gratifying–a chance to inject ideas straight into the bloodstream of civic discussion around the world. Kudos to Cambridge University Press for supporting innovation!” — David Armitage, Professor and Chair of the Department of History, Harvard University and co-author of The History Manifesto

*

“Technology allows for efficient worldwide dissemination of research and scholarship. But closed distribution models can get in the way. Open access helps to fulfill the promise of the digital age. It benefits the public by making knowledge freely available to everyone, not hidden behind paywalls. It also benefits authors by maximizing the impact and dissemination of their work.” – Jennifer Jenkins, Senior Lecturing Fellow and Director, Center for the Study of the Public Domain, Duke University

*

“Unhappy with your current democracy providers? Work for political and institutional change by making your research open access and joining the struggle for the democratization of democracy” – Gary Hall, co-founder of Open Humanities Press and Professor of Media and Performing Arts, Coventry University

September Community Summit On Air

Heather Leson - September 3, 2014 in Community, Events, Open Knowledge Foundation Local Groups, Working Groups

We’re hosting a September Community Call. Join us to discuss a number of community programming ideas and help make a plan. All welcome. okfest by artepilpilean

(Amazing drawing by Artepilpilean)

  • What: September Community Summit On Air
  • Date: Wednesday, September 10th
  • Your Local time:
  • 8:00 – 9:00 EDT, 13:00 – 14:00 BST, 14:00 – 15:00 CEST (Also see worldtimebuddy.com)
  • Duration: 1 hour
  • Registration
Draft Agenda
  • Talk about how to implement some of the OKFest Community Summit Outputs
  • Source: )
  • Outline the International Council
  • Plan Fall Community programming (e.g. Skillshares)

Talk Soon!

All-star wrap-up of a month of Open Knowledge events all around the world – May 2014

Beatrice Martini - June 5, 2014 in Events, OKF Argentina, OKF Greece, OKF Italy, OKF Scotland, OKF Switzerland, Open Knowledge Foundation, Open Knowledge Foundation Local Groups, Sprint / Hackday, Working Groups, Workshop

Last month flew by! It’s already June and time to turn the spotlight on the Open Knowledge community’s events which rocked the month of May!

Bikestorming is a mobile app to grow urban cycling in cities around the world, developed by members of Open Knowledge Argentina’s community. Matías Kalwill gave a Pecha Kucha talk in Buenos Aires, and was invited to record an English version for Pecha Kucha’s international website. Check it out to learn about this exciting project featuring a strong open knowledge ecosystem, including open data, open web technologies and community-powered events inspired by School of Data’s Data Expeditions started on the International Open Data Day at Buenos Aires. Must watch!

Rob Edwards, Ally Tibbitt, Sarah Hutchinson, Jackie McKenzie and Jennifer Jones co-facilitated a one-day workshop, bringing together people working on FOI, on journalism, and on open data. Many were the discussion items: is the information disclosed under FOIA accessible as it could be? How can Open Government Data policies best be integrated with FOI disclosure? Can FOI disclosure logs help us understand what types of data are most in demand? Is greater ‘data literacy’ necessary for both the media and the public to understand the potential and limitations of data? Read more about it here.

  • Busy month for Open Knowledge Greece!

The month kicked off with the final celebration and presentations of the first Greek Data Expedition, ended on May 7. The data expedition was as an initiative by the Open Knowledge Foundation Chapter in Greece, working in collaboration with the IT Applications laboratory in Media (AUTH Department of Journalism), and Postgraduate WebScience (AUTH Department of Mathematics) in Thessaloniki. The data journalism issues analysed focused on air quality in Greece, new technologies in business, student Mobility in Europe and Greece and e-Government. The articles presenting the expeditions’ results will be posted on the Greek School of Data website. European-Student-Mobility Then on May 27 Open Knowledge Greece invited community members and curious citizens to an open workshop to develop together the statements and propositions in regards to the Greek Action Plan 2014 – 2016 for the Open Government Partnership Initiative. Keep up the good work, Greece!

DNAdigest, a non-profit organisation aiming to educate, facilitate and engage on issues regarding access to genomic data, hosted an editathon with the goal to make it easier to find new resources, online tools and recent content for genetics research when searching Wikipedia. The editathon was open to participants in London as well as online contributors. Offline meets online collaboration – well done! tumblr_inline_n5j63gAD791suuv9r

Sport is fun, sport is healthy, sport is a business – and sport is increasingly data, too. There are huge amounts of data collected by fans, on global spectator sport and local junior leagues, on big matches and tiny niches. And personal data, too: bike routes, running trails and more. The Sports hackdays explored and celebrated open sports data and also represented the first project aiming to kick-off a new Open Knowledge Working Group dedicated to all things sports and open data. We’re sure that with the World Cup approaching we’ll hear more about it very soon! Screen Shot 2014-05-22 at 11.23.50 AM

What a month! Are you running an Open Knowledge event? We want to hear from you – share your event stories for next months’ global roundup! Please submit your blogposts about your June events to the Community Tumblr (details about how/where here) by July 6 in order to be featured in our all-star monthly wrap-up to be published in July on the main Open Knowledge blog and channels!

