e-InfraNet: Open as the default modus

operandi for research and higher

education








...an invention has to make sense in the world
in which it is finished, not the world in which
it is started
Ray Kurzweil
Page 1 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Acknowledgements
This report has been developed within the project European Network for co-ordination of policies and
programmes on e-infrastructures (e-InfraNet.eu). The project is an ERA-NET co-funded by the 7
th

Framework Programme of the European Commission. The members of the consortium are:

Participant organisation name Short Name Country
Higher Education Authority HEA IE
Higher Education Funding Council for England HEFCE (JISC) UK
SURF SURF NL
Foundation for Science and Technology FCT PT
Latvian Academy of Sciences LAS LV
Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness MINECO ES
CSC - IT Center for Science CSC FI
National Information Infrastructure Development Institute NIIFI HU
The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey TUBITAK TR
The Israel-Europe R&D Directorate ISERD IL
The General Secretariat for Research and Technology GSRT GR
Department of Economy, Science and Innovation, Flemish Government EWI BE
Disclaimer: The information in this document is subject to change without notice. Company or product
names mentioned in this document may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective
companies.

e-InfraNet: Open as the default modus operandi for research and higher education by e-InfraNet is
licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
This document reflects only the authors view. The European Community is not liable for any use that
may be made of the information contained herein.
Front page quote from Open Source Paradigm Shift, Tim OReilly, June 2004,
http://tim.oreilly.com/lpt/a/4868
Illustrations: The public domain work of numerous illustrators was used to formulate some of the graphics
in this publication. Their contribution is hereby acknowledged.
Author(s):
Co-authors/editors:
Lilian van der Vaart (SURF)
Marnix van Berchum (SURF), Rachel Bruce (JISC), Maureen Burgess
(HEA), Gabriel Hanganu (JISC), Neil Jacobs (JISC), Damien Lecarpentier
(CSC), Stephen Pinfield (Sheffield University), Paul Stokes (JISC)
Page 2 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. 2
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................... 3
Figures ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
Executive summary.................................................................................................................................. 5
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 7
1.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 7
1.2 Structure ..................................................................................................................................... 8
1.3 Intended audience ...................................................................................................................... 9
2 Context and definitions ............................................................................................................... 10
2.1 Context ..................................................................................................................................... 10
2.2 The meaning of OpenDefinitions ........................................................................................ 11
2.3 The meaning of OpenMotivations ...................................................................................... 13
3 State of PlayWhere has Open got us so far? ......................................................................... 17
3.1 Open Access to research literature .......................................................................................... 18
3.2 Open Data ................................................................................................................................. 20
3.3 Open Educational Resources .................................................................................................... 22
3.4 Open Infrastructure and Open Standards ................................................................................ 24
3.5 Open Source Software and Open Development ...................................................................... 26
3.6 Open Education ........................................................................................................................ 28
3.7 Open Peer Review .................................................................................................................... 30
3.8 Open Research .......................................................................................................................... 32
3.9 Open Innovation ....................................................................................................................... 34
4 Challenges ................................................................................................................................... 36
4.1 How open is Open? ................................................................................................................. 36
4.2 Evaluation and reward or perverse triggers? ........................................................................... 41
4.3 The Longer Term ....................................................................................................................... 42
4.4 Diversity .................................................................................................................................... 45
4.5 Skills .......................................................................................................................................... 45
5 Ways forward .............................................................................................................................. 47
5.1 Research and higher education as an Open Enterprise? .......................................................... 47
5.2 Individual or coordinated development? ................................................................................. 48
5.3 Implications for policy and implementation ............................................................................ 49
6 Conclusions and recommendations ............................................................................................ 53
Annexes ................................................................................................................................................. 56
A Stakeholder map ......................................................................................................................... 57
B Reports and projects consulted .................................................................................................. 62
B.1 Reports ...................................................................................................................................... 62
B.2 Projects / Initiatives .................................................................................................................. 70
B.3 Other sources ........................................................................................................................... 73
C Survey of sustainability models ................................................................................................... 76
D Data/Services model ................................................................................................................... 77
Page 3 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Figures
Figure 1one of many open access logos in common use ............................................................................ 7
Figure 2The range of Opens ..................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 3 5 star system for open content ...................................................................................................... 37
Figure 4 The 5 stars of linked data ................................................................................................................ 37
Figure 5 The 5 stars of online journal access ................................................................................................. 37
Figure 6Stakeholder impactResearch institutions ................................................................................. 58
Figure 7Stakeholder impactTeachers/Tutors ......................................................................................... 58
Figure 8Stakeholder impactResearchers ................................................................................................ 58
Figure 9Stakeholder impactLearners (students. lifelong) ...................................................................... 58
Figure 10Stakeholder impactResearch funders ..................................................................................... 59
Figure 11Stakeholder impactInfrastructure providers ........................................................................... 59
Figure 12Stakeholder impactContent providers .................................................................................... 59
Figure 13Stakeholder impactData centres ............................................................................................. 59
Figure 14Stakeholder impactStandards bodies ..................................................................................... 60
Figure 15Stakeholder impactPublishers ................................................................................................. 60
Figure 16Stakeholder impactDeveloper communities ........................................................................... 60
Figure 17Stakeholder impactCommercial organisations ....................................................................... 60
Figure 18Stakeholder impactNon-commercial organisations ................................................................ 61
Figure 19Stakeholder impactEuropean Commission ............................................................................. 61
Figure 20Data/Services model ................................................................................................................... 77

Page 4 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Executive summary
The document shows that Open is an important modus
operandi for an effective and efficient research and higher
education system. It is seen as an approach, not as an ideology
or an end in itself. It fits this sector naturally since it optimizes
the possibilities for the advancement of knowledge that is so
necessary to tackle the increasing complexity and scale of the
worlds questions for Research. The big challenges require
cross-disciplinary approaches, and conditions that nourish
serendipity, unforeseen collaborations and re-combinations of
available research outputs and data into new discoveries
Openness in research and higher education is crucial to make
this possible, to cut across the current barriers that prohibit
bringing the necessary minds and computing power to known
and new problems. There is by now sufficient evidence for the
beneficial impact of Open, both within and outside academia.
This is increasingly being recognized in the sector, also by
policymakers and funding organisations, as witnessed for
example by the EC Communication and Recommendation on better access to scientific information
1
and
the Royal Societys Report on Science as an Open Enterprise
2
. To realize the full potential of Open
e-InfraNet recommends a broad policy framework that covers open access to content and infrastructure
as well as open approaches to the further development of
Open itself, and to the way research and higher education are
conducted. Some practical recommendations for
implementation are also included.
For this broad Open policy framework e-InfraNet has opted
for a broad definition that describes the optimal situation for
Open:
"Open means ensuring that there is little or no
barrier to access for anyone who can, or
wants to, contribute to a particular
development or use its output."
The basis for the policy framework is an overview of the
current Open landscape outlining contexts, drivers,
achievements and effects of the various opens, as well as a
number of common issues. Because of this commonality,
coordinating the vision and approach can benefit all opens
individually, and contribute to the development of Open as
the default modus operandi for the research and higher

1
European Commission Research & Innovation Science in Society
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/index.cfm?fuseaction=public.topic&id=1301, July 2012
2
Science as an Open Enterprise
http://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/science-public-enterprise/report/, June 2012
Openness in both
research and higher
education is crucial to
make this possible, to
cut across the current
barriers that prohibit
bringing the necessary
minds and computing
power to known and
new problems
To realize the full
potential of Open
e-InfraNet recommends
a broad policy
framework that covers
open access to content
and infrastructure as
well as open
approaches to the
further development of
Open itself, and to the
way research and
higher education are
conducted.
Page 5 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

education sectors. A pragmatic approach to the implementation of the vision will ensure the necessary
flexibility to adjust for the diversity in the various opens themselves and in their geographic and
disciplinary contexts.
In view of its findings, e-InfraNet makes the following recommendations for the adoption and
implementation of a generic Open policy framework:
1. e-InfraNet recommends that European and National governments and funding organisations, and
research and higher education institutions adopt the policy that for publicly funded activities,
Open is the default modus operandi, for the physical infrastructure, the content and the use of
both in open processes.
2. e-InfraNet recommends the adoption of the principles of the Open Development Methodology
for the further coordinated development of Open in publicly funded projects. The EC and other
funding organisations should build into their Funding requirements for projects to comply with
these open development principles. Institutions should build the open development principles
into their project management methods.
3. e-InfraNet recommends that the involvement and cooperation of researchers in the further
development of Open is actively stimulated and that barriers are removed through the adoption
of appropriate evaluation and reward systems including qualitative and quantitative criteria that
focus on open research communication in aid of the advancement of knowledge; and by support
and advice in copyright and licensing issues
4. e-InfraNet recommends that researchers and other staff who work on Open and in an open
development process are actively supported with appropriate training and support. Open
Education initiatives should be developed as a vital, natural training ground for the researcher of
the future.
5. e-InfraNet recommends that interoperability of systems, services and content is continuously
supported as a key component in the Open e-infrastructure.
6. e-InfraNet recommends that the EC continues to invest in research and development work in the
area of Open, with respect to policies, good practices and technical approaches.
With a clear and conscious choice for Open as the default modus operandi in research and higher
education, the EC, national governments, funders, infrastructure providers and institutions lay a firm
foundation for a more coordinated and sustained development of open approaches. This choice will be a
great support to the communities that shape the development. It will contribute towards more intensive,
shared use of the valuable resources in the research and higher education system. It will also optimize the
conditions for innovative Research and Development, both within and outside academia, that rely upon
openness in infrastructure, content and work processes.
Page 6 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

1 Introduction
The e-InfraNet project has been set up to further the uptake and integration of innovative policy at
national and EC level, in aid of greater effectiveness and efficiency of e-infrastructure and e-infrastructure
programmes. Its approach strives for a good balance between general progress, joint actions and
flexibility to adjust to diverse national requirements. e-InfraNet builds on existing policy initiatives and
seeks to identify gaps in the uptake and integration of innovative policy at national and EU level.
Its long-term impact is geared towards more efficient use of resources, the adoption of best practice in
national e-infrastructure programmes, a convergence of funding programmes and avoiding unnecessary
overlap. e-InfraNets approach will allow for progress to be made, while giving flexibility to adjust to
national requirements and leave the route open to all to build on successful joint actions.
3

e-InfraNet has chosen three focus areas in the wide-ranging field of research and higher education e-
Infrastructures: Green ICT, Cloud Computing and Open. This policy document
is the output from the projects work on Open which started mid-2011 with
an inventory of current (national) programmes and policies in the partner
countries, to establish the level of uptake of the Open Agenda. It was found
that work on Open up until now has been a patchwork development of
multiple open approaches, in response to different drivers in different
contexts, that vary in maturity
4

5
; there is not yet an Open Agenda as such.
Given the present levels of maturity, a more coordinated approach in the
further development of the various open approaches may prove more fruitful
in contributing to an effective, efficient and sustainable research and higher
education system. Therefore, e-InfraNet has undertaken to provide a
document scoping a generic policy framework for Open that would stimulate
general progress in the development of open approaches, and allow for joint
action where applicable, and flexibility to adjust to diverse requirements.
1.1 Objectives
a broad policy framework for Open
an open system of sharing and (re-)using content and other resources for more effective, efficient,
innovative and innovating research and higher education
This document shows that Open has an important role to play in an effective and efficient research and
higher education system. The increasing complexity and scale of the worlds questions for research, of the
way research is conducted, and the impact this has on (the demands on) higher education require the
traditional system to evolve its modus operandi, in order that it responds to this new complexity, scale
and demand. The big challenges ask for cross-disciplinary approaches as well as conditions that nourish
serendipityunforeseen collaborations and re-combinations of available research outputs and data into
new discoveries. Openness in research and higher education is crucial to make this possible, to cut across

3
http://e-InfraNet.eu/
4
We use opens to indicate the various individual open approaches listed in section 2.2. The phrase Open or Openness is used to describe the
combined opens and Open as an approach in general.
5
Proceedings of the Workshop on Open (D.1.24) and the Overview of National Programmes on Open (D.1.1.4)
Figure 1one of many open
access logos in common use
Page 7 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

the current barriers that prohibit bringing the necessary minds and computing power to known and new
problemsto paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld
6
, unknown knowns.
Open fits the research and higher education sector naturally, since it optimizes the possibilities for
advancement of knowledge that is so necessary to tackle the increasing complexity and scale of the
worlds questions for Research. There is sufficient evidence by now that Open leads to better quality and
more innovative research and improves re-use of data and other resources, both within and outside
academia, so that it contributes to greater innovation and agility in the wider economic context
7
. It has
important societal impacts, for instance in terms of improved education beyond institutional and national
boundaries and also improved transparency and accountability. Last but not least, it contributes to
greater efficiency because it enables shared use of expensive, scarce resources and avoids the duplication
of investments and efforts. This is increasingly being recognized in the sector, also by policymakers and
funding organisations, as witnessed for example by the European Commissions Communication
8
and
Recommendation
9
on better access to scientific information (July 2012) and the Royal Societys Report on
Science as an Open Enterprise
10
(June 2012).
In line with e-InfraNets aims, and to realize the full potential of Open, this policy document sets out to
provide a broad policy framework for Open, which aims for an open system of sharing and (re)using
content and other resources for more effective, efficient, innovative and innovating research and higher
education. This broad framework covers open access to content and infrastructure as well as open
approaches to the further development of Open itself, and to the way research and higher education are
conducted. It includes some practical recommendations for implementation.
This policy framework will enable a more coordinated and cross-fertilizing approach to the further
development of the various opens, thus forming an Open Agenda in research and higher education that
better aligns the sector to the role it has to play in fostering growth in knowledge circulation and
innovation in society.
1.2 Structure
Section 2 continues with a brief description of the context for this document. It further describes what is
understood in this policy document by Open and the various opens constituting the Open Agenda. It
also summarizes the key motivations for Open.
Section 3 sketches the present Open landscapeprimarily in Europein its development, aims,
achievements, effects and current issues. This is based on desk research into key projects, activities and
reports in Europe (particularly in partner countries) and seen in the wider global context.
Section 4 discusses a number of important issues identified as generic for Open. Based on these issues,
Section 5 proposes ways forward for a more coordinated Open Agenda. Section 6 summarizes
e-InfraNets main recommendations. The focus is on necessary shifts in perspectives and on approaches
which identify ways out of present debates & dilemmas and leave scope for diversity and phased
realization.