Newsflash! OKFestival Programme Launches

Beatrice Martini - June 4, 2014 in Events, Free Culture, Join us, Network, News, OKFest, OKFestival, Open Access, Open Data, Open Development, Open Economics, Open Education, Open GLAM, Open Government Data, Open Humanities, Open Knowledge Foundation, Open Knowledge Foundation Local Groups, Open Research, Open Science, Open Spending, Open Standards, Panton Fellows, Privacy, Public Domain, Training, Transparency, Working Groups

At last, it’s here!

Check out the details of the OKFestival 2014 programme – including session descriptions, times and facilitator bios here!

Screen Shot 2014-06-04 at 4.11.42 PM

We’re using a tool called Sched to display the programme this year and it has several great features. Firstly, it gives individual session organisers the ability to update the details on the session they’re organising; this includes the option to add slides or other useful material. If you’re one of the facilitators we’ll be emailing you to give you access this week.

Sched also enables every user to create their own personalised programme to include the sessions they’re planning to attend. We’ve also colour-coded the programme to help you when choosing which conversations you want to follow: the Knowledge stream is blue, the Tools stream is red and the Society stream is green. You’ll also notice that there are a bunch of sessions in purple which correspond to the opening evening of the festival when we’re hosting an Open Knowledge Fair. We’ll be providing more details on what to expect from that shortly!

Another way to search the programme is by the subject of the session – find these listed on the right hand side of the main schedule – just click on any of them to see a list of sessions relevant to that subject.

As you check out the individual session pages, you’ll see that we’ve created etherpads for each session where notes can be taken and shared, so don’t forget to keep an eye on those too. And finally; to make the conversations even easier to follow from afar using social media, we’re encouraging session organisers to create individual hashtags for their sessions. You’ll find these listed on each session page.

We received over 300 session suggestions this year – the most yet for any event we’ve organised – and we’ve done our best to fit in as many as we can. There are 66 sessions packed into 2.5 days, plus 4 keynotes and 2 fireside chats. We’ve also made space for an unconference over the 2 core days of the festival, so if you missed out on submitting a proposal, there’s still a chance to present your ideas at the event: come ready to pitch! Finally, the Open Knowledge Fair has added a further 20 demos – and counting – to the lineup and is a great opportunity to hear about more projects. The Programme is full to bursting, and while some time slots may still change a little, we hope you’ll dive right in and start getting excited about July!

We think you’ll agree that Open Knowledge Festival 2014 is shaping up to be an action-packed few days – so if you’ve not bought your ticket yet, do so now! Come join us for what will be a memorable 2014 Festival!

See you in Berlin! Your OKFestival 2014 Team

Upcoming Community Sessions: CKAN, Community Feedback

Heather Leson - April 28, 2014 in CKAN, Events, Network, Open Knowledge Foundation Local Groups, Our Work, Working Groups

Happy week! We are hosting two Community Sessions this week. You have expressed an interest in learning more about CKAN. As well, We are continuing our regular Community Feedback sessions.

Boy and the world image

Take a CKAN Tour:

This week we will give an overview and tour of CKAN – the leading open source open data platform used by the national governments of the US, UK, Brazil, Canada, Australia, France, Germany, Austria and many more. This session will cover why data portals are useful, what they provide and showcase examples and best practices from CKAN’s varied user base! Bring your questions on how to get started and best practices.

Guest: Irina Bolychevsky, Services Director (Open Knowledge) Questions are welcome via G+ or Twitter.

  • Date: Wednesday, April 30, 2014
  • Time: 7:30 PT /10:30 ET /14:30 UTC /15:30 BST/16:30 CEST
  • Duration: 1 hour
  • Register and Join via G+ (The Hangout will be recorded.)
Community Feedback Session

We promised to schedule another Community Feedback Session. It is hard to find a common time for folks. We will work on timeshifting these for next sessions. This is a chance to ask questions, give input and help shape Open Knowledge.

Please join Laura, Naomi and I for the next Community Feedback Session. Bring your ideas and questions.

  • Date: Wednesday, April 30, 2014
  • Time:9:00 PT/12:00EDT/16:00 UTC /17:00 BST/18:00 CEST
  • Duration:1 hour
  • Join via Meeting Burner

We will use Meeting Burner and IRC. (Note: We will record both of these.)

How to join meeting Burner: Audio instructions Option 1 Dial-in to the following conference line: Number 1- (949) 229 – 4400 # Option 2 You may join the conference bridge with your computer’s microphone/speakers or headset

How to join IRC: http://wiki.okfn.org/How_to_use_IRC/_Clients_and_Tips

More about the new Open Knowledge Brand

Host a Community Session in May

We are booking Community Sessions for May. These Open Knowledge online events can be in a number of forms: a scheduled IRC chat, a community google hangout, a technical sprint or an editathon. The goal is to connect the community to learn and share their stories and skills. If you would like to suggest a session or host one, please contact heather dot leson at okfn dot org.