6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_are_known_knowns
7
http://open-access.net/de_en/general_information/pros_and_cons_of_open_access/
8
Towards better access to scientific information: Boosting the benefits of public investments in research
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/era-communication-towards-better-access-to-scientific-
information_en.pdf
9
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 17.7.2012 on access to and preservation of scientific information
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/recommendation-access-and-preservation-scientific-information_en.pdf
10
Science as an Open enterprise
http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/policy/projects/sape/2012-06-20-SAOE.pdf
Page 8 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

1.3 Intended audience
This document is written primarily for policymakers and policy influencers at EU and national levels, as
well as for other funding organisations, e-Infrastructure providers and research & higher education
institutions in Europe.
In addition, it is aimed at managers of research, education and e-Infrastructures programmes and projects
that may encompass one or more of the opens discussed in the document.
Page 9 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

2 Context and definitions
2.1 Context
e-InfraNets work in the Open Focus area so far has led to two main conclusions:
1. Work on Open up until now has been a variegated development of different open approaches
that have grown up in distinct contexts in response to different drivers and that vary in maturity;
there is not yet an Open Agenda as such.
2. Given the present levels of maturity, there is a need and scope for a more coordinated approach
in the further development of the various open approaches; a generic Open policy framework
may prove more fruitful for the further development of all open approaches to contribute to an
effective, efficient and sustainable research and higher education system.
The e-InfraNet Action Plan for Open
11
identifies the production of a policy document outlining such a
framework as its main deliverable.
The approach recommended here aligns with (and potentially enhances) other EU initiatives. The flagship
initiatives Innovation Union
12
and Digital Agenda for Europe
13
form the wider policy context for
e-InfraNets work on Open, as does the development of the European Research Area (ERA) as the
Europe-wide space for knowledge and technologies. Open as an approach has an important role to play
in realising innovation. The realisation of the Digital Agenda and ERA also, to a large extent, build upon
the concept of Opennessopenness of content, infrastructure and processes.
In the context of this document, Open is therefore seen as an approach, a modus operandi
14
, not as an
end in itself or as an ideology. As is stated in the OpenAIRE Studies on Subject-Specific Requirements for
Open Access Infrastructure
14
, infrastructure is a way of sharing (often scarce and expensive) resources
among researchers; and this sharing can lead to synergies and developments that would otherwise not
have been possible
15
. Open also implies and facilitates sharing. An Open e-Infrastructure thus
maximises the degree to which the sharing of resources can be exploited
16
. In this way, Open can
contribute to greater efficiency and economic value of the e-Infrastructure, and it provides important and
necessary conditions for innovation.
e-InfraNet focuses on Open in the research and higher education sector. Online work, collaboration and
education are a growing reality in this sector, and so is Open. Work carried out in this sector is also a key
driver for wider innovation, with the sector acting as a supplier of people, ideas, answers and approaches.
Thus Open in this sector potentially has a double impact: it contributes to innovation in the research and
higher education sector itself, as well as to innovation in other sectors. This potential double impact
makes it all the more important to look at ways to strengthen the development of Open.

11
Action Plan for Open: D.2.13
12
Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative: Innovation Union COM(2010) 546 final
http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/innovation-union-communication_en.pdf
13
A Digital Agenda for Europe COM(2010) 245 final
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0245:FIN:EN:PDF
14
Studies on Subject- Specific Requirements for Open Access Infrastructure, Edited by Christian Meier zu Verl and Wolfram Horstmann,
http://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/publication/2445229
15
The Studies mention the Human Genome Project as an example (p. 366). Infrastructure in this context is perceived to include content (see also
section 5.2)
16
Studies on Subject-Specific Requirements, p. 367
Page 10 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

2.2 The meaning of OpenDefinitions
2.2.1 The range of opens
The phrase Open encompasses a range of open approaches including the following

Figure 2The range of Opens
Together, these open approaches contribute to an open research and higher education system, and more
generally, to open borders, open opportunity, and innovation in the wider sense of the word.
The various Opens differ in context, drivers and in maturity, ranging from established (such as Open
Source SoftwareOSSand OSS development) to experimental (for example open peer review and open
research). This difference in maturity is an inherent characteristic of an Open system; it has to, by
definition, remain open to new developments.
Open access to research literature
Open data
Open educational resources
Open source software
Open infrastructure
Open standards
Open development
Open education
Open peer review
Open research
Open innovation
O
p
e
n

C
o
n
t
e
n
t

O
p
e
n

p
r
o
c
e
s
s

O
p
e
n

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

O
p
e
n

c
u
l
t
u
r
e

Page 11 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

2.2.2 Open defined
There are individual definitions for each of the open approaches. Indeed there are often more than one.
In section 3 one or two definitions are given for each. Thought-provoking work on definitions has been
undertaken by the Open Knowledge Definition Project.
17
.
In the context of this wide-ranging document a very broad definition of Open has been chosen based on
the one developed by JISC CETIS
18
. It describes the optimal situation for Open:
19

"Open means ensuring that there is little or no barrier to access for anyone
who can, or wants to, contribute to a particular development or use its
output."
This definition has the advantage that it
is simple
contains or implies the important attributes access, (re)use and participation
is easily and recognizably applicable to the whole range of open approaches
is non-discriminatory
leaves space for controlled access when that is essential
is as applicable within the e-infrastructure as outside it
The danger of simplicity in the definition is that it hides the factors that account for the complexity
encountered when implementing Open. The main concepts are as follows:
little or no barrier to access means there are little or no technological
20
, organisational
21
,
financial
22
, legal
23
, or even cultural
24
restrictions to access. It also implies that access remains
possible over time
25
.
for anyone who can, or wants to means whether (s)he is a regular participant in the research &
higher education system or not, and whether (s)he actually contributes/(re)uses or not.
contribute to a particular development or use its output means that little or no barrier to
access extends to little or no barrier to participate in development and/or use the results of that
development. It requires that outputs are available in their entirety (full text, complete data,
source code and so on), in formats that allow processing by humans and machines; that this
remain the case over time; and that access, participation and (re)use can be immediate. It also
requires that full documentation is available to enable understanding of what has been made
open, to allow for appropriate (re)use.
2.2.3 Open as Content, Process, Infrastructure and Culture
The definition above indicates that Open does not stop at open access, whether to content
26
or to e-
Infrastructure
27
. Open also implies and encompasses activity: use, reuse, participation in creative and

17
http://opendefinition.org
18
Definition by Wilbert Kraan, CETIS Assistant Director, http://jisc.cetis.ac.uk/topic/open
19
Section 4 goes into the issue of the necessity and legitimacy of restrictions to Open
20
For example those engendered by standards, formats, authorization & authentication
21
Access should be time & place independent and there should be seamless access independent of organisation
22
No upfront payment by end-user
23
For example rights & permissions, licensing
24
For example notions about sharing data and what constitutes good research; such cultural aspects are outside the e-Infrastructure as such, but
do influence its character
25
Content is preserved and guaranteed to be available through the use of interoperable e-infrastructure hardware and software
Page 12 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

development processes. The availability of and access to e-infrastructures and content are necessary
conditions for efficiency and effectiveness in modern research and higher education. For sustained and
sustainable development and innovationboth within and outside research and higher educationopen
participatory and collaborative approaches are also required. As the availability of and access to content
and infrastructural resources increases, the need for and use of open processes
28
becomes more evident.
Where open content is used and produced in open processes within an open infrastructural setting, a
culture of openness
29
gradually emerges.
2.3 The meaning of OpenMotivations
Since the inception of the various opens considerable evidence has been gathered relating to the
benefits and challenges involved. Even though the challenges of and perceptions about Open may differ,
levels of awareness among communities of stakeholders are considered to be high enough not to have to
give a comprehensive account of the benefits of Open in this document. However, a general summary of
the main motivations for Open is beneficial in this context; Annex A provides an overview of how various
stakeholders are impacted in different ways.
In this document, challenges are seen as the problems, the seeking of solutions to which drives the further
development of Open. Section 3 identifies important ones for the different opens and Section 4
discusses the common themes among them.
The main motivations for Open can be summarised in three important, and partly overlapping,
categories:
research & development,
societal/political, and
economic
2.3.1 Research & Development
2.3.1.1 Greater visibility and impact from reuse of material
Easier and earlier discovery of and access to content leads to greater impact. It enables recombining
material (often in unanticipated ways). Curating it adequately ensures greater longevityand therefore
long-term reuseas well as large scale data sharing research, data and text mining. It also improves the
timeliness of communication. Examples of this were given as early as 1995 by the Committee on
Geophysical and Environmental Data of the US National Research Council in their communication On the
full and open exchange of scientific data. They wrote:
Experience has shown that increased access to scientific data, information, and related
products has often led to significant scientific discoveries and the opportunity for educational
enhancement. For example, the declassification of GEOSAT (a U.S. Navy geodetic satellite)
data below 30 degrees south latitude led to a breakthrough in the study of global ocean floor
topography and ocean sediment thickness (Smith and Sandwell, 1994a). The researchers also
produced a global sea floor topography map that is being distributed internationally through

26
Such as literature, (primary) data, educational resources, bibliographies, software, images, video, audio etc., normally onlinethe actual
materials available for access and (re)use
27
Exemplified by software, standards, authorization & authenticationthe technology/system enabling open content and open process
28
As used for example in open source software development, open review, open research, open learning, open innovationthe way in which the
materials are dealt with in research & HEimplying a participatory process
29
The context in which (and the mind-set with which) the infrastructure, processes and content are implemented, carried out and used
Page 13 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

the World Data Center system (Smith and Sandwell, 1994b). An example where not only the
scientific community but the general public was engaged, was the near-real-time monitoring of
Shoemaker-Levy comet fragments colliding with Jupiter. Impact phenomena from around the
world were shared over the Internet, allowing astronomers an unprecedented opportunity to
continuously modify their plans to make the optimal observations (Kerr, 1994). A third example
concerns the transmission of real-time weather information into elementary and high schools
with the goal of fostering science education. A one-year pilot program by the American
Meteorological Society was so successful in engaging teachers and students on problems
ranging from science to social studies that it will be expanded to include other types of
environmental information.
(Geer et al., 1995)
30

More recent examples can be found at the University of Manchester where researchers developed a text-
mining technique to map Open Access articles to specific gene data, allowing new and unexpected
discoveries relevant to genetic disorders. And the example of White Design (Bristol-based architects)
shows the effects of successful knowledge transfer across the academic border. They obtained data on
carbon content for low carbon buildings using straw construction in an OA paper, which creates the
potential for a low carbon offset market that could, eventually, be worth millions of pounds
31
.
2.3.1.2 Improved quality
The greater visibility of material enables the input from others via review creating a virtuous circle which,
in turn leads, to improving quality of learning, research, software and administration. Furthermore
because of concerns around reputation, people are more likely to share better quality work when it is
openly available.
A typical example would be that illustrated by the Polymath Project. Tim Gowers, a mathematician,
posted a problem on his blog and this open science resulted in a collaboration of 27 contributors and 800
comments which solved the problem better and more quickly and pushed the research forward in a way
he could never have achieved alone
32
.
Error detection is also quicker and easier, as is shown in the example of the Committee on Geophysical
and Environmental Data concerning the Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) satellite:
delays in obtaining data allowed a calibration error to go undetected for months Misinterpretation of
these data led to erroneous estimates of global warming (Reynolds, 1993).
33

2.3.1.3 Enhancement and protection of reputation and trust in institutions
Use of open courseware has been about demonstrating the quality of education on offer and about
strengthening reputation and international connections (as in the case of MIT). Another example is that
of research where it is shared openly. The UK House of Commons inquiry into climate data reinforced the
1995 messages of the Committee on Geophysical and Environmental data when it concluded that
climate scientists need to take steps to make available all the data that support their work and full
methodological workings, including their computer codes.
34


30
http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/exch/exch.html
31
UK OAIG report: http://open-access.org.uk/2011/10/24/how-can-universities-support-economic-growth-and-innovation-take-the-open-road
32
http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/the-polymath-project-scope-of-participation/
33
http://www.nap.edu/readingroom.php?book=exch&page=summary.html
34
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/inquiries/uea/
Page 14 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

2.3.2 Societal/political
2.3.2.1 Innovation and agility
The Open Educational Quality Initiative "Beyond OER" report found that the use of Open Educational
Resources and the implementation of open educational practices lead to innovations in pedagogical terms
and in learning strategies, in addition to the innovations at an institutional level. Furthermore, the MITx
example (see Section 3) shows societal impact in that it very effectively breaks down traditional borders in
place, time, age as well as the borders between research and education. The White Design and Polymath
projects mentioned above clearly show the societal impact as well, in environmental gains and effective
use of available knowledge outside the traditional academic boundaries.
2.3.2.2 Transparency and accountability
Transparency is an important motivation in open government and open government data, as a means for
improved democratic control of national, regional and local governmental organisations. Transparency is
equally important in research and higher education as a precondition for accountability of spent (public)
funding. But it is also important for detection of errors, plagiarism or fraud. The AVHRR satellite
calibration error mentioned above is an example of error detection. A recent example of a significant
measurement error concerns the preliminary findings of a CERN research team about neutrinos travelling
faster than the speed of light. Examples of fraud are Hwangs faked stem cell cloning research published
in Science
35
, and Stapels social psychology research based on fabricated data
36
; open availability of data
would have given the opportunity for checking and testing the validity of the data and the research
outcomes based on them.
2.3.2.3 Democracy
Democracy is another motivation stemming from the area of open government (data) that has importance
for research and higher education. Open Educational Resources and practices have a democratizing effect
on education, as is shown by the MIT example (Section 3); and a better educated population has an
important societal impact.
Democratization of research is taking place in open research and citizen science, where members of the
public take part in research projects. Galaxy Zoo
37
and Open Source Drug Discovery for Malaria
38
provide
recent examples; the project instantiated by the Committee on Geophysical and Environmental Data that
involved observing Shoemaker-Levy comet fragments collisions with Jupiter is an older one
39
.
Democratization is even more evident in open research projects where members of the public actually
influence the aims and scope of the research project, as happens for example in the Citizen Cyberscience
programme
40
. Developments like this have the potential to reduce the ivory tower-quality of research by
making use of available knowledge outside academia, bringing in research questions based on practical
needs, and making the results available publicly without claims of ownership.

35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hwang_Woo-suk , http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/12/world/asia/12korea.html?_r=0
36
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Stapel, http://universonline.nl/2012/11/28/levelt-report-fraud-detected-in-55-publications/
37
http://www.galaxyzoo.org/
38
http://openwetware.org/wiki/Open_Source_Drug_Discovery
39
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/94EO00965/pdf
40
http://citizencyberscience.net/
Page 15 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

2.3.3 Economic
2.3.3.1 Business opportunities
Open access to research results enables commercial organisations (especially SMEs) to find new business
opportunities and innovate. The White Design example mentioned above shows clearly how research
data on low carbon content could be turned into an application of great value to society as well as a
business opportunity for the company itself. In the US, open meteorological data has enabled a range of
local commercial weather services
41
. AppliSci (a specialist SME supporting big pharmaceutical and
healthcare companies with leading edge research services) found directly relevant process evidence in a
critical OA article that led to a development thought capable of opening the way for an entirely new
medical application for treatment of a rare infectious disease, with a market potential estimated at tens of
millions of dollars
42
.
2.3.3.2 Cost effectiveness
Open approaches can enable efficient use of expensive resources, shared approaches, reduce duplication
of effort and can save time and support collaboration. There are many examples where open research,
open access, open source software solutions and open infrastructure can contribute to being more cost
effective. Sharing openly on the Web is the most obvious example. Open approaches in e-Infrastructures
such as European grids, High Performance Computing and Cloud Computing can provide a much more
powerful system in a much more cost effective way than any closed system at a national level could
offer. The Open Access model is pursued because of the great inefficiencies in the current scholarly
communications system: it is all too common to find researchers at a university where the research is
actually produced with no access to it; the contribution of universities to the process is not accounted for
in the high subscription costs; access to the results of research is slow. In short, the current system is not
cost effective and open approaches can alleviate this.