More details about Community Sessions

(Photo: Heather Leson (San Francisco))

Building an archaeological project repository II: Where are the research data repositories?

Guest - April 17, 2014 in CKAN, Open Science, WG Archaeology

This is a guest post by Anthony Beck, Honorary fellow, and Dave Harrison, Research fellow, at the University of Leeds School of Computing

DART_UML_DART_2011_2013_RAW

Data repository as research tool

In a previous post, we examined why Open Science is necessary to take advantage of the huge corpus of data generated by modern science. In our project Detection of Archaeological residues using Remote sensing Techniques, or DART, we adopted Open Science principles and made all the project’s extensive data available through a purpose-built data repository built on the open-source CKAN platform. But with so many academic repositories, why did we need to roll our own? A final post will look at how the portal was implemented.

DART: data-driven archaeology

DART’s overall aim is to develop analytical methods to differentiate archaeological sediments from non-archaeological strata, on the basis of remotely detected phenomena (e.g. resistivity, apparent dielectric permittivity, crop growth, thermal properties etc). DART is a data rich project: over a 14 month period, in-situ soil moisture, soil temperature and weather data were collected at least once an hour; ground based geophysical surveys and spectro-radiometry transects were conducted at least monthly; aerial surveys collecting hyperspectral, LiDAR and traditional oblique and vertical photographs were taken throughout the year, and laboratory analyses and tests were conducted on both soil and plant samples. The data archive itself is in the order of terabytes.

Analysis of this archive is ongoing; meanwhile, this data and other resources are made available through open access mechanisms under liberal licences and are thus accessible to a wide audience. To achieve this we used the open-source CKAN platform to build a data repository, DARTPortal, which includes a publicly queryable spatio-temporal database (on the same host), and can support access to individual data as well as mining or analysis of integrated data.

This means we can share the data analysis and transformation processes and demonstrate how we transform data into information and synthesise this information into knowledge (see, for example, this Ipython notebook which dynamically exploits the database connection). This is the essence of Open Science: exposing the data and processes that allow others to replicate and more effectively build on our science.

Lack of existing infrastructure

Pleased though we are with our data repository, it would have been nice not to have to build it! Individual research projects should not bear the burden of implementing their own data repository framework. This is much better suited to local or national institutions where the economies of scale come into their own. Yet in 2010 the provision of research data infrastructure that supported what DART did was either non-existent or poorly advertised. Where individual universities provided institutional repositories, these were focused on publications (the currency of prestige and career advancement) and not on data. Irrespective of other environments, none of the DART collaborating partners provided such a data infrastructure.

Data sharing sites like Figshare did not exist – and when it did exist the size of our hyperspectral data, in particular, was quite rightly a worry. This situation is slowly changing, but it is still far from ideal. The positions taken by Research Councils UK and the Engineering and Physical Science Research Council (EPSRC) on improving access to data are key catalysts for change. The EPSRC statement is particularly succinct:

Two of the principles are of particular importance: firstly, that publicly funded research data should generally be made as widely and freely available as possible in a timely and responsible manner; and, secondly, that the research process should not be damaged by the inappropriate release of such data.

This has produced a simple economic issue – if research institutions can not demonstrate that they can manage research data in the manner required by the funding councils then they will become ineligible to receive grant funding from that council. The impact is that the majority of universities are now developing their own, or collaborating on communal, data repositories.

But what about formal data deposition environments?

DART was generously funded through the Science and Heritage Programme supported by the UK Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and the EPSRC. This means that these research councils will pay for data archiving in the appropriate domain repository, in this case the Archaeology Data Service (ADS). So why produce our own repository?

Deposition to the ADS would only have occurred after the project had finished. With DART, the emphasis has been on re-use and collaboration rather than primarily on archiving. These goals are not mutually exclusive: the methods adopted by DART mean that we produced data that is directly suitable for archiving (well documented ASCII formats, rich supporting description and discovery metadata, etc) whilst also allowing more rapid exposure and access to the ‘full’ archive. This resulted in DART generating much richer resource discovery and description metadata than would have been the case if the data was simply deposited into the ADS.

The point of the DART repository was to produce an environment which would facilitate good data management practice and collaboration during the lifetime of the project. This is representative of a crucial shift in thinking, where projects and data collectors consider re-use, discovery, licences and metadata at a much earlier stage in the project life cycle: in effect, to create dynamic and accessible repositories that have impact across the broad stakeholder community rather than focussing solely on the academic community. The same underpinning philosophy of encouraging re-use is seen at both FigShare and DataHub. Whilst formal archiving of data is to be encouraged, if it is not re-useable, or more importantly easily re-useable, within orchestrated scientific workflow frameworks then what is the point.

In addition, it is unlikely that the ADS will take the full DART archive. It has been said that archaeological archives can produce lots of extraneous or redundant ‘stuff’. This can be exacerbated by the unfettered use of digital technologies – how many digital images are really required for the same trench? Whilst we have sympathy with this argument, there is a difference between ‘data’ and ‘pretty pictures’: as data analysts, we consider that a digital photograph is normally a data resource and rarely a pretty picture. Hence, every image has value.

This is compounded when advances in technology mean that new data can be extracted from ‘redundant’ resources. For example, Structure from Motion (SfM) is a Computer Vision technique that extracts 3D information from 2D objects. From a series of overlapping photographs, SfM techniques can be used to extract 3D point clouds and generate orthophotographs from which accurate measurements can be taken. In the case of SfM there is no such thing as redundancy, as each image becomes part of a ‘bundle’ and the statistical characteristics of the bundle determine the accuracy of the resultant model. However, one does need to be pragmatic, and it is currently impractical for organisations like the ADS to accept unconstrained archives. That said, it is an area that needs review: if a research object is important enough to have detailed metadata created about it, then it should be important enough to be archived.

For DART, this means that the ADS is hosting a subset of the archive in long-term re-use formats, which will be available in perpetuity (which formally equates to a maximum of 25 years), while the DART repository will hold the full archive in long term re-use formats until we run out of server money. We are are in discussion with Leeds University to migrate all the data objects over to the new institutional repository with sparkling new DOIs and we can transfer the metadata held in CKAN over to Open Knowledge’s public repository, the dataHub. In theory nothing should be lost.

How long is forever?

The point on perpetuity is interesting. Collins Dictionary defines perpetuity as ‘eternity’. However, the ADS defines ‘digital’ perpetuity as 25 years. This raises the question: is it more effective in the long term to deposit in ‘formal’ environments (with an intrinsic focus on preservation format over re-use), or in ‘informal’ environments (with a focus on re-use and engagement over preservation (Flickr, Wikimedia Commons, DART repository based on CKAN, etc)? Both Flickr and Wikimedia Commons have been around for over a decade. Distributed peer to peer sharing, as used in Git, produces more robust and resilient environments which are equally suited to longer term preservation. Whilst the authors appreciate that the situation is much more nuanced, particularly with the introduction of platforms that facilitate collaborative workflow development, this does have an impact on long-term deployment.

Choosing our licences

Licences are fundamental to the successful re-use of content. Licences describe who can use a resource, what they can do with this resource and how they should reference any resource (if at all).

Two lead organisations have developed legal frameworks for content licensing, Creative Commons (CC) and Open Data Commons (ODC). Until the release of CC version 4, published in November 2013, the CC licence did not cover data. Between them, CC and ODC licences can cover all forms of digital work.

At the top level the licences are permissive public domain licences (CC0 and PDDL respectively) that impose no restrictions on the licensees use of the resource. ‘Anything goes’ in a public domain licence: the licensee can take the resource and adapt it, translate it, transform it, improve upon it (or not!), package it, market it, sell it, etc. Constraints can be added to the top level licence by employing the following clauses:

  • BY – By attribution: the licensee must attribute the source.
  • SA – Share-alike: if the licensee adapts the resource, they must release the adapted resource under the same licence.
  • NC – Non commercial: the licensee must not use the work within a commercial activity without prior approval. Interestingly, in many area of the world, the use of material in university lectures may be considered a commercial activity. The non-commercial restriction about the nature of the activity, not the legal status of the institution doing the work.
  • ND – No derivatives: the licensee can not derive new content from the resource.

Each of these clauses decreases the ‘open-ness’ of the resource. In fact, the NC and ND clause are not intrinsically open (they restrict both who can use and what you can do with the resource). These restrictive clauses have the potential to produce license incompatibilities which may introduce profound problems in the medium to long term. This is particularly relevant to the SA clause. Share-alike means that any derived output must be licensed under the same conditions as the source content. If content is combined (or mashed up) – which is essential when one is building up a corpus of heritage resources – then content created under a SA clause can not be combined with content that includes a restrictive clause (BY, NC or ND) that is not in the source licence. This licence incompatibility has a significant impact on the nature of the data commons. It has the potential to fragment the data landscape creating pockets of knowledge which are rarely used in mainstream analysis, research or policy making. This will be further exacerbated when automated data aggregation and analysis systems become the norm. A permissive licence without clauses like Non-commercial, Share-alike or No-derivatives removes such licence and downstream re-user fragmentation issues.

For completeness, specific licences have been created for Open Government Data. The UK Government Data Licence for public sector information is essentially an open licence with a BY attribution clause.

At DART we have followed the guidelines of The Open Data Institute and separated out creative content (illustrations, text, etc.) from data content. Hence, the DART content is either CC-BY or ODC-BY respectively. In the future we believe it would be useful to drop the BY (attribution) clause. This would stop attribute stacking (if the resource you are using is a derivative of a derivative of a derivative of a ….. (you get the picture), at what stage do you stop attribution) and anything which requires bureaucracy, such as attributing an image in a powerpoint presentation, inhibits re-use (one should always assume that people are intrinsically lazy). There is a post advocating ccZero+ by Dan Cohen. However, impact tracking may mean that the BY clause becomes a default for academic deposition.