41
http://www.noaa.gov/partnershippolicy/
42
UK OAIG report: http://open-access.org.uk/2011/10/24/how-can-universities-support-economic-growth-and-innovation-take-the-open-road
http://open-access.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OAIG_Benefits_OA_PrivateSector.pdf
Page 16 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

3 State of PlayWhere has Open got us so far?
To understand how a generic Open policy framework may strengthen the further development of the
various opens individually and jointly, insight is needed in the main achievements and effects of
developments so far, as well as in the important issues to be tackled. The desk research relating to
projects and literature undertaken for this document was not exhaustive. The authors chose rather to look
for the most recent and representative. The following section covers the main findings and impressions.
Annex B outlines the literature and projects consulted, with brief summaries and links to their websites
for further reference.
The primary focus in this section concerns the developments in Europe; for some topics, non-European
developments are also referenced.
Page 17 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
1

O
p
e
n

A
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

l
i
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

O
p
e
n

A
c
c
e
s
s

(
O
A
)

t
o

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

L
i
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

T
h
e

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e

o
f

p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g

u
n
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d

a
c
c
e
s
s

v
i
a

t
h
e

I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t

t
o

p
e
e
r
-
r
e
v
i
e
w
e
d

s
c
h
o
l
a
r
l
y

j
o
u
r
n
a
l

a
r
t
i
c
l
e
s
.


O
A

i
s

a
l
s
o

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
l
y

b
e
i
n
g

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d

f
o
r

t
h
e
s
e
s
,

s
c
h
o
l
a
r
l
y

m
o
n
o
g
r
a
p
h
s

a
n
d

b
o
o
k

c
h
a
p
t
e
r
s
4
3
.

F
r
e
e

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
n

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
c

i
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
,

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g

a
n
y

u
s
e
r
s

t
o

r
e
a
d
,

d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
,

c
o
p
y
,

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
,

p
r
i
n
t
,

s
e
a
r
c
h
,

o
r

l
i
n
k

t
o

t
h
e

f
u
l
l

t
e
x
t
s

o
f

t
h
e
s
e

a
r
t
i
c
l
e
s
,

c
r
a
w
l

t
h
e
m

f
o
r

i
n
d
e
x
i
n
g
,

p
a
s
s

t
h
e
m

a
s

d
a
t
a

t
o

s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
,

o
r

u
s
e

t
h
e
m

f
o
r

a
n
y

o
t
h
e
r

l
a
w
f
u
l

p
u
r
p
o
s
e
,

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
,

l
e
g
a
l
,

o
r

t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

b
a
r
r
i
e
r
s

o
t
h
e
r

t
h
a
n

t
h
o
s
e

i
n
s
e
p
a
r
a
b
l
e

f
r
o
m

g
a
i
n
i
n
g

a
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

t
h
e

i
n
t
e
r
n
e
t

i
t
s
e
l
f
.


T
h
e

o
n
l
y

c
o
n
s
t
r
a
i
n
t

o
n

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
,

a
n
d

t
h
e

o
n
l
y

r
o
l
e

f
o
r

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

i
n

t
h
i
s

d
o
m
a
i
n
,

s
h
o
u
l
d

b
e

t
o

g
i
v
e

a
u
t
h
o
r
s

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

i
n
t
e
g
r
i
t
y

o
f

t
h
e
i
r

w
o
r
k

a
n
d

t
h
e

r
i
g
h
t

t
o

b
e

p
r
o
p
e
r
l
y

a
c
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
d

a
n
d

c
i
t
e
d
4
4
.

R
o
o
t
s

O
n
l
i
n
e

a
r
c
h
i
v
e
s

o
f

p
r
e
p
r
i
n
t
s

o
r

w
o
r
k
i
n
g

p
a
p
e
r
s

l
i
k
e

a
r
X
i
v
4
5

i
n

P
h
y
s
i
c
s

a
n
d

R
e
P
E
c
4
6

i
n

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
s

D
i
s
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n

w
i
t
h

p
r
i
c
e

m
o
d
e
l
s

o
f

s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
s

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

E
a
s
y

&

e
a
r
l
y

e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e

o
f

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

a
m
o
n
g
s
t

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s

O
p
e
n

u
p

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

l
i
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

t
o

t
h
e

w
o
r
l
d
,

c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e

t
o

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

F
i
n
d

e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e

&

e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s

t
o

s
u
b
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n

m
o
d
e
l
s

K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

O
A
I
-
P
M
H

p
r
o
t
o
c
o
l
4
7

B
u
d
a
p
e
s
t

O
p
e
n

A
c
c
e
s
s

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

a
n
d

t
h
e

B
e
r
l
i
n

D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
4
8

D
R
I
V
E
R

/

D
R
I
V
E
R

I
I
4
9

E
U

O
A

P
i
l
o
t

a
n
d

O
p
e
n
A
I
R
E
(
p
l
u
s
)
5
0

O
A

j
o
u
r
n
a
l

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

a
n
d

O
A

d
i
s
s
e
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n

v
i
a

r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s



























































4
3

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
n
.
w
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
.
o
r
g
/
w
i
k
i
/
O
p
e
n
_
a
c
c
e
s
s

4
4

B
u
d
a
p
e
s
t

O
p
e
n

A
c
c
e
s
s

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
o
p
e
n
s
o
c
i
e
t
y
f
o
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
o
r
g
/
o
p
e
n
a
c
c
e
s
s
/
r
e
a
d

4
5

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
a
r
x
i
v
.
o
r
g
/

4
6

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
r
e
p
e
c
.
o
r
g
/

4
7

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
o
p
e
n
a
r
c
h
i
v
e
s
.
o
r
g
/
p
m
h
/

4
8

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
o
a
.
m
p
g
.
d
e
/
l
a
n
g
/
e
n
-
u
k
/
b
e
r
l
i
n
-
p
r
o
z
e
s
s
/
b
e
r
l
i
n
e
r
-
e
r
k
l
a
r
u
n
g
/

4
9

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
d
r
i
v
e
r
-
r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
y
.
e
u
/

5
0

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
o
p
e
n
a
i
r
e
.
e
u
/
e
n
/
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
/
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
/
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
/
3
2
6
-
o
p
e
n
a
i
r
e
p
l
u
s
-
p
r
e
s
s
-
r
e
l
e
a
s
e

Page 18 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

O
A
-
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

(
e
-
)
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

b
e
i
n
g

b
u
i
l
t

/

i
n

p
l
a
c
e

i
n

m
o
s
t

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s

P
o
l
i
c
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

a
t

E
C
-
l
e
v
e
l

a
n
d

i
n

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s

i
s

g
r
o
w
i
n
g

a
n
d

b
o
o
s
t
s

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

s
u
p
p
o
r
t

a
n
d

g
o
o
d

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s

s
h
a
r
e
d

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
/
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s

O
A

S
u
c
c
e
s
s

s
t
o
r
i
e
s

a
r
e

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
l
y

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

O
A

v
i
a

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l

r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s

w
i
d
e
n
s

a
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

a
l
l

k
i
n
d
s

o
f

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

l
i
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
/
r
e
s
u
l
t
s

i
n

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n

o
v
e
r

a
n
d

a
b
o
v
e

a
c
c
e
s
s

v
i
a

O
A

j
o
u
r
n
a
l

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g

O
p
e
n
,

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d

n
e
t
w
o
r
k

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
e
s

u
s
i
n
g

e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s

t
o

s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

I
s
s
u
e
s

U
n
e
v
e
n

r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
y

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

i
n

t
h
e

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s

a
n
d

a

r
a
n
g
e

o
f

u
s
e

c
a
s
e
s

n
o
t

y
e
t

w
e
l
l

s
u
p
p
o
r
t
e
d

b
y

r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s

d
u
e

t
o

l
a
c
k

o
f

a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e

i
n
t
e
r
o
p
e
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

U
n
e
v
e
n

a
n
d

s
o
m
e
t
i
m
e
s

s
l
o
w

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,

e
s
p
e
c
i
a
l
l
y

a
t

n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

l
e
v
e
l
;

p
o
l
i
c
y

i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s

a
r
e

o
f
t
e
n

a
t

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l

l
e
v
e
l
,

a
n
d

/

o
r

a
t

f
u
n
d
i
n
g

b
o
d
i
e
s

l
e
v
e
l

I
n

O
A
,

t
h
e

m
a
n
y

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s

c
o
n
c
e
r
n
i
n
g

t
h
e

(
l
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m
)

p
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

d
i
g
i
t
a
l

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s

a
n
d

t
h
e

d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n

o
f

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s

r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g

p
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n

m
a
y

h
a
v
e

a
n

e
v
e
n

d
e
e
p
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

t
h
a
n

e
l
s
e
w
h
e
r
e

E
v
i
d
e
n
c
e

f
o
r

g
r
o
w
t
h

a
n
d

i
m
p
a
c
t

o
f

O
A

i
s

h
a
r
d

t
o

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
.


T
h
e

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d

w
o
r
k

o
n

m
e
t
r
i
c
s

/

u
s
a
g
e

s
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s

i
n

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d
/
f
e
d
e
r
a
t
e
d

n
e
t
w
o
r
k

o
f

s
y
s
t
e
m
s

i
s

i
n

i
t
s

e
a
r
l
y

s
t
a
g
e
s

T
h
e

c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d

c
l
a
i
m

o
f

l
a
c
k

o
f

a
w
a
r
e
n
e
s
s

a
m
o
n
g

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s

a
b
o
u
t

O
p
e
n

A
c
c
e
s
s

i
s

h
e
a
r
d

i
n

m
a
n
y

O
A

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

T
h
e

t
h
r
e
e

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e
s

m
e
n
t
i
o
n
e
d

m
o
s
t

o
f
t
e
n

a
r
e
:

o

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

a
n
d

l
i
c
e
n
s
i
n
g

i
s
s
u
e
s

o

t
h
e

c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e

o
f

c
a
r
e
e
r

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t

f
o
r

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s

b
a
s
e
d

o
n

n
u
m
b
e
r
s

o
f

p
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n

h
i
g
h

I
m
p
a
c
t

F
a
c
t
o
r

j
o
u
r
n
a
l
s

o

t
h
e

f
u
n
d
i
n
g

o
f

O
A

p
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

a
r
t
i
c
l
e

p
r
o
c
e
s
s

c
h
a
r
g
e
s

Page 19 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
2

O
p
e
n

D
a
t
a

O
p
e
n

D
a
t
a

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

A

p
i
e
c
e

o
f

d
a
t
a

i
s

o
p
e
n

i
f

a
n
y
o
n
e

i
s

f
r
e
e

t
o

u
s
e
,

r
e
u
s
e
,

a
n
d

r
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e

i
t

s
u
b
j
e
c
t

o
n
l
y
,

a
t

m
o
s
t
,

t
o

t
h
e

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t

t
o

a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e

a
n
d
/
o
r

s
h
a
r
e
-
l
i
k
e
5
1
.

R
o
o
t
s

A
d
v
o
c
a
c
y

b
y

W
o
r
l
d

M
e
t
e
o
r
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l

O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

(
W
M
O
)
5
2

a
n
d

t
h
e

C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e

o
n

G
e
o
p
h
y
s
i
c
a
l

a
n
d

E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l

D
a
t
a

o
f

t
h
e

U
S

N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

C
o
u
n
c
i
l
5
3

t
o

o
p
e
n

u
p

a
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

d
a
t
a

O
p
e
n

g
o
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t

d
a
t
a

D
a
t
a

d
e
l
u
g
e

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

T
o

r
e
s
i
s
t

c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
s

i
n

c
h
a
n
g
i
n
g

t
h
e

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e

o
f

f
r
e
e

a
n
d

u
n
r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
e
d

e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e

o
f

d
a
t
a

D
e
a
l

w
i
t
h

a
n
d

o
p
t
i
m
i
z
e

u
s
e

o
f

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g

a
m
o
u
n
t
s

o
f

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

d
a
t
a

K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

O
E
C
D

P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s

a
n
d

G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s

f
o
r

A
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

D
a
t
a

f
r
o
m

P
u
b
l
i
c

F
u
n
d
i
n
g

(
2
0
0
7
)
5
4

R
e
p
o
r
t

R
i
d
i
n
g

t
h
e

W
a
v
e
:

H
o
w

E
u
r
o
p
e

c
a
n

g
a
i
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

r
i
s
i
n
g

t
i
d
e

o
f

s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

d
a
t
a
5
5

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y

F
o
r
u
m

o
n

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

(
E
S
F
R
I
)
5
6
,

a
n
d

n
u
m
e
r
o
u
s

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

(
e
.
g
.

E
N
V
R
I
,

D
A
S
I
S
H
,

C
R
I
S
P
,

B
i
o
m
e
d
B
r
i
d
g
e
s
)

E
U
D
A
T
5
7

O
p
e
n
A
I
R
E
p
l
u
s

D
a
t
a
C
i
t
e
5
8

R
D
A
5
9



























































5
1

O
p
e
n

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
o
p
e
n
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
.
o
r
g
/

5
2

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
w
m
o
.
i
n
t
/
p
a
g
e
s
/
i
n
d
e
x
_
e
n
.
h
t
m
l

5
3

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
c
a
d
e
m
i
e
s
.
o
r
g
/
n
r
c
/
i
n
d
e
x
.
h
t
m
l

5
4

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
o
e
c
d
.
o
r
g
/
s
c
i
e
n
c
e
/
s
c
i
e
n
c
e
a
n
d
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
p
o
l
i
c
y
/
o
e
c
d
p
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
a
n
d
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
f
o
r
a
c
c
e
s
s
t
o
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
d
a
t
a
f
r
o
m
p
u
b
l
i
c
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
.
h
t
m

5
5

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
c
.
e
u
r
o
p
a
.
e
u
/
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
_
s
o
c
i
e
t
y
/
n
e
w
s
r
o
o
m
/
c
f
/
i
t
e
m
l
o
n
g
d
e
t
a
i
l
.
c
f
m
?
i
t
e
m
_
i
d
=
6
2
0
4

5
6

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
c
.
e
u
r
o
p
a
.
e
u
/
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
/
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
/
i
n
d
e
x
_
e
n
.
c
f
m
?
p
g
=
e
s
f
r
i

5
7

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
e
u
d
a
t
.
e
u
/

5
8

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
d
a
t
a
c
i
t
e
.
o
r
g
/

5
9

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
r
d
a
-
j
s
c
.
o
r
g
/
r
d
a
.
h
t
m
l

Page 20 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

I
n

v
a
r
i
o
u
s

p
l
a
c
e
s
,

w
o
r
k

o
n

c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s

o
f

a

D
a
t
a

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

i
s

g
o
i
n
g

o
n

a
n
d

t
h
e

C
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

D
a
t
a

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

(
C
D
I
)

c
a
l
l
e
d

u
p
o
n

b
y

t
h
e

H
i
g
h

L
e
v
e
l

E
x
p
e
r
t

G
r
o
u
p

o
n

S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

D
a
t
a

i
s

e
m
e
r
g
i
n
g
.