The ADS uses a more restrictive bespoke default licence which does not map to national or international licence schemes (they also don’t recognise non CC licences). Resources under this licence can only be used for teaching, learning, and research purposes. Of particular concern is their use of the NC clause and possible use of the ND clause (depending on how you interpret the licence). Interestingly, policy changes mean that the use of data under the bespoke ADS licence becomes problematic if university teaching activities are determined to be commercial. It is arguable that the payment of tuition fees represents a commercial activity. If this is true then resources released under the ADS licence can not be used within university teaching which is part of a commercial activity. Hence, the policy change in student tuition and university funding has an impact on the commercial nature of university teaching which has a subsequent impact on what data or resources universities are licensed to use. Whilst it may never have been the intention of the ADS to produce a licence with this potential paradox, it is a problem when bespoke licences are developed, even if they were originally perceived to be relatively permissive licences. To remove this ambiguity it is recommended that submissions to the ADS are provided under a CC licence which renders the bespoke ADS licence void.

In the case of DART, these licence variations with the ADS should not be a problem. Our licences are permissive (by attribution is the only clause we have included). This means the ADS can do anything they want with our resources as long as they cite the source. In our case this would be the individual resource objects or collections on the DART portal. This is a good thing, as the metadata on the DART portal is much richer than the metadata held by the ADS.

Concerns about opening up data, and responses which have proved effective

Christopher Gutteridge (University of Southampton) and Alexander Dutton (University of Oxford) have collated a Google doc entitled ‘Concerns about opening up data, and responses which have proved effective‘. This document describes a number of concerns commonly raised by academic colleagues about increasing access to data. For DART two issues became problematic that were not covered by this document:

  • The relationship between open data and research novelty and the impact this may have on a PhD submission.
  • Journal publication – specifically that a journal won’t publish a research paper if the underlying data is open.

The former point is interesting – does the process of undertaking open science, or at least providing open data, undermine the novelty of the resultant scientific process? With open science it could be difficult to directly attribute the contribution, or novelty, of a single PhD student to an openly collaborative research process. However, that said, if online versioning tools like Git are used, then it is clear who has contributed what to a piece of code or a workflow (the benefits of the BY clause). This argument is less solid when we are talking solely about open data. Whilst it is true that other researchers (or anybody else for that matter) have access to the data, it is highly unlikely that multiple researchers will use the same data to answer exactly the same question. If they do ask the same question (and making the optimistic assumption that they reach the same conclusion), it is still highly unlikely that they will have done so by the same methods; and even if they do, their implementations will be different. If multiple methods using the same source data reach the same conclusion then there is an increased likelihood that the conclusion is correct and that the science is even more certain. The underlying point here is that 21st-century scientific practice will substantially benefit from people showing their working. Exposure of the actual process of scientific enquiry (the algorithms, code, etc.) will make the steps between data collection and publication more transparent, reproduceable and peer-reviewable – or, quite simply, more scientific. Hence, we would argue that open data and research novelty is only a problem if plagiarism is a problem.

The journal publication point is equally interesting. Publications are the primary metric for academic career progression and kudos. In this instance it was the policy of the ‘leading journal in this field’ that they would not publish a paper from a dataset that was already published. No credible reasons were provided for this clause – which seems draconian in the extreme. It does indicate that no one size fits all approach will work in the academic landscape. It will also be interesting to see how this journal, which publishes work which is mainly funded by EPSRC, responds to the EPSRC guidelines on open data.

This is also a clear demonstration that the academic community needs to develop new metrics that are more suited to 21st century research and scholarship by directly link academic career progression to other source of impact that go beyond publications. Furthermore, academia needs some high-profile exemplars that demonstrate clearly how to deal with such change. The policy shift and ongoing debate concerning ‘Open access’ publications in the UK is changing the relationship between funders, universities, researchers, journals and the public – a similar debate needs to occur about open data and open science.

The altmetrics community is developing new metrics for “analyzing, and informing scholarship” and have described their ethos in their manifesto. The Research Councils and Governments have taken a much greater interest in the impact of publically funded research. Importantly public, social and industry impact are as important as academic impact. It is incumbent on universities to respond to this by directly linking academic career progression through to impact and by encouraging improved access to the underlying data and procesing outputs of the research process through data repositories and workflow environments.

Happy Spring Cleaning, Community Style

Heather Leson - April 1, 2014 in Community Stories, Events, Featured, Network, OKF Projects, OKFestival, Open Knowledge Foundation, Open Knowledge Foundation Local Groups, Our Work, Working Groups

OKF_HK

Crazy about happy? Call it spring fever, but I am slightly addicted to the beautiful creativity of people around the world and their Happy videos (map). We are just one small corner of the Internet and want to connect you to Open Knowledge. To do this, we, your community managers, need to bring in the Happy. How can we connect you, meet your feedback, continue the spirit of global Open Data Day, and celebrate our upcoming 10 year anniversary as Open Knowledge? Tall order, but consider this.