S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

a
r
e

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
l
y

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
e
d
,

b
r
i
d
g
i
n
g

w
i
t
h

o
t
h
e
r

d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
e
s

a
n
d

a
c
r
o
s
s

n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

b
o
r
d
e
r
s
.


T
h
e

e
m
e
r
g
e
n
c
e

o
f

p
a
n
-
E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

(
R
I
s
)

i
n

a
l
m
o
s
t

a
l
l

s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

f
i
e
l
d
s

r
e
f
l
e
c
t
s

t
h
i
s

t
r
e
n
d
.

I
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
i
n
g

a
n
d

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g

c
o
m
m
o
n

s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s

i
n

t
h
e

d
o
m
a
i
n
s

o
f

e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l

s
c
i
e
n
c
e
s
,

s
o
c
i
a
l

s
c
i
e
n
c
e

a
n
d

h
u
m
a
n
i
t
i
e
s
,

p
h
y
s
i
c
a
l

s
c
i
e
n
c
e
s
,

a
n
d

b
i
o
m
e
d
i
c
a
l

s
c
i
e
n
c
e
s
.

O
v
e
r
a
r
c
h
i
n
g

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

a
t

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

l
e
v
e
l

c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
e

i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y

o
n

i
n
t
e
r
o
p
e
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

a
n
d

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

i
s
s
u
e
s

i
n

t
h
e

a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
e
.

I
n

v
a
r
i
o
u
s

r
e
g
i
o
n
s

o
f

t
h
e

g
l
o
b
e

t
h
e
r
e

i
s

n
o
w

a

s
h
a
r
e
d

u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g

t
h
a
t

s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s

m
u
s
t

b
e

g
l
o
b
a
l

a
n
d

t
h
a
t

t
h
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

o
f

a
n

i
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

a
n
d

i
n
t
e
r
o
p
e
r
a
b
l
e

d
a
t
a

d
o
m
a
i
n

c
a
n

o
n
l
y

b
e

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
d

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g

g
l
o
b
a
l

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
.


T
h
e

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

D
a
t
a

A
l
l
i
a
n
c
e

(
R
D
A
)

i
s

a

r
e
c
e
n
t

i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

a
i
m
i
n
g

t
o

s
t
e
e
r

t
h
e

e
f
f
o
r
t
s

i
n

t
h
i
s

a
r
e
a
.

I
s
s
u
e
s

V
e
r
y

u
n
e
v
e
n

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

i
n

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
,

s
u
p
p
o
r
t

a
n
d

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

a
c
r
o
s
s

a
n
d

w
i
t
h
i
n

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s

M
a
n
y

u
n
c
e
r
t
a
i
n
t
i
e
s

w
i
t
h

r
e
s
p
e
c
t

t
o

l
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m

p
r
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
.

T
h
e

g
r
o
w
t
h

a
n
d

i
m
p
a
c
t

o
f

O
p
e
n

D
a
t
a

a
r
e

h
a
r
d

t
o

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
.

G
r
e
a
t
e
r

c
o
m
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

i
n

t
h
e

d
a
t
a

f
i
e
l
d

t
h
a
n

i
n

O
A

t
o

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

l
i
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

a
r
e

c
r
e
a
t
e
d

f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e

b
y

t
h
e

v
a
r
i
e
t
y

o
f

s
o
u
r
c
e
s
,

r
e
p
o
s
i
t
o
r
i
e
s
,

d
a
t
a

s
e
t
s

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
,

d
a
t
a

f
o
r
m
a
t
s

a
n
d

m
e
t
a
d
a
t
a
,

m
a
k
i
n
g

i
t

h
a
r
d

t
o

c
o
m
b
i
n
e

d
a
t
a

(
s
e
t
s
)

a
n
d

h
a
m
p
e
r
i
n
g

a
c
c
e
s
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
.

T
h
e

d
e
s
i
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

O
p
e
n
n
e
s
s

o
f

d
a
t
a

i
s

n
o
t

u
n
c
o
n
t
e
s
t
e
d
;

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s

a
n
d

o
b
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

c
o
n
c
e
r
n

s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y

a
n
d

l
e
g
a
l

i
s
s
u
e
s

(
I
P
R
,

l
i
c
e
n
s
i
n
g
,

p
r
i
v
a
c
y
)
,

c
o
m
p
e
t
i
t
i
o
n

v
e
r
s
u
s

c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

b
e
t
w
e
e
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s

a
n
d

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

g
r
o
u
p
s
,

a
n
d

i
m
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

f
o
r

c
a
r
e
e
r

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
;

w
i
t
h

t
h
e

a
t
t
e
m
p
t
s

t
o

c
r
e
a
t
e

a

g
e
n
e
r
i
c

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

d
a
t
a

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

t
h
a
t

c
a
n
,

f
o
r

i
n
s
t
a
n
c
e
,

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e

i
n
t
e
r
d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
a
r
y

a
n
d

o
p
e
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
,

t
h
e

c
o
m
p
l
e
x
i
t
y

o
f

a
n
d

s
e
n
s
i
t
i
v
i
t
y

t
o

t
h
e
s
e

i
s
s
u
e
s

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
s
.

S
u
b
j
e
c
t

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
i
t
y

i
s

m
e
n
t
i
o
n
e
d

a
s

a
n

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e

a
n
d

a

r
e
a
s
o
n

n
o
t

t
o

a
d
o
p
t

a

g
e
n
e
r
i
c

o
p
e
n

p
o
l
i
c
y

i
n

t
h
e

c
a
s
e

o
f

d
a
t
a
.

Page 21 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
3

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

(
O
E
R
)

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

(
O
E
R
)

a
r
e

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s

t
h
a
t

a
r
e

f
r
e
e
l
y

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

t
o

u
s
e
,

r
e
m
i
x
,

a
n
d

r
e
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
.
6
0

F
r
e
e
l
y

a
c
c
e
s
s
i
b
l
e
,

o
p
e
n
l
y

f
o
r
m
a
t
t
e
d

a
n
d

o
p
e
n
l
y

l
i
c
e
n
s
e
d

d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
s

a
n
d

m
e
d
i
a

t
h
a
t

a
r
e

u
s
e
f
u
l

f
o
r

t
e
a
c
h
i
n
g
,

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
,

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
,

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
6
1
.

R
o
o
t
s

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

a
r
o
u
n
d

d
i
g
i
t
a
l

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

o
b
j
e
c
t
s

O
p
e
n

a
n
d

D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

R
e
u
s
e

o
f

d
i
g
i
t
a
l

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s

i
n

a

v
a
r
i
e
t
y

o
f

p
e
d
a
g
o
g
i
c
a
l

s
i
t
u
a
t
i
o
n
s

A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s

o
f

t
h
e

o
p
e
n

s
o
u
r
c
e

/

f
r
e
e

s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

m
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s

t
o

c
o
n
t
e
n
t

U
s
i
n
g

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

t
o

i
m
p
r
o
v
e
,

a
n
d

g
r
e
a
t
l
y

w
i
d
e
n

a
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

C
o
m
b
i
n
i
n
g

t
h
e

t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
l
y

p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e

a
n
d

t
h
e

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y

d
e
s
i
r
a
b
l
e

6
0

C
r
e
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
m
m
o
n
s
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
i
k
i
.
c
r
e
a
t
i
v
e
c
o
m
m
o
n
s
.
o
r
g
/
O
E
R

6
1

W
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a

,
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
n
.
w
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
.
o
r
g
/
w
i
k
i
/
O
p
e
n
_
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
_
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

Page 22 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

S
e
v
e
r
a
l

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

e
f
f
o
r
t
s

(
f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e

w
i
t
h

r
e
s
p
e
c
t

t
o

m
e
t
a
d
a
t
a
,

c
o
n
t
e
n
t

e
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
,

a
n
d

o
t
h
e
r

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y

f
o
r

d
i
s
c
o
v
e
r
y

a
n
d

r
e
u
s
e

o
f

d
i
g
i
t
a
l

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
)

U
s
e

o
f

C
r
e
a
t
i
v
e

C
o
m
m
o
n
s

L
i
c
e
n
c
e
s

i
n

O
E
R

O
p
e
n
C
o
u
r
s
e
w
a
r
e
6
2

(
O
C
W
,

b
y

M
I
T

i
n

2
0
0
0
)

a
n
d

O
p
e
n
C
o
u
r
s
e
W
a
r
e

C
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
6
3

C
o
n
n
e
x
i
o
n
s
6
4

(
R
i
c
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
)

W
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
/
W
i
k
t
i
o
n
a
r
y

M
O
O
C

(
M
a
s
s
i
v
e

o
p
e
n

o
n
l
i
n
e

c
o
u
r
s
e
)

O
E
R

C
o
m
m
o
n
s
6
5

P
a
r
i
s

O
E
R

D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
U
N
E
S
C
O
,

2
0
1
2
)
6
6

M
I
T
x
6
7

a
n
d

e
d
X

(
2
0
1
2
)
6
8

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

O
E
R

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

t
a
k
i
n
g

p
l
a
c
e

a
l
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

w
o
r
l
d
,

s
p
r
e
a
d
i
n
g

q
u
i
c
k
l
y

A
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

m
o
r
e

s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s

i
n

a

r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
l
y

e
a
s
y

w
a
y

O
p
e
n
i
n
g

u
p

q
u
a
l
i
t
y

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

t
o

s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s

w
h
o

w
o
u
l
d

o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e

n
o
t

h
a
v
e

a
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

i
t

E
n
h
a
n
c
i
n
g

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s

r
e
p
u
t
a
t
i
o
n

C
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
n
g

t
o

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

a
s

a

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
,

a
n
d

a
s

a

f
i
e
l
d

o
f

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
,

w
i
t
h

r
e
s
p
e
c
t

t
o

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
,

p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s

a
s

w
e
l
l

a
s

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
,

b
y

v
i
r
t
u
e

o
f

t
h
e

O
p
e
n

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

M
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

w
h
i
c
h

i
s

p
a
r
t

o
f

O
E
R

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.

I
s
s
u
e
s

F
u
n
d
i
n
g

m
o
d
e
l
s
:

h
o
w

t
o

f
i
n
a
n
c
e

s
t
a
r
t
-
u
p
s

o
f

O
E
R

i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s

a
n
d

h
o
w

t
o

m
a
k
e

t
h
e
s
e

i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s

s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e

a
f
t
e
r

t
h
e
i
r

i
n
i
t
i
a
l

s
t
a
g
e

T
o

a

l
e
s
s
e
r

d
e
g
r
e
e
,

I
P
R
,

n
o
n
-
c
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e

l
i
c
e
n
s
e
s

D
i
s
c
o
v
e
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

R
e
c
o
g
n
i
t
i
o
n

M
a
n
y

i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s

r
a
t
h
e
r

l
o
c
a
l

N
e
w

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

i
m
p
e
r
i
a
l
i
s
m

(
t
h
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d

w
o
r
l
d

t
a
k
i
n
g

t
h
e

l
e
a
d

i
n

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
n
g

t
h
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g

w
o
r
l
d
)



























































6
2

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
o
c
w
.
m
i
t
.
e
d
u
/
i
n
d
e
x
.
h
t
m

6
3

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
o
c
w
c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m
.
o
r
g
/

6
4

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
c
n
x
.
o
r
g
/

6
5

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
o
e
r
c
o
m
m
o
n
s
.
o
r
g
/

6
6

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
u
n
e
s
c
o
.
o
r
g
/
n
e
w
/
e
n
/
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
-
a
n
d
-
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
/
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
/
n
e
w
s
-
a
n
d
-
i
n
-
f
o
c
u
s
-
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
s
/
a
l
l
-
n
e
w
s
/
n
e
w
s
/
u
n
e
s
c
o
_
w
o
r
l
d
_
o
e
r
_
c
o
n
g
r
e
s
s
_
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
s
_
2
0
1
2
_
p
a
r
i
s
_
o
e
r
_
d
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
/

6
7

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
m
i
t
x
.
o
r
g
/

6
8

h
t
t
p
s
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
e
d
x
.
o
r
g
/

Page 23 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
4

O
p
e
n

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

a
n
d

O
p
e
n

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

O
p
e
n

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

a
n
d

O
p
e
n

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

A
n

o
p
e
n

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

i
s

a

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

t
h
a
t

i
s

p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

a
n
d

h
a
s

v
a
r
i
o
u
s

r
i
g
h
t
s

t
o

u
s
e

a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d

w
i
t
h

i
t
6
9
,

a
n
d

m
a
y

a
l
s
o

h
a
v
e

v
a
r
i
o
u
s

p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s

o
f

h
o
w

i
t

w
a
s

d
e
s
i
g
n
e
d

(
f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e
,

o
p
e
n

p
r
o
c
e
s
s
)
.


T
h
e
r
e

i
s

n
o

s
i
n
g
l
e

d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
s

v
a
r
y

w
i
t
h

u
s
a
g
e
.
7
0

A
n

o
p
e
n

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

a
l
l
o
w
s

f
o
r

t
h
e

a
g
g
r
e
g
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

a
c
t
i
o
n

o
n
l
i
n
e

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
,

l
e
g
a
l

a
n
d

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

h
i
n
d
r
a
n
c
e
s
7
1

R
o
o
t
s

T
h
e

g
l
o
b
a
l

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

(
G
I
I
)

e
m
e
r
g
i
n
g

i
n

t
h
e

1
9
9
0
s
,

p
r
o
m
o
t
e
d

a
s

a
n

o
p
e
n

s
y
s
t
e
m

E
C
-
d
r
i
v
e
n

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

o
f

p
a
n
-
E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

e
-
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

f
o
r

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

s
i
n
c
e

l
a
t
e

1
9
9
0
s

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

t
e
l
e
c
o
m
s

l
i
b
e
r
a
l
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

l
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
1
9
9
9
)

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

P
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n

o
f

a

l
e
v
e
l

p
l
a
y
i
n
g

f
i
e
l
d

a
n
d

p
r
e
v
e
n
t
i
o
n

o
f

d
o
m
i
n
a
n
c
e

a
n
d

l
o
c
k
-
i
n

b
y

a

f
e
w

c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

p
a
r
t
i
e
s

F
o
c
u
s

o
n

i
n
t
e
r
o
p
e
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

a
n
d

o
p
e
n

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

S
u
p
p
o
r
t

f
o
r

m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

i
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

h
i
g
h
e
r

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
,

t
o

f
a
c
e

i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

c
o
m
p
e
t
i
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

s
t
r
i
v
e

f
o
r

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

e
x
c
e
l
l
e
n
c
e



























































6
9

T
h
e

Q
R

c
o
d
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

i
s

a

g
o
o
d

e
x
a
m
p
l
e
,

i
t

i
s

o
p
e
n

I
S
O

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

(
I
S
O
/
I
E
C
1
8
0
0
4
)
,

b
u
t

t
h
e

p
a
t
e
n
t

b
e
l
o
n
g
s

t
o

D
e
n
s
o

w
a
v
e
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
q
r
c
o
d
e
.
c
o
m
/
e
n
/
q
r
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
.
h
t
m
l

7
0

W
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
n
.
w
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
.
o
r
g
/
w
i
k
i
/
O
p
e
n
_
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

7
1

P
a
r
a
p
h
r
a
s
e
d

f
r
o
m

F
C
F
o
r
u
m
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
f
c
f
o
r
u
m
.
n
e
t
/
s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
-
m
o
d
e
l
s
-
f
o
r
-
c
r
e
a
t
i
v
i
t
y
/
h
o
w
-
t
o
-
m
a
n
u
a
l
#
c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

Page 24 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

A
r
e
a

(
E
R
A
)
7
2

T
h
e

G

A
N
T

n
e
t
w
o
r
k
7
3
,

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

o
n

b
e
h
a
l
f

o
f

t
h
e

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

c
o
n
s
o
r
t
i
u
m

o
f

N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

N
e
t
w
o
r
k
s

(
N
R
E
N
s
)

T
h
e

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

G
r
i
d

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

(
E
G
I
)
7
4
,

i
n

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

w
i
t
h

N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

G
r
i
d

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s

(
N
G
I
s
)
.

D
E
I
S
A
7
5

a
n
d

P
R
A
C
E
7
6

S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

l
i
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

a
n
d

d
a
t
a

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
/
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

s
u
c
h

a
s

O
p
e
n
A
I
R
E
(
p
l
u
s
)
,

D
O
A
J
7
7
,

B
A
S
E

a
n
d

S
h
e
r
p
a
R
o
M
E
O
7
8
.

D
4
-
S
c
i
e
n
c
e
7
9
,

S
C
I
D
I
P
-
E
S
8
0
,

a
n
d

E
U
D
A
T
8
1

(
d
a
t
a

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

a
c
r
o
s
s

d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
e
s

t
o

b
e

o
p
e
r
a
t
e
d

a
s

p
a
r
t

o
f

a

g
e
n
e
r
i
c
,

o
p
e
n

a
n
d

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
)


A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

A

p
a
n
-
E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

e
-
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

s
y
s
t
e
m

c
o
n
s
i
s
t
i
n
g

o
f

s
e
v
e
r
a
l

i
n
t
e
r
t
w
i
n
e
d

d
o
m
a
i
n
s
,

t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r

p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g

a

v
a
r
i
e
t
y

o
f

f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
s

a
n
d

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s

f
o
r

(
i
n

p
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
)

a
n
y
o
n
e

i
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

h
i
g
h
e
r

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

i
n

E
u
r
o
p
e

L
a
r
g
e
r
,

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
v
e

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

w
h
i
c
h

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e

o
p
e
n
n
e
s
s

a
c
c
e
s
s

a
c
r
o
s
s

d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
a
r
y

a
n
d

n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

b
o
r
d
e
r
s

P
h
y
s
i
c
a
l

e
-
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

a
n
d

e
-
c
o
n
t
e
n
t

a
r
e

m
e
r
g
i
n
g

i
n
t
o

o
n
e

i
n
t
e
r
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
e
d

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

e
-
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

I
s
s
u
e
s

T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
,

l
e
g
a
l
,

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

a
n
d

p
o
l
i
c
y

i
n
t
e
r
o
p
e
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

,

e
.
g
.
:

o

L
e
g
a
l

c
o
m
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

(
d
a
t
a

p
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

l
e
g
i
s
l
a
t
i
o
n
)
;

l
a
c
k

o
f

a

c
o
m
m
o
n

l
e
g
a
l

f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k

a
n
d

i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n

i
n

E
u
r
o
p
e

o

C
u
r
r
e
n
t

A
u
t
h
e
n
t
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

A
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

(
A
A
I
)

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
e
s

p
r
e
s
e
n
t

a

b
a
r
r
i
e
r

t
o

a
c
c
e
s
s

f
o
r

n
o
n
-
t
r
a
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l

p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s

i
n

t
h
e

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

H
i
g
h
e
r

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s
,

s
u
c
h

a
s

a
c
a
d
e
m
i
c
a
l
l
y

t
r
a
i
n
e
d

p
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
s

i
n

S
M
E

s

(
a
s

p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s

i
n

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s
)
,

a
n
d

m
e
m
b
e
r
s

o
f

t
h
e

g
e
n
e
r
a
l

p
u
b
l
i
c

(
a
s

p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s

i
n

f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e

o
p
e
n
/
c
i
t
i
z
e
n
s

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
)

o

A
t

t
h
e

t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

l
e
v
e
l
,

S
i
n
g
l
e
-
S
i
g
n
-
O
n

(
S
S
O
)

f
o
r

u
s
e
r
s

i
s

n
o
t

s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
l
y

w
i
d
e
s
p
r
e
a
d

a
c
r
o
s
s

t
h
e

e
n
t
i
r
e

e
-
I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
.


I
t

i
s

a
c
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
d

t
h
a
t

n
o

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

c
a
n

b
e

u
n
i
v
e
r
s
a
l
l
y

a
d
o
p
t
e
d
,

b
u
t

t
h
e
r
e

s
h
o
u
l
d

b
e

m
e
c
h
a
n
i
s
m
s

i
n

p
l
a
c
e

t
o

a
l
l
o
w

f
o
r

i
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
.

S
o
m
e

s
y
s
t
e
m
s
,

f
o
r

i
n
s
t
a
n
c
e

f
o
r

g
r
i
d

a
n
d

s
u
p
e
r
c
o
m
p
u
t
i
n
g
,

a
r
e

c
o
m
p
l
i
c
a
t
e
d

a
n
d

f
a
c
e

u
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

a
n
d

s
c
a
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

i
s
s
u
e
s

o

T
h
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

a
n
d

c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
s

o
f
f
e
r
e
d

b
y

C
l
o
u
d

i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e



























































7
2

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
c
.
e
u
r
o
p
a
.
e
u
/
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
/
e
r
a
/
i
n
d
e
x
_
e
n
.
h
t
m

7
3

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
g
e
a
n
t
.
n
e
t
/
p
a
g
e
s
/
h
o
m
e
.
a
s
p
x

7
4

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
e
g
i
.
e
u
/

7
5

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
d
e
i
s
a
.
e
u
/

7
6

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
p
r
a
c
e
-
r
i
.
e
u
/

7
7

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
d
o
a
j
.
o
r
g
/

7
8

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
s
h
e
r
p
a
.
a
c
.
u
k
/
r
o
m
e
o
/

7
9

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
d
4
s
c
i
e
n
c
e
.
e
u
/

8
0

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
s
c
i
d
i
p
-
e
s
.
e
u
/

8
1

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
e
u
d
a
t
.
e
u
/

Page 25 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
5

O
p
e
n

S
o
u
r
c
e

S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

a
n
d

O
p
e
n

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

O
p
e
n

S
o
u
r
c
e

S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

a
n
d

O
p
e
n

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
(
O
S
S
/
O
D
M
)

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

O
p
e
n

S
o
u
r
c
e

S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

i
s

c
o
m
p
u
t
e
r

s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

t
h
a
t

i
s

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

w
i
t
h

s
o
u
r
c
e

c
o
d
e
:

t
h
e

s
o
u
r
c
e

c
o
d
e

a
n
d

c
e
r
t
a
i
n

o
t
h
e
r

r
i
g
h
t
s

n
o
r
m
a
l
l
y

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d

f
o
r

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

h
o
l
d
e
r
s

a
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

a
n

o
p
e
n
-
s
o
u
r
c
e

l
i
c
e
n
s
e

t
h
a
t

p
e
r
m
i
t
s

u
s
e
r
s

t
o

s
t
u
d
y
,

c
h
a
n
g
e
,

i
m
p
r
o
v
e

a
n
d

a
t

t
i
m
e
s

a
l
s
o

t
o

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e

t
h
e

s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
8
2

O
p
e
n

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

i
s

a

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
-
l
e
d

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

u
s
e
d

i
n

o
p
e
n

s
o
u
r
c
e

s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

w
h
e
r
e
b
y

t
h
e

s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

i
s

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
l
y

a
n
d

o
p
e
n
l
y
.


K
e
y

a
t
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s

a
r
e
:

a

d
e
e
p

l
e
v
e
l

o
f

u
s
e
r

e
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
,

t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
,

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

a
g
i
l
i
t
y
,

s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,

s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g

t
o
o
l
s
8
3

R
o
o
t
s

F
r
e
e

S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

m
o
v
e
m
e
n
t

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

o
f

t
h
e

i
n
t
e
r
n
e
t

a
n
d

i
n

p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r

t
h
e

w
o
r
l
d

w
i
d
e

w
e
b

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

S
o
u
r
c
e

c
o
d
e

v
i
e
w
a
b
l
e

t
o

a
l
l
,

n
o

(
o
r

r
e
l
a
x
e
d
)

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s

t
o

a
l
l
o
w

f
o
r

r
e
u
s
e
,

c
h
a
n
g
e

a
n
d

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n

M
a
i
n
t
a
i
n

a
n
d

d
e
v
e
l
o
p

t
h
e

o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
,

w
h
a
t
e
v
e
r

t
h
a
t

m
i
g
h
t

b
e

C
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
e

t
o

m
a
k
e

s
o
m
e
t
h
i
n
g

b
e
t
t
e
r

t
h
a
n

a
n
y

i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l

c
o
u
l
d

m
a
k
e

o
n

h
i
s

o
w
n

K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

F
r
e
e

S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

F
o
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
8
4

O
p
e
n

S
o
u
r
c
e

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
8
5

a
n
d

O
p
e
n

S
o
u
r
c
e

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

G
N
U

L
i
c
e
n
c
e
8
6

L
i
n
u
x

A
p
a
c
h
e

S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

F
o
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
8
7

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

o
f

t
h
e

w
o
r
l
d

w
i
d
e

w
e
b

u
s
i
n
g

o
p
e
n

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

a
n
d

o
p
e
n

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
(
f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e

t
h
e

r
e
q
u
e
s
t

f
o
r

c
o
m
m
e
n
t

p
r
o
c
e
s
s

m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
e
d

b
e

I
E
T
F
8
8
)



























































8
2

W
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
n
.
w
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
.
o
r
g
/
w
i
k
i
/
O
p
e
n
_
s
o
u
r
c
e
_
s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

8
3

O
S
S

W
a
t
c
h
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
o
s
s
-
w
a
t
c
h
.
a
c
.
u
k
/
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
/
o
d
m


8
4

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
f
s
f
.
o
r
g
/

8
5

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
o
p
e
n
s
o
u
r
c
e
.
o
r
g
/

8
6

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
g
n
u
.
o
r
g
/
l
i
c
e
n
s
e
s
/
g
p
l
.
h
t
m
l

8
7

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
a
p
a
c
h
e
.
o
r
g
/

8
8

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
i
e
t
f
.
o
r
g
/
r
f
c
.
h
t
m
l

Page 26 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

O
S
S
/
O
D
M

n
o
w

o
f
f
e
r
s

a
n

a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e

b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

m
o
d
e
l

t
h
a
t

h
a
s

p
r
o
v
e
n

t
o

b
e

s
u
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l
;

f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e
:

o

O
D
M

s

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d

p
e
e
r
-
r
e
v
i
e
w

m
e
t
h
o
d

a
n
d

t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
t

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

p
r
o
c
e
s
s
/
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
s

e
n
s
u
r
e

h
i
g
h

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

a
n
d

c
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,

w
h
i
c
h

c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s

t
o

t
h
e

s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s

c
r
e
a
t
e
d

i
n

t
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

o

O
S
S

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s

w
i
t
h

h
i
g
h

m
a
r
k
e
t

p
e
n
e
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r

l
o
y
a
l
t
y
,

w
h
i
c
h

c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s

t
o

c
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y
/
s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

(
s
u
c
h

a
s

A
p
a
c
h
e

H
T
T
P

s
e
r
v
e
r
,

G
N
U
/
L
i
n
u
x

o
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g

s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
,

M
o
z
i
l
l
a

F
i
r
e
f
o
x

b
r
o
w
s
e
r
,

A
n
d
r
o
i
d
)

o

O
D
M

o
f
f
e
r
s

t
h
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

f
o
r

a

m
o
r
e

f
l
e
x
i
b
l
e

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

a
n
d

q
u
i
c
k
e
r

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
,

b
e
c
a
u
s
e

o
f

t
h
e

t
y
p
i
c
a
l
l
y

l
a
r
g
e

n
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
e
r
s

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
n
g

o
n

t
h
e

s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e

O
S
S

i
s

n
o
w

i
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t

f
o
r

r
e
u
s
e

o
f

d
a
t
a

s
e
t
s

I
s
s
u
e
s

S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t

p
e
o
p
l
e

a
n
d

m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

s
k
i
l
l
s

a
r
e

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d

t
o

d
e
a
l

w
i
t
h

t
h
e

o
p
e
n
,

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d

a
n
d

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
l

n
a
t
u
r
e

o
f

t
h
e

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y

P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s

m
a
y

b
r
a
n
c
h

o
f
f

w
i
t
h

t
h
e

p
r
o
d
u
c
t

a
n
d

c
r
e
a
t
e

a

c
o
m
p
e
t
i
t
o
r

C
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
t
y

o
f

t
h
e

O
p
e
n

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y

d
e
p
e
n
d
s

t
o

a

l
a
r
g
e

e
x
t
e
n
t

o
n

t
h
e

f
o
u
n
d
e
r
s

b
e
i
n
g

a
b
l
e

t
o

c
o
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e

a

c
l
e
a
r

g
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e

m
o
d
e
l

a
s

t
h
e

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y

i
t
s
e
l
f

g
r
o
w
s

a
n
d

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
s

Page 27 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
6

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

O
p
e
n

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

i
s

t
h
e

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

t
e
r
m

t
h
a
t

r
e
f
e
r
s

t
o

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
/
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
e
s

t
h
a
t

s
e
e
k

t
o

e
l
i
m
i
n
a
t
e

b
a
r
r
i
e
r
s

t
o

e
n
t
r
y
.


S
u
c
h

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
,

f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e
,

w
o
u
l
d

n
o
t

h
a
v
e

a
c
a
d
e
m
i
c

a
d
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
.


P
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

a
r
e

c
o
m
m
o
n
l
y

(
b
u
t

n
o
t

n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
i
l
y
)

d
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

l
i
k
e

e
-
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
,

M
O
O
C

a
n
d

O
p
e
n
C
o
u
r
s
e
W
a
r
e
.


W
h
e
r
e
a
s

m
a
n
y

e
-
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

a
r
e

f
r
e
e

t
o

f
o
l
l
o
w
,

t
h
e

c
o
s
t
s

o
f

a
c
q
u
i
r
i
n
g

a

c
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

m
a
y

b
e

a

b
a
r
r
i
e
r
,

m
a
n
y

o
p
e
n

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e
s

o
f
f
e
r

f
r
e
e

c
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

s
c
h
e
m
e
s
.
8
9

T
h
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

o
f

a

v
a
s
t

p
o
o
l

o
f

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

o
n

t
h
e

I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
,

o
p
e
n

a
n
d

f
r
e
e

f
o
r

a
l
l

t
o

u
s
e
,

a
s

w
e
l
l

a
s

o
p
e
n

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s

t
h
a
t

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
,

f
l
e
x
i
b
l
e

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

a
n
d

t
h
e

o
p
e
n

s
h
a
r
i
n
g

o
f

t
e
a
c
h
i
n
g

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s

t
h
a
t

e
m
p
o
w
e
r

e
d
u
c
a
t
o
r
s

t
o

b
e
n
e
f
i
t

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

b
e
s
t

i
d
e
a
s

o
f

t
h
e
i
r

c
o
l
l
e
a
g
u
e
s
.