Open Knowledge is a thriving network. We exist because of all of you and the incremental efforts each of you make on a wide-range of issues around the world. The way forward is to flip the community around. We will focus on connecting you to each other. Call it inspired by Happy or the Zooinverse mission, but we heard your input into the community survey and want to meet it.

Coffee smiley by spaceageboy

So, here are 4 key ways we aim to connect you:

1. Community Tumblr

Greece, MENA, and Tanzania – these are just some of the locations of Open Knowledge Stories on the Community Tumblr. We know that many of you have stories to tell. Have something to say or share? Submit a story. Just one look at the recent WordPress about 10 moments around the world gives me inspiration that the stories and impact exist, we just need to share more.

The Open Knowledge Community Tumblr

2. Wiki Reboot

As with every spring cleaning, you start by dusting a corner and end up at the store buying bookshelves and buckets of paint. The Open Knowledge wiki has long been ridden with spam and dust bunnies. We’ve given it a firm content kick to make it your space. We are inspired by the OpenStreetMap community wiki.

What next? Hop on over and create your Wiki User account – Tell us about yourself, See ways to Get Involved and Start Editing. We think that the wiki is the best way to get a global view of all things Open Knowledge and meet each other. Let’s make this our community hub.

3. Community Sessions

We have a core goal to connect you to each other. This April we are hosting a number of online community events to bring you together. Previously, we had great success with a number of online sessions around Open Data Day and OKFestival.

The Community Sessions can be in a number of forms: a scheduled IRC chat, a community Google hangout, a technical sprint or hackpad editathon. We are using the wiki to plan. All events will be announced on the blog and be listed in the main Open Knowledge events calendar.

Wiki planning for the Community Sessions:

The first session is Wednesday, April 2, 2014 at 14:30 UTC/10:30 ET. We will host an IRC chat all about the wiki. To join, hop onto irc.freenode.net #okfn. IRC is a free text-based chat service.

4. OkFestival

OKFestival is coming soon. You told us that events is one of the biggest ways that you feel connected to Open Knowledge. As you many know, there are regular online meetups for School of Data, CKAN and OpenSpending Communities. Events connect and converge all of us with location and ideas.

Are you planning your own events where you live or on a particular open topic? We can help in a few ways:

  • Let us know about the events you’re running! Let’s discover together how many people are joining Open knowledge events all around the world!
  • Never organized an event before or curious to try a new type of gathering? Check out our Events Handbook for tips and tricks and contact our Events Team if you have questions or feedback about it
  • Want to connect with other community members to talk about your events, share skills, create international series of events together? Ping our global mailing list!

Have some ideas on how we can bring on the happy more? Drop us a line on the okfn-discuss mailing list or reach out directly – heather DOT leson AT okfn DOT org.

(Photo by SpaceAgeBoy)

Building an archaeological project repository I: Open Science means Open Data

Guest - February 24, 2014 in CKAN, Open Science, WG Archaeology

This is a guest post by Anthony Beck, Honorary fellow, and Dave Harrison, Research fellow, at the University of Leeds School of Computing.

In 2010 we authored a series of blog posts for the Open Knowledge Foundation subtitled ‘How open approaches can empower archaeologists’. These discussed the DART project, which is on the cusp of concluding.

The DART project collected large amounts of data, and as part of the project, we created a purpose-built data repository to catalogue this and make it available, using CKAN, the Open Knowledge Foundation’s open-source data catalogue and repository. Here we revisit the need for Open Science in the light of the DART project. In a subsequent post we’ll look at why, with so many repositories of different kinds, we felt that to do Open Science successfully we needed to roll our own.

Open data can change science

Open inquiry is at the heart of the scientific enterprise. Publication of scientific theories – and of the experimental and observational data on which they are based – permits others to identify errors, to support, reject or refine theories and to reuse data for further understanding and knowledge. Science’s powerful capacity for self-correction comes from this openness to scrutiny and challenge. (The Royal Society, Science as an open enterprise, 2012)

The Royal Society’s report Science as an open enterprise identifies how 21st century communication technologies are changing the ways in which scientists conduct, and society engages with, science. The report recognises that ‘open’ enquiry is pivotal for the success of science, both in research and in society. This goes beyond open access to publications (Open Access), to include access to data and other research outputs (Open Data), and the process by which data is turned into knowledge (Open Science).

The underlying rationale of Open Data is this: unfettered access to large amounts of ‘raw’ data enables patterns of re-use and knowledge creation that were previously impossible. The creation of a rich, openly accessible corpus of data introduces a range of data-mining and visualisation challenges, which require multi-disciplinary collaboration across domains (within and outside academia) if their potential is to be realised. An important step towards this is creating frameworks which allow data to be effectively accessed and re-used. The prize for succeeding is improved knowledge-led policy and practice that transforms communities, practitioners, science and society.

The need for such frameworks will be most acute in disciplines with large amounts of data, a range of approaches to analysing the data, and broad cross-disciplinary links – so it was inevitable that they would prove important for our project, Detection of Archaeological residues using Remote sensing Techniques (DART).