I
t

m
a
y

a
l
s
o

g
r
o
w

t
o

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

n
e
w

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
e
s

t
o

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
,

a
c
c
r
e
d
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
9
0
.

R
o
o
t
s

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

c
i
t
i
z
e
n
s

b
y

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s

a
t

p
u
b
l
i
c

u
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
i
e
s

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
l

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s

O
p
e
n

u
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
i
e
s
,

o
p
e
n

d
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
9
1

O
p
e
n
C
o
u
r
s
e
W
a
r
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

O
p
e
n

a
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
/
m
o
v
e
m
e
n
t

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

L
e
a
r
n
e
r
s

h
a
v
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

o
v
e
r

w
h
a
t
,

w
h
y
,

h
o
w

a
n
d

w
h
e
r
e

t
h
e
y

l
e
a
r
n

U
s
i
n
g

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

t
o

m
a
k
e

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

m
o
r
e

a
c
c
e
s
s
i
b
l
e

a
n
d

e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e

F
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
,

f
l
e
x
i
b
l
e

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

a
n
d

t
h
e

o
p
e
n

s
h
a
r
i
n
g

o
f

t
e
a
c
h
i
n
g

a
n
d

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s

P
r
o
d
u
c
e

a

t
h
r
e
e
f
o
l
d

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e

t
h
a
t

c
o
m
b
i
n
e
s

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
/
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
,

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

&

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

a
n
d

t
h
e

a
b
i
l
i
t
y

t
o

s
h
a
r
e

f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s

w
i
t
h

a

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n



























































8
9

W
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
n
.
w
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
.
o
r
g
/
w
i
k
i
/
O
p
e
n
_
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

9
0

C
a
p
e

T
o
w
n

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
c
a
p
e
t
o
w
n
d
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
.
o
r
g
/

9
1

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

d
o
e
s

d
i
f
f
e
r

f
r
o
m

O
n
l
i
n
e

(
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
)

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

(
O
D
E
)
,

w
h
i
c
h

i
s

f
o
r
m
a
l

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
,

i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g

c
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
,

i
n

a
n

o
n
l
i
n
e

e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
.

Page 28 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

C
o
n
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s

a
n
d

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

W
e
e
k

C
a
p
e

T
o
w
n

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n

N
o
n
-
c
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
e
-
g
r
a
n
t
i
n
g

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
,

i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g

e
d
X
,

M
I
T
x
,

H
a
r
v
a
r
d
x
9
2
,

C
o
u
r
s
e
r
a
9
3
,

U
d
a
c
i
t
y
9
4
,

O
p
e
n

L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
9
5

O
E
R

u
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
9
6

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

I
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n

o
f

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s
;

S
o
u
t
h

A
f
r
i
c
a
,

B
r
a
z
i
l
,

I
n
d
i
a

a
n
d

N
i
g
e
r
i
a

a
r
e

s
o
m
e

o
f

t
h
e

m
o
s
t

e
n
g
a
g
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

u
s
e

o
f

O
p
e
n

E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

C
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
n
g

t
o

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

a
s

a

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
,

a
n
d

a
s

a

f
i
e
l
d

o
f

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
,

w
i
t
h

r
e
s
p
e
c
t

t
o

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
,

p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s

a
s

w
e
l
l

a
s

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
.

T
y
i
n
g

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

&

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

c
l
o
s
e
r

t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r

N
o
u
r
i
s
h
i
n
g

t
h
e

k
i
n
d

o
f

p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
o
r
y

c
u
l
t
u
r
e

o
f

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
,

c
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
,

s
h
a
r
i
n
g

a
n
d

c
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

t
h
a
t

r
a
p
i
d
l
y

c
h
a
n
g
i
n
g

k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e

s
o
c
i
e
t
i
e
s

n
e
e
d

I
s
s
u
e
s

F
u
n
d
i
n
g

m
o
d
e
l
s

C
e
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
;

i
s
s
u
e

r
e
v
o
l
v
e
s

a
r
o
u
n
d

t
h
e

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n

w
h
e
t
h
e
r

s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s

g
e
t

t
h
e

p
r
o
p
e
r

r
e
c
o
g
n
i
t
i
o
n

o
f

t
h
e

q
u
a
l
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

g
a
i
n
e
d

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

o
p
e
n

l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

a
s
s
u
r
a
n
c
e

o
f

t
e
a
c
h
e
r
s

a
n
d

O
E
R

A
v
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
/
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

i
n

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s



























































9
2

h
t
t
p
s
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
e
d
x
.
o
r
g
/
u
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
_
p
r
o
f
i
l
e
/
H
a
r
v
a
r
d
X

9
3

h
t
t
p
s
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
c
o
u
r
s
e
r
a
.
o
r
g
/

9
4

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
u
d
a
c
i
t
y
.
c
o
m
/

9
5

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
o
l
i
.
c
m
u
.
e
d
u
/

9
6

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
i
k
i
e
d
u
c
a
t
o
r
.
o
r
g
/
O
E
R
_
u
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

Page 29 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
7

O
p
e
n

P
e
e
r

R
e
v
i
e
w

O
p
e
n

P
e
e
r

R
e
v
i
e
w

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

l
i
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

c
o
n
c
e
p
t

a
n
d

p
r
o
c
e
s
s
,

c
e
n
t
r
a
l

t
o

w
h
i
c
h

i
s

t
h
e

v
a
r
i
o
u
s

t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y

a
n
d

d
i
s
c
l
o
s
u
r
e

o
f

t
h
e

i
d
e
n
t
i
t
i
e
s

o
f

t
h
o
s
e

r
e
v
i
e
w
i
n
g

s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

p
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
9
7

R
o
o
t
s

D
i
s
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n

w
i
t
h

t
h
e

e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g

a
n
o
n
y
m
o
u
s

p
e
e
r

r
e
v
i
e
w

s
y
s
t
e
m

b
e
c
a
u
s
e

o
f

a

n
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

d
e
f
e
c
t
s
;

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

s
h
o
w
e
d

t
h
a
t

t
h
e

o
p
e
n

v
a
r
i
e
t
y

p
e
r
f
o
r
m
e
d

e
q
u
a
l
l
y

w
e
l
l

i
n

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n

t
o

h
a
v
i
n
g

a

n
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

a
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
s

T
h
e

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

i
n
t
e
r
n
e
t

a
n
d

o
n
l
i
n
e

a
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

p
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

O
p
e
n

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

P
r
o
v
i
d
e

a
n

a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e

t
h
a
t

g
i
v
e
s

m
o
r
e

t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y

a
n
d

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,

f
a
s
t
e
r

c
l
a
i
m

o
f

p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e

a
n
d

l
e
s
s

p
o
s
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y

f
o
r

a
b
u
s
e

a
n
d

b
i
a
s

P
r
o
v
e

p
e
e
r

r
e
v
i
e
w

s

a
d
d
e
d

v
a
l
u
e

t
o

t
h
e

s
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c

p
r
o
c
e
s
s

a
n
d

t
h
u
s

i
t
s

p
l
a
c
e

i
n

a
n

e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c

w
o
r
l
d

w
h
e
r
e

a
u
t
h
o
r
s

c
a
n

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
y

g
o

s
t
r
a
i
g
h
t

t
o

r
e
a
d
e
r
s

I
n

O
D
M
:

b
e
t
t
e
r

q
u
a
l
i
t
y
,

f
a
s
t
e
r

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

S
p
r
e
a
d

i
n

d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t

f
i
e
l
d
s
,

f
r
o
m

P
h
y
s
i
c
s

a
n
d

C
o
m
p
u
t
e
r

S
c
i
e
n
c
e

t
o

t
h
e

A
r
t
s

&

H
u
m
a
n
i
t
i
e
s

E
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
s

i
n

j
o
u
r
n
a
l
s
,

e
.
g
.

B
r
i
t
i
s
h

M
e
d
i
c
a
l

J
o
u
r
n
a
l

a
n
d

S
h
a
k
e
s
p
e
a
r
e

Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
,

a
s

w
e
l
l

a
s

i
n

b
o
o
k

c
h
a
p
t
e
r
s

i
n

t
h
e

A
&
H

T
h
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

i
n

O
S
S

a
n
d

O
p
e
n

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s



























































9
7

W
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
n
.
w
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
.
o
r
g
/
w
i
k
i
/
O
p
e
n
_
p
e
e
r
_
r
e
v
i
e
w

Page 30 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

T
h
e

e
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
s

m
e
n
t
i
o
n
e
d

a
b
o
v
e

a
p
p
l
y

t
h
e

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

m
o
d
e
r
n

I
C
T

t
o
o
l
s

a
n
d

n
e
w

p
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
s

o
n

t
h
e

w
a
y

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
s

p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

a
n
d

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
e
d

i
n

o
r
d
e
r

t
o

a
d
d
r
e
s
s

c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
s

i
n

t
h
e

t
r
a
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l

s
y
s
t
e
m
.


T
h
e
s
e

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
:

o

r
e
l
i
a
n
c
e

o
n

a

s
m
a
l
l
,

e
l
i
t
e

a
n
d

c
l
o
s
e
d

g
r
o
u
p

o
f

e
x
p
e
r
t
s

c
a
n

l
i
m
i
t

t
h
e

r
a
n
g
e

o
f

f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k

a
n
d

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
z
e

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

s
c
h
o
o
l
s

o
f

t
h
i
n
k
i
n
g

i
n

s
u
b
j
e
c
t

a
r
e
a
s

o

m
o
n
o
p
o
l
y

e
f
f
e
c
t

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
e
s
e
n
t

s
y
s
t
e
m

o
n

a
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

p
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

i
n

e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d

j
o
u
r
n
a
l
s

a
n
d

t
h
u
s

o
n

a
c
a
d
e
m
i
c

c
a
r
e
e
r

a
n
d

t
e
n
u
r
e

T
h
e
y

a
l
s
o

a
l
l
o
w

t
h
e

i
n
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

t
h
e

p
e
r
c
e
i
v
e
d

b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s

a
n
d

p
i
t
f
a
l
l
s
/
c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
s

s
u
c
h

a
s

o

b
e
t
t
e
r

p
r
e
v
e
n
t
i
o
n

a
g
a
i
n
s
t

f
r
a
u
d

a
n
d

o
t
h
e
r

a
b
u
s
e

o
f

p
e
e
r

r
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
s

p
r
i
v
i
l
e
g
e

o

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

(
f
o
r

r
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
s

c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
)

v
e
r
s
u
s

m
o
r
e

h
o
n
e
s
t
y

i
n

a
n
o
n
y
m
o
u
s

s
y
s
t
e
m

o

c
r
e
d
i
t

f
o
r

(
o
f
t
e
n

u
n
p
a
i
d
)

e
x
p
e
r
t

w
o
r
k

o

f
a
s
t
e
r

c
l
a
i
m

o
f

p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e

o

b
e
t
t
e
r

q
u
a
l
i
t
y
,

f
a
s
t
e
r
,

w
h
e
n

o
p
e
n
e
d

u
p

t
o

t
h
e

s
w
i
f
t

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

j
u
d
g
m
e
n
t

o
f

a

m
u
c
h

b
r
o
a
d
e
r

i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
e
d

a
u
d
i
e
n
c
e
9
8

v
e
r
s
u
s

q
u
a
l
i
t
y

o
n
l
y

p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e

f
r
o
m

e
x
p
e
r
t

p
e
e
r
s

a
n
d

o
v
e
r
l
o
a
d

i
n

c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s

I
s
s
u
e
s

A
s

l
o
n
g

a
s

O
p
e
n

R
e
v
i
e
w

i
s

n
o
t

c
o
m
m
o
n

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
,

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s

r
e
m
a
i
n

u
n
c
e
r
t
a
i
n

a
b
o
u
t

t
h
e

e
f
f
e
c
t

i
t

m
a
y

h
a
v
e

o
n

t
h
e
i
r

c
a
r
e
e
r

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

a
r
e

t
h
e
r
e
f
o
r
e

w
a
r
y

t
o

p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e

i
n

e
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
s

P
o
r
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

e
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
s

r
e
s
u
l
t
s

t
o

o
t
h
e
r

d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
e
s

A
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

O
p
e
n

R
e
v
i
e
w

i
n

f
u
n
d
i
n
g

p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s

(
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
l
y

o
f

p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y

f
u
n
d
e
d

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
)



























































9
8

P
a
t
r
i
c
i
a

C
o
h
e
n
:

S
c
h
o
l
a
r
s

T
e
s
t

W
e
b

A
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e

t
o

P
e
e
r

R
e
v
i
e
w
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
n
e
t
a
g
e
.
o
r
g
/
2
0
1
0
/
0
8
/
2
4
/
s
c
h
o
l
a
r
s
-
t
e
s
t
-
w
e
b
-
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
/

Page 31 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
8

O
p
e
n

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

O
p
e
n

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

T
h
e

c
e
n
t
r
a
l

t
h
e
m
e

o
f

o
p
e
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
s

t
o

m
a
k
e

c
l
e
a
r

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
s

o
f

t
h
e

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

f
r
e
e
l
y

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

v
i
a

t
h
e

i
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
,

a
l
o
n
g

w
i
t
h

a
n
y

d
a
t
a

o
r

r
e
s
u
l
t
s

e
x
t
r
a
c
t
e
d

o
r

d
e
r
i
v
e
d

f
r
o
m

t
h
e
m
.


T
h
i
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
s

a

m
a
s
s
i
v
e
l
y

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

a
n
d

o
n
e

i
n

w
h
i
c
h

a
n
y
o
n
e

m
a
y

p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e

a
t

a
n
y

l
e
v
e
l

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
9
9
.