DART: data-driven archaeology

DART aimed is to develop analytical methods to differentiate archaeological sediments from non-archaeological strata, on the basis of remotely detected phenomena (e.g. resistivity, apparent dielectric permittivity, crop growth, thermal properties etc). The data collected by DART is of relevance to a broad range of different communities. Open Science was adopted with two aims:

  • to maximise the research impact by placing the project data and the processing algorithms into the public sphere;
  • to build a community of researchers and other end-users around the data so that collaboration, and by extension research value, can be enhanced.

‘Contrast dynamics’, the type of data provided by DART, is critical for policy makers and curatorial managers to assess both the state and the rate of change in heritage landscapes, and helps to address European Landscape Convention (ELC) commitments. Making the best use of the data, however, depends on openly accessible dynamic monitoring, along the lines of that developed for the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) satellite constellations under development by the European Space Agency. What is required is an accessible framework which allows all this data to be integrated, processed and modelled in a timely manner.

It is critical that policy makers and curatorial managers are able to assess both the state and the rate of change in heritage landscapes. This need is wrapped up in national commitments to the European Landscape Convention (ELC). Making the best use of the data, however, depends on openly accessible dynamic monitoring, along similar lines to that proposed by the European Space Agency for the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) satellite constellations. What is required is an accessible framework which allows all this data to be integrated, processed and modelled in a timely manner. The approaches developed in DART to improve the understanding and enhance the modelling of heritage contrast detection dynamics feeds directly into this long-term agenda.

Cross-disciplinary research and Open Science

Such approaches cannot be undertaken within a single domain of expertise. This vision can only be built by openly collaborating with other scientists and building on shared data, tools and techniques. Important developments will come from the GMES community, particularly from precision agriculture, soil science, and well documented data processing frameworks and services. At the same time, the information collected by projects like DART can be re-used easily by others. For example, DART data has been exploited by the Royal Agricultural University (RAU) for use in such applications as carbon sequestration in hedges, soil management, soil compaction and community mapping. Such openness also promotes collaboration: DART partners have been involved in a number of international grant proposals and have developed a longer term partnership with the RAU.

Open Science advocates opening access to data, and other scientific objects, at a much earlier stage in the research life-cycle than traditional approaches. Open Scientists argue that research synergy and serendipity occur through openly collaborating with other researchers (more eyes/minds looking at the problem). Of great importance is the fact that the scientific process itself is transparent and can be peer reviewed: as a result of exposing data and the processes by which these data are transformed into information, other researchers can replicate and validate the techniques. As a consequence, we believe that collaboration is enhanced and the boundaries between public, professional and amateur are blurred.

Challenges ahead for Open Science

Whilst DART has not achieved all its aims, it has made significant progress and has identified some barriers in achieving such open approaches. Key to this is the articulation of issues surrounding data-access (accreditation), licensing and ethics. Who gets access to data, when, and under what conditions, is a serious ethical issue for the heritage sector. These are obviously issues that need co-ordination through organisations like Research Councils UK with cross-cutting input from domain groups. The Arts and Humanities community produce data and outputs with pervasive social and ethical impact, and it is clearly important that they have a voice in these debates.

Dispatch: Crisismappers Community needs Data Makers

Heather Leson - November 25, 2013 in Data Journalism, Events, Open Data and My Data, Open Data Partnership For Development, WG Open Government Data, Workshop

What does open data / open knowledge have to do with Crisismapping? Everything. In times of crisis, we live in open data / open government ecosystem. We seek, build and make it happen in real time – talk converts to action quickly.

On Tuesday, November 19th, the School of Data hosted a full day pre-conference training session as part of the International Conference of Crisis Mappers Conference (ICCM) in Nairobi, Kenya. The full event hosted over 110 attendees from around the world for a training offering with Knowledge/Research, Maps to Data and Mobile/Security. The Crisismappers community brings humanitarians, governmental staff, civil society practitioners, researchers, and technologists in a common, equal space. Participants work on projects ranging from human rights, anti-corruption, humanitarian response and economic development in post-conflict zones. The brilliance of cross-sector community focused on using data for their work highlights the importance that Open Knowledge Foundation as an member of the greater network. Building a global network of data makers is a one-by-one task. Our goal is to have leaders train their colleagues thus widening a circle of sharing and collaboration.

Some recent examples of our communities connecting include: Open Spending Tree Map by Donor: Foreign Aid Transparency – Faith (Philippines) and Early Results – Micromappers Yolanda (uses Crowdcrafting which was incubated at OKFN Labs).

Baking Soda with Crisis Mappers

Steve and School of Data

(Steve Kenei, Development Initiatives)

Data is just a word until we activate it. I like to call the School of Data the “Baking Soda” team. Together with key ingredients (community, problem/issue description, data sets and tool menus), they work with others to make data usable and actionable.