R
o
o
t
s

O
p
e
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
s

a

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

f
o
l
l
o
w
s

f
r
o
m
,

a
n
d

c
o
m
b
i
n
e
s

i
n

i
t
,

s
e
v
e
r
a
l

o
t
h
e
r

o
p
e
n
s

:

O
p
e
n

A
c
c
e
s
s

t
o

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

l
i
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
,

O
p
e
n

D
a
t
a
,

O
p
e
n

S
o
u
r
c
e

S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
,

O
p
e
n

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

O
p
e
n

R
e
v
i
e
w

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

M
a
k
e

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

(
i
n

p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r

t
h
a
t

w
h
i
c
h

i
s

p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y

f
u
n
d
e
d
)

m
o
r
e

t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
t
,

e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

a
n
d

a
c
c
e
s
s
i
b
l
e

t
o

a

l
a
r
g
e
r

p
u
b
l
i
c

b
y
,

f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e
:

o

T
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y

i
n

e
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
a
l

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
,

o
b
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
,

a
n
d

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

d
a
t
a

o

P
u
b
l
i
c

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

a
n
d

r
e
u
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

d
a
t
a

o

P
u
b
l
i
c

a
c
c
e
s
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y

a
n
d

t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y

o
f

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

o

U
s
i
n
g

w
e
b
-
b
a
s
e
d

t
o
o
l
s

t
o

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

o
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

o

E
n
g
a
g
i
n
g
/
a
c
t
i
v
e

p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

a

w
i
d
e
r

a
u
d
i
e
n
c
e
,

a
l
s
o

o
u
t
s
i
d
e

a
c
a
d
e
m
i
a


K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s

/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

E
a
r
l
y

a
d
o
p
t
e
r
s

i
n

t
h
e

L
i
f
e

a
n
d

C
o
m
p
u
t
e
r

S
c
i
e
n
c
e
s
,

i
n

M
a
t
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
s

a
n
d

A
s
t
r
o
n
o
m
y

I
m
p
o
r
t
a
n
t

i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s

i
n

t
h
e

f
i
e
l
d

o
f

m
e
d
i
c
i
n
e
/
m
e
d
i
c
a
l

t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
s
,

s
u
c
h

a
s

N
e
g
l
e
c
t
e
d

D
i
s
e
a
s
e
s
1
0
0

a
n
d

t
h
e

O
p
e
n

S
o
u
r
c
e

D
r
u
g

D
i
s
c
o
v
e
r
y

N
e
t
w
o
r
k
1
0
1

C
i
t
i
z
e
n

S
c
i
e
n
c
e

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

l
i
k
e

G
a
l
a
x
y

Z
o
o
1
0
2

a
n
d

F
o
l
d
i
t
1
0
3
,

i
n

w
h
i
c
h

t
h
e

g
e
n
e
r
a
l

p
u
b
l
i
c

(
w
h
e
t
h
e
r

a
c
a
d
e
m
i
c
a
l
l
y

t
r
a
i
n
e
d

o
r

n
o
t
)

c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e

t
o

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s

p
r
o
m
o
t
i
n
g

p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y

f
u
n
d
e
d

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

s
h
o
u
l
d

b
e

p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

,

a
s

m
e
n
t
i
o
n
e
d

f
o
r

o
t
h
e
r

o
p
e
n
s

F
u
n
d
e
r
s

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
l
y

r
e
q
u
i
r
e

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

a
c
r
o
s
s

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s

a
n
d

c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s



























































9
9

W
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
,

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
e
n
.
w
i
k
i
p
e
d
i
a
.
o
r
g
/
w
i
k
i
/
O
p
e
n
_
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

1
0
0

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
t
h
e
s
y
n
a
p
t
i
c
l
e
a
p
.
o
r
g
/

1
0
1

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
o
s
d
d
.
n
e
t
/

1
0
2

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
g
a
l
a
x
y
z
o
o
.
o
r
g
/

1
0
3

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
f
o
l
d
.
i
t
/
p
o
r
t
a
l
/

Page 32 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

C
u
r
r
e
n
t

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

s
h
o
w

t
h
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

f
o
r

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

b
y

b
r
i
n
g
i
n
g

m
o
r
e

m
i
n
d
s

t
o
g
e
t
h
e
r

o
n

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s

t
h
a
n

h
a
s

e
v
e
r

b
e
e
n

p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e

b
e
f
o
r
e
,

w
i
t
h

r
e
m
a
r
k
a
b
l
e

r
e
s
u
l
t
s

(
e
x
a
m
p
l
e
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

t
h
e

P
o
l
y
m
a
t
h

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
,

t
h
e

2
0
1
1

E
H
E
C
-
c
r
i
s
i
s

i
n

G
e
r
m
a
n
y
)
.

T
h
e
s
e

e
x
p
e
r
i
m
e
n
t
s

p
r
o
v
i
d
e

t
e
s
t
i
n
g

g
r
o
u
n
d

f
o
r

i
d
e
a
s

s
u
c
h

a
s
:

o

F
o
r

t
h
e

i
n
c
r
e
a
s
i
n
g
l
y

c
o
m
p
l
e
x

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s

f
a
c
i
n
g

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
,

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

w
i
t
h

o
t
h
e
r
s

i
s

e
s
s
e
n
t
i
a
l


o

C
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

o
n

c
o
m
p
l
e
x

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s

w
i
l
l

b
r
i
n
g

i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s

g
r
e
a
t
e
r

b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s

t
h
a
n

d
o
i
n
g

t
h
e

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

o
n

t
h
e
i
r

o
w
n

o

U
s
e
f
u
l

k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e

i
s

w
i
d
e
l
y

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
,

b
o
t
h

i
n
s
i
d
e

a
n
d

a
l
s
o

o
u
t
s
i
d
e

a
c
a
d
e
m
i
c

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s

I
s
s
u
e
s

R
i
s
k
s

a
n
d

i
n
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
i
e
s

o
f

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

o
v
e
r
l
o
a
d

R
i
s
k

o
f

a
b
u
s
e

o
f

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

f
o
r

h
a
r
m
f
u
l

p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
.

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t
s

v
e
r
s
u
s

s
o
c
i
e
t
a
l

i
m
p
a
c
t
s

a
n
d

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
c

g
o
o
d

Page 33 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

3
.
9

O
p
e
n

I
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

O
p
e
n

I
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

O
p
e
n

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

i
s

a

p
a
r
a
d
i
g
m

t
h
a
t

a
s
s
u
m
e
s

t
h
a
t

f
i
r
m
s

c
a
n

a
n
d

s
h
o
u
l
d

u
s
e

e
x
t
e
r
n
a
l

i
d
e
a
s

a
s

w
e
l
l

a
s

i
n
t
e
r
n
a
l

i
d
e
a
s
,

a
n
d

i
n
t
e
r
n
a
l

a
n
d

e
x
t
e
r
n
a
l

p
a
t
h
s

t
o

m
a
r
k
e
t
,

a
s

t
h
e

f
i
r
m
s

l
o
o
k

t
o

a
d
v
a
n
c
e

t
h
e
i
r

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
1
0
4

I
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
n
g

w
i
t
h

p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s

b
y

s
h
a
r
i
n
g

r
i
s
k

a
n
d

s
h
a
r
i
n
g

r
e
w
a
r
d
1
0
5

R
o
o
t
s

N
e
w

m
e
t
h
o
d
s

f
o
r

n
e
w

b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

T
h
e

t
e
r
m

b
e
c
a
m
e

a

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

w
i
t
h

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

H
e
n
r
y

C
h
e
s
b
r
o
u
g
h

s

b
o
o
k

O
p
e
n

I
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
:

T
h
e

n
e
w

i
m
p
e
r
a
t
i
v
e

f
o
r

c
r
e
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

p
r
o
f
i
t
i
n
g

f
r
o
m

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y

A
i
m
s
/

m
o
t
i
v
a
t
i
o
n
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e

i
s

w
i
d
e
l
y

d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d

a
n
d

o
f

g
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y

h
i
g
h

q
u
a
l
i
t
y

.
1
0
6

T
o

t
a
p

i
n
t
o

t
h
o
s
e

k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e

r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s

n
o
t

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e

w
i
t
h
i
n

t
h
e

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

(
t
h
e

s
o

c
a
l
l
e
d

o
u
t
s
i
d
e
-
i
n

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
)

T
o

e
x
p
l
o
i
t

m
o
r
e

i
n
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
s

m
o
r
e

s
u
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l
l
y

b
y

s
e
l
l
i
n
g

o
r

l
i
c
e
n
s
i
n
g

t
h
o
s
e

t
h
e

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

c
a
n
n
o
t

a
n
d

w
i
l
l

n
o
t

e
x
p
l
o
i
t

i
t
s
e
l
f

(
t
h
e

s
o

c
a
l
l
e
d

i
n
s
i
d
e
-
o
u
t

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
)

T
o

b
e

a
b
l
e

t
o

d
e
a
l

w
i
t
h

m
o
r
e

c
o
m
p
l
e
x

q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s

T
o

o
p
e
n

u
p

t
h
e

d
i
s
c
o
v
e
r
y

p
r
o
c
e
s
s

i
t
s
e
l
f

K
e
y

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
/

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
/

p
o
l
i
c
y

d
r
i
v
e
r
s

C
r
o
w
d

s
o
u
r
c
i
n
g

G
o
o
g
l
e

S
u
m
m
e
r

o
f

C
o
d
e

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
1
0
7

M
I
T
x
,

e
d
X

C
i
t
i
z
e
n

s
c
i
e
n
c
e

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

(
s
e
e

a
l
s
o

O
p
e
n

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
b
o
v
e
)



























































1
0
4

C
h
e
s
b
r
o
u
g
h
,

H
e
n
r
y
,

(
2
0
0
3
)
.

O
p
e
n

I
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
:

T
h
e

N
e
w

I
m
p
e
r
a
t
i
v
e

f
o
r

C
r
e
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

P
r
o
f
i
t
i
n
g

f
r
o
m

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
.

B
o
s
t
o
n
:

H
a
r
v
a
r
d

B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

S
c
h
o
o
l

P
r
e
s
s

1
0
5

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
1
0
0
o
p
e
n
.
c
o
m
/
2
0
1
1
/
0
3
/
o
p
e
n
-
i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
-
d
e
f
i
n
e
d

1
0
6

C
h
e
s
b
r
o
u
g
h

1
0
7

h
t
t
p
:
/
/
c
o
d
e
.
g
o
o
g
l
e
.
c
o
m
/
s
o
c
/

Page 34 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1

A
c
h
i
e
v
e
m
e
n
t
s

/

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

A
d
o
p
t
i
o
n

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e

h
a
s

a
n

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
n
g

i
n
f
l
u
e
n
c
e

o
n

t
h
e

w
a
y

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

h
i
g
h
e
r

e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

i
s

c
o
n
d
u
c
t
e
d

S
t
r
o
n
g
e
r

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
v
e

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

/

m
o
r
e

o
r

u
n
e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d

s
p
i
n
-
o
f
f

b
e
c
a
u
s
e

o
f

t
h
e

o
u
t
-
o
f
-
t
h
e
-
b
o
x

c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r

o
f

o
p
e
n

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

S
t
r
o
n
g
e
r

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

t
i
e
s

b
e
t
w
e
e
n

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
s
/
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

a
n
d

(
o
u
t
s
i
d
e
)

p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t
s

b
e
c
a
u
s
e

o
f

t
h
e

a
c
t
i
v
e

i
n
v
o
l
v
e
m
e
n
t

i
n

t
h
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

W
i
d
e
r

s
o
c
i
e
t
a
l

b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s

I
s
s
u
e
s

E
x
p
l
o
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

r
i
g
h
t
s
,

i
n
t
e
l
l
e
c
t
u
a
l

p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y

(
I
P
)

C
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

r
e
t
u
r
n

o
n

i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
1
0
8

C
o
m
p
e
t
i
t
i
o
n

C
o
n
t
r
o
l




























































1
0
8

D
i
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
i
e
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

f
o
r

e
x
a
m
p
l
e

t
h
e

o
p
e
n
-
e
n
d
e
d

n
a
t
u
r
e

o
f

o
p
e
n

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n
,

a
n
d

t
h
e

e
f
f
e
c
t

o
f

s
o
c
i
e
t
a
l

i
m
p
a
c
t
s
.


I
n

t
e
r
m
s

o
f

s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
a
t
t
e
r

i
s

a

f
a
c
t
o
r

t
h
a
t

s
h
o
u
l
d

b
e

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d

i
n
,

a
s

i
s

d
o
n
e

b
y

s
o
m
e

f
i
r
m
s

t
h
a
t

o
p
e
r
a
t
e

o
n

t
h
e

b
a
s
i
s

o
f

s
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,

r
a
t
h
e
r

t
h
a
n

p
r
o
f
i
t

m
a
x
i
m
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
.


I
t

i
s

a
l
s
o

a

r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t

f
a
c
t
o
r

i
n

p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y

f
u
n
d
e
d

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
s
.

Page 35 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

4 Challenges
The survey of the State of Play in Section 3 reveals a number of common themes that can provide
challenges in the development of Open as a modus operandi in research and higher education. They are
discussed in greater detail in this section to allow the identification of possible ways forward in Section 5.
4.1 How open is Open?
So far in this document, Open has been used as a single, generic term. Yet, closer inspection of the
definition already shows there are different levels of Open. The same can be said for a number of the
issues encountered in the implementation of the various opens. One of the challenges to be dealt with is
the fact that
ideas of openness remain open to interpretation
109
,
and we probably must be open with respect to these interpretations. However, even within these
constraints, there is much that can be said about different levels of openness, and the way they impact
discussions about the implementation of Open as a modus operandi.
4.1.1 Practical aspects
4.1.1.1 Free versus Open
In a lot of the discussions about open content and open software (in particular), confusion often arises
because the words free and open are used synonymously, and free is interpreted as free of charge.
In the Open Source Software community, where this discussion dates back to the 1990s, free has the
wider connotation of freedom: source code is also open, and one has the right to modify and redistribute
it.
110
There is often also a moral connotation to the discussion, with freedom being an end in itself. In the
late 1990s, the term open source was created as an alternative to free, to escape from the confusion
and for the pragmatic reason that open source was a promising business strategy for the corporate
world
110
.
In the Open Source community, open now can mean free of charge, but more important is its freedom
for (re)use
111
. When free of charge is seen as only one of the possible flavours of open, a wider range of
options is opened up, depending for instance on what is available openly, at what level of openness, and
at what service level. Open Source and Open Standards have proven that it is possible to have open
products, projects and specifications on the basis of which further specific applications are built that are
not openthese do not harm or limit the availability and use of the original open version. On the
contrary, they can even contribute towards the sustainability of the open version. Examples are online
collaboration platforms like Alfresco
112
and Liferay
113
, that offer open source platforms in free-of-charge
and subscription-based versions. Drupal
114
offers a free-of-charge open source/open development
collaboration platform and points to a market-place of providers for paid services, hosting and training.

109
Open Source and Open Innovation, OSS Watch, 2010, http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/openinnov.xml
110
http://producingoss.com/en/introduction.html#free-vs-open-source, which also quotes the battle between the Netscape and Microsoft IE
browsers as an example that zero-cost software is not free as in freedom to use
111
In the sense of right to modify and re-distribute.
112
http://www.alfresco.com/
113
http://www.liferay.com/
114
http://drupal.org/
Page 36 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

4.1.1.2 Levels of Openness
Related to the Free/Open distinction is the question what level of openness is provided. Are resources
open if they can be accessed free of charge but only after log-in, or upon receipt of a certificate (as is the
case, for example, with many grids)? Is content open if it can be accessed freely, but not easily reused
due to technical or legal barriers (barriers such as incompatible formats, copyright claims, and so on)? Is
research or innovation open if participants can only join on invitation and/or have no influence on the
direction of the project?
These are only a few of the questions which make clear how varied the open landscape can be, and how
important it is in discussions to clarify the possible distinctions and perspectives between
participants; not to find the one and only true definition of Open but to find the
range within which cooperation and progress is feasible. Examples of how
this ranging could be presented can be seen in the five-star-
system
115
for open content, embodied in the 5 levels of
openness for data (Tim Berners-Lee
116
) and the five
stars evaluation scheme for Online Journal Articles
as presented by David Shotton (Oxford
University
117
). Another example is the distinction
between 'open source' and 'community source' in
the OSS context. in 'community source' projects
a consortium of institutions or commercial companies sign an agreement whereby they decide to
contribute a certain amount of financial
and/or human resources, and get, in
exchange, exclusivity in
influencing the development of
the project during an initial
closed stage. After this closed
period, the code can be made
available to everyone, and the
development moves towards a more
traditional open source
model.
118

4.1.1.3 Intellectual Property
One of the most often raised issues in the discussions about openness is that relating to Intellectual
Property (IP), its protection and its exploitation/commercialization. All parties involved, including
authors/creators and their institutions, point to IP as a reason not to provide open research outputs. This
may be because IP-rights are habitually transferred exclusively to other parties so that their own control
over their outputs is lost. Protection of exploitation interests is another reason.