School of Data in session (School of Data session at ihub for ICCM)

The data track workshop sessions including using spreadsheets, cleaning data, data visualization and how to geocode. Some folks stayed in this track all day, even skipping breaks. The track started with a spreadsheet training delivered by Steve Kenei from Development Initiatives, continued with an Introduction to OpenRefine and an introduction to data visualization by Agnes Rube of Internews Kenya. The track was finished by School of Data mentor Ketty Adoch. The workshop was designed to address issues that civil society organizations have using data. One of the exciting results was the sheer concentration and intent of participants. They skipped breaks and even brought their own datasets to guide their learning.

Communities, Ideas connecting:

Ketty Adour, Fruits of Thought

Ketty Adour, Fruits of Thought

The ICCM conference, including pre-conference events, was jam packed week of maps, data, research and technology. Most of the ignite talks and panels referred to some stage of open data needs or the issues ranging from data ethics, data quality and data collection methodology. Ketty Adour – one of this years ICCM fellows – she shared her experiences on building a community mapping in Uganda using OpenStreetMap at Fruits of Thought.

Next Steps

During the self-organized sessions, together with Luis Capelo of UN OCHA , I hosted a discussion about Open Data Opportunities and Challenges. It was an exercise for the attendees to discuss Open Data and Crisismapping.

We determined a few concrete actions for the community:

  • A common data sharing space for Crisismappers interested in Humanitarian data.
  • A Crisismappers Open Data Working Group to help share impact and build momentum.
  • Training and a mentorship programs to help build skills and leadership in the field.

The Crisismappers community is over 5000 members strong with a mailing list, webinar and NING site. Do consider joining this vibrant community of maps and data makers who are at the edge of what it takes to unite policy with sheer determined actions. Also see our various Working Groups and the Open Data Partnership for Development programme.

Some additional resources:

Working Group Community Stories

Katelyn Rogers - November 11, 2013 in Open GLAM, WG Open Product Data, Working Groups

The Open Knowledge Foundation is proud to support over 20 active and incubating working groups, domain specific groups promoting, advocating for and building openness in their respective fields. Here is what some of our working groups have been up to over the past few months!

OpenScience

Open Science:

The Open Science Working Group has welcomed three new Panton Fellows. Meet Samuel Moore, Rosie Grave and Peter Krater, three early career researchers who will spend the next year exploring and supporting the adoption of open research practices in science and other fields of research.

In addition to welcoming these incredible new fellows, the Open Science working group (in collaboration with IDRC and Open-UTC) organised two Open Science for Development workshops, one in Cape Town (see photo above) and one in London. Following from these successful workshops, the working group has been working tirelessly to produce an Open Science for Development Research Framework. At OKcon in September, the working group organised an Open & Citizen Science Hack Day, where they succeeded in attracting both OKcon attendees present in Geneva and remote participants from France, the US, the Netherlands and Germany.

Open Science is spreading across the world! More and more local open science strands are coming together as open science enthusiasts from different corners of the globe are getting together and developing projects in their local community. Now you can join an open science community in Stockholm, Brazil or one of the other local strands of the working group. If you’d like to get involved, introduce yourself on the open science mailing list and follow the group on twitter.

Open Product Data:

Open Product Data is one of the newest Open Knowledge Foundation working groups with the goal of both developing the largest open product database in the world and advocating for increased access to product data. Open product data has the potential to empower consumers, increase efficiency and drive economic growth but at the moment product data, such as a product’s barcode, is public but not open. Since joining the Open Knowledge Foundation only a month ago, our community has already developed an android application for Open Product Data and heard stories of others use our database to further their initiatives.

The working group is organising an event (in collaboration with Hub Westminster and Provenance) in London on November 26th, 2013 in order to bring together a diverse group of people interested in open product data to share what they are building and discuss future collaborations. The daytime event will be focused on the more technical aspects of open product data with discussion topics such as mapping the data source possibilities, hypothesising the future implications of open product data and brainstorming the information architecture necessary for such an endeavour. A separate evening event will bring together manufacturers, retailers and consumer groups to discuss the business model opportunities that a more open product data environment would create.

Find out more about the ambitions of the group here and remember, Open Product Data is a community project, if you want to contribute, join the group on github, say hello on the mailing list and follow everything that they are doing on twitter.

OpenGLAM:

OpenGLAM is now all over the world. 2013 has seen the growth of local OpenGLAM groups organising professional networks that take action and promote the value of open culture within a given region or country (ex US, Switzerland, Austria etc.).

The OpenGLAM Working Group is now also supported by a new set of key network partners including the Digital Public Library of America, LODLAM and the Internet Archive.

The OpenGLAM Working Group has been working hard on a set of principles, which cultural institutions can adopt and endorse in order to make their resources more open to re-use. The OpenGLAM Working Group has been collecting useful research and resources on open cultural data and specifically its measurable impact on cultural institutions. You can check the page where we are gathering together these resources and essential reading for anyone hoping to open up cultural content or data.


OpenGLAM, Open Science and Open Product Data are only three of our 20+ working groups dedicated to making their fields more open! If you would like to get involved, join one of the mailing lists or contact us directly at getinvolved {at} okfn . org and make sure to tune in next month to find out what other groups have been up to.

Get Updates