115
http://5stardata.info
116
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
117
Shotton D (2012). The Five Stars of Online Journal Articles a Framework for Article Evaluation, D-Lib Magazine 18 (1/2) (January/February
2012 issue). doi:10.1045/january2012-shotton. (Preprint, giving original text prior to revision and expansion following post-publication peer
review, available in Nature Proceedings at http://precedings.nature.com/documents/6542/version/1 )
118
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/communityvsopen.xml



Figure 4 The 5 stars of linked data
Figure 5 The 5 stars of online journal access
Figure 3 5 star system for open content
Page 37 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

It is clear that IP is not an easy issue to deal with, and the legitimacy of the wish for exploitation of rights is
seldom debated.
Yet here too, lessons from Open Source Software, Development and Innovation indicate there may be
scope for more openness than now presumed. The TexGen example
119
shows the open source benefits
were both financial (additional funding) and intangible (increased knowledge about potential applications
for example); and the commercial applications developed from the original open source product did not
impact the availability and usefulness of the latter. The same phenomenon has been true for other Open
Source Software.
Open Innovation literature states that many patents lie unused, because the time, manpower and/or
expertise is lacking to exploit them all
120
. Furthermore, Rufus Pollock (co-founder Open Knowledge
Foundation) points out that the best thing to do with your data will be thought of by someone else
121

which is characteristic for innovation as a whole. A recent Future of Research report

122
suggests that for
UK researchers to stay competitive globally
they need to get used to sharing data and move freely between sectors and
countries
123
.
Holding on to research outputs can mean serious loss of capital (intellectual and financial), to both the
originator and society; and it hampers innovation.
4.1.1.4 Competition versus cooperation
Related to the issue of IP but ranging wider is the question of competition versus cooperation. An
example is the competition between higher education institutions for more students. In the edX
experiment
124
competitive universities join forces in a new offering which can be expected to benefit each
of them by drawing in larger number of students and by learning about online education. They could
probably each do this independently but no doubt at much higher cost, with no better guarantee of
success. Joining forces is likely to increase the chance of achieving the critical mass necessary for this sort
of experiment to succeed. edX is an interesting example of a relatively new way of working for
organizations: coopetition
125
.
Similarly, research groups and institutions can be faced with the choice between competition, cooperation
or coopetition. Which choice is made is in any case influenced by the assumptions about expected
benefits to the group, the institution and/or the project, and by funding requirements (is a consortium
required for instance). An important factor in these assessments is whether societal benefits are included
or not. Although
It is difficult to predict the potential pay outs of technology or to assess the costs of
withholding it, there is general agreement that the benefit to any single institution of

119
A software product originally made in the context of a research project and subsequently provided Open Source in an Open Development
community; it became successful in much wider circles, procuring continued funding from new sources and finding new, unexpected applications.
TexGen: a case study, 2009, http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/cs-texgen.xml
120
Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, Chesbrough et al., http://www.openinnovation.net/Book/NewParadigm/Chapters/01.pdf p.
5, last update March 2006
121
Open Innovation in software, http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/openinnovsoftware.xml, OSS Watch, 2011
122
Future of Research report http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/TheFutureOfResearch.pdf
123
Quoted from Open Innovation in software, http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/openinnovsoftware.xml, OSS Watch, 2011
124
https://www.edx.org
125
Coopetition occurs when companies interact with partial congruence of interests. They cooperate with each other to reach a higher value
creation if compared to the value created without interaction, and struggle to achieve competitive advantage,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coopetition
Page 38 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

holding technology is not as great as the cost of withholding it from all other research
institutions
126
.
This sentimentexpressed here in relation to technologyapplies equally to information and other
research outputs. From the perspective of a single institution this may not seem attractive; yet, there is
growing recognition that with the increasingly complex questions facing research, collaboration with
others is essential and will bring the individual institution greater benefits than going it alone.
Also of influence on the choice is the available research and management expertise. Cooperation and
coopetition require complex management skills, and if these are lacking, the best choice may well be to
stick to the competition mode. The best choice is dependent on the specific situations and circumstances;
none of the working modes is inherently the best.
4.1.1.5 Security
Another frequently mentioned argument against Open is security risk: personal safety risks, health
hazards, breach of privacy, financial risks, etc. Risks are real and not unique to the online world, though
online does add a new assortment. No doubt the new and unknown of open increases sensitivity to its
risks. In itself this is positive, since it triggers important questions for which new answers need to be
found. It also creates an alertness to the risks that is necessary to combat themas is seen in the current
discussions about cybercrime, spyware, and the like. The Microsoft Internet Explorer leak
127
case poses
interesting questions not only about the safety of the browser, but also about the decisions where to have
equipment produced and assembled. At the same time it is important to remain aware that the interests
of organisations specializing in cybercrime and spyware detection may influence the discussions, as
happened in the debate on Open Standards and Open Source Software in the 1990s.
The recent H5N1 influenza debate
128
is another significant example of a security dilemma. Publications
from two different research groups aimed at easier detection and prevention of the spread of the H5N1
avian influenza virus also opened up the possibility of biological warfare. The debate on this dual use risk
in the US National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) eventually resulted in a reversal of its
original advice to withhold key details from publication, to a large extent because:
New evidence has emerged that underscores the fact that understanding specific
mutations may improve international surveillance and public health and safety. Global
cooperation, critical for pandemic influenza preparedness efforts, is predicated upon
the free sharing of information and was a fundamental principle in evaluating these
manuscripts.
An informed debate tipped the scales in favour of the benefits of publication, rather than the risks. This
may look counter-intuitive, and that is exactly why the informed debate is so important in issues like this.
The NSABB argument echoes the experience in the OSS environment that open source is neither more
nor less secure than closed source; the apparent lack of organized control is mitigated by the open
source principle of many eyes make every problem shallow
129
. Our world is becoming increasingly open,
and we cannot afford to be naive about its effects; but neither can we afford to keep relying on rules,
notions and intuitions that have been formed in a paper-based information society.

126
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_science
127
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms12-063
128
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/03/breaking-news-nsabb-reverses-pos.html
129
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/securityintro.xml
Page 39 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

4.1.2 Cultural aspects
4.1.2.1 Mindset
Habit is ones second nature and it often unconsciously influences our behaviour in adoption of new
technologies and other innovations
130
. Habits are formed within a frame of reference created by
education and social and organisational reward systems. They can lead to innovations, but also hinder
them.
131

Open is an innovation at the global cultural levelnotwithstanding the fact that it impacts different
cultures in different wayswith deep impacts at all lower levels: national, political, organisational, and
personal. The impact of open developments in research and higher education is mixed. On the one hand,
there is happy adoption of tools supporting relatively open communication and collaborationGoogle
Docs, Mendeley, Blogs, Twitter, etc. On the other hand, the more organised introduction of Open as in
Open Access, Open Data, Open Review and Open Research triggers hesitation (at least), if not resistance.
This may, in part, have to do with lack of freedom of choice; but the responses in surveys among
researchers on the open developments indicate there is more at stake. The open web-tools mentioned
above facilitate or build upon the present process of research communication and do not by their nature
bring into question ingrained research publication habits. These habits underpin the current frame of
reference for the entire research and higher education system: for research, funding, career assessment,
review and publication, education. The introduction of Open most definitely does affect these habits.
Where critical examination of new theories and experiments is the method used in ones everyday work
a scenario that is particularly prevalent in the world of researchvalued habits are likely to be retained
until an alternative is proven to be efficacious. As Chesbrough says in the context of innovation research:
scholars withhold their support of these novelties, unless and until they can
demonstrate a more enduring contribution to the advancement of knowledge
132
.
In addition to the current research publication habits, this scholarly mind set may be an important factor
at play in the lack of adoption of Open. Firstly, Open is not mature enough yet to demonstrate such
enduring contribution sufficiently, but perhaps more importantly, it is hard to simultaneously apply this
scholarly perspective of demonstrate first and be participant in the experiment.
4.1.2.2 Distinctions in disciplines and generations
Perspectives on and adoption of Open differ among disciplines and generations. The early adoption
disciplines and generations provide the experiments needed to demonstrate the enduring contribution to
the advancement of knowledge (and/or to society at large). And in a growing number of examples this
demonstration is successful, or on-going. OSS is probably the easiest example to use of proof because it
is more established than Open Access or Open Data. Yet early examples of Open Access publishing and
Open Data also prove to have benefits hitherto unknown or unimagined (see section 2.3)
The main issue with disciplinary distinctions is that success in one discipline is not perceived as necessarily
applicable in another and so is not accepted as proof. This isnt entirely unjustified. Every discipline
must find its own applications in its own specific context. The Arts and Humanities clearly show that given

130
Intention does not always matter: The contingent role of habit on it usage behaviour, M. Limayem et al., Global Co-Operation in the New
Millennium, The 9th European Conference on Information Systems, Slovenia, June 2001
131
Innovation and the role of habits: a conceptual analysis, D. Cavagnoli, Discussion Paper, August 2008
132
Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, Chesbrough et al., http://www.openinnovation.net/Book/NewParadigm/Chapters/01.pdf, p.
4, last update March 2006
Page 40 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

time and interest, scholars will find new applications that enrich their research and publications.
Annotation tools, text mining techniques and the OAPEN
133
publication platform are clear cases in point.
Distinctions in generations are not easy to interpret. Younger researchers and studentsthe so called
digital nativeshave grown up in, and are believed to be used to, online environments and tools; they
would seem to be the likely candidates to adopt the changes. However, when they move into the world
of academic education and research, many show fairly conservative behaviour; the influence of the habits
of their senior mentors and the current reward systems are strong and engender a must fit in frame of
mind, particularly when it comes to safeguarding career prospects
134
.
Established researchers are steeped in, and owe their position to, the current traditions and therefore
appear to be less likely to change their habits. Yet, they could be powerful innovators precisely because of
their established position, in their roles as tutors for young researchers, as researchers and as participants
in funding decisions. Some actually do take that innovator role, as do some young researchers, but it is
not enough yet to create the necessary critical mass.
4.2 Evaluation and reward or perverse triggers?
Elsevier boycott: Academic spring in Germany slightly rainy
A ZBW survey shows that German economists sympathize with the Elsevier boycott and
Open Access, but still support the established reputation and ranking systems

Young researchers indicated that they are reluctant to join the boycott for fear of the
negative impact on their further career. One of the participants stated: Boycott is only
an option for tenured professors. A young scholar would criminally endanger his
personal future if he did not publish in the magazines of Elsevier, some of which enjoy a
very high reputation.
Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, Kiel/Hamburg, 16 May 2012

The most daunting obstacle to opening up the process is that peer-review publishing is
the path to a job and tenure, and no would-be professor wants to be the academic
canary in the coal mine.
The first question that Alan Galey, a junior faculty member at the University of Toronto,
asked when deciding to participate in The Shakespeare Quarterlys experiment was
whether his essay would ultimately count toward tenure. I went straight to the dean
with it, Mr. Galey said. (It would.)
Scholars Test Web Alternative to Peer Review, NY Times, 24 August 2010

The European Commission will help if it gives value to the publications with open
access policies and if it convinces governments to create valuable indicators related to
open access policies. Moreover, as highlighted by another, open access policies will
have an impact if its use is somehow prized and merited according to standards for
promotion.

133
http://www.oapen.org/home
134
JISC reports on generation X and Y; http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2012/researchers-of-tomorrow.aspx and
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/ggworkpackageii.pdf
Page 41 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Survey on Open Access in FP7 EC-DG for Research and Innovation
These quotes from researchers in the context of Open Access to research literature and Open Peer Review
are equally applicable to other Opens, as was shown in section 3. If ones career is perceived to be
dependent primarily on the number of research articles published in a very particular set of journals, all
requests for participation in other activities will be considered in that light and therefore be judged as at
least ineffective and at worst damaging. These other activities could include for example provision of
Open Data, cooperation in the creation of research-informed OER, cooperating in the development of fit-
for-purpose disciplinary data infrastructures and in the innovation of education.
One could argue that research and higher education should be about the advancement of knowledge, not
about career points, and no doubt this view is endorsed widely. Yet if an evaluation and reward system
relies heavily on a single quantitative measure that has proven to be flawed even in what it measures
135
, it
is arguably lacking in effectiveness. It is a legitimate question whether it is not more a perverse trigger
than a reward system.
Innovation reflects a process of learning. Learning is affected by the system of
rewards within each organisation; therefore, workplace practices, management
policies and government policies affect the system of rewards, and so, learning;
thereby contributing to, or harnessing the, creation and diffusion of innovation
Habits of behaviour and of thoughts affect the priority of what needs to be learned.
Habits help to adapt. They are maintained and reinforced via a system of rewards.
However, rewards influence the process of learning, as they perpetuate values and
beliefs of what to learn; and so, habits can also hinder adaptation and innovation.
136

4.3 The Longer Term
4.3.1 Preservation
One of the issues mentioned in section 3 is that there are many questions and uncertainties with respect
to long(er) term preservation of open access research materials. Particular questions of note include:
what to preserveparticularly in relation to the different impacts of preservation in different
disciplines
how that can be done over decadesproblems include ever-changing hardware and software
configurations
who is responsiblewhat level of aggregation do we look at (individual, institution, discipline, and
so on) and how do we take into consideration discipline-related differences in needs
who pays the substantial bills involved (not just now, but also in the future)
The analysis of the ECs questionnaire on National Open Access and Preservation Policies in Europe states
that:
While many of the responding countries have put in place notable initiatives or
strategies regarding the digital preservation of cultural heritage in general, specific

135
Experience has shown that there can be a marked difference between a journals reputation amongst peers and its impact factor, not just
because of time delays in the IF, but also structurally e.g. in the case of interdisciplinary journals. The manipulation of the IF e.g. by selective
citing and regular publishing of Review articles/issues is also a known phenomenon.
136
Innovation and the role of habits: a conceptual analysis, D. Cavagnoli, Working Papers 2008.03, School of Economics, La Trobe University,
http://ideas.repec.org/p/trb/wpaper/2008.03.html.
Page 42 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

attention to the preservation of scientific information needs to be further developed
within most existing national policies and legislative frameworks. Moreover,
researchers do not seem to always be aware of preservation of scientific information,
articles and data as a key issue...
137

Considering the complexity and scope of the issues involved, although a nationally-based policy and
legislative framework is necessary, long-term preservation seems to be an area of research and
development that would benefit from a collaborative approach across nations to prevent costly
duplication of efforts. It also seems to be an area that needs to look for approaches rather than
solutions. A solution implies a finality that is illusionary in an activity that is in principle never
completed. Approaches can evolve over time as circumstances change, and help find the best solutions
for the time being. The Blue Ribbon Task Force
138
has set an example of how this could be done, by
treating long-term preservation as a process, rather than a project and setting time-horizons for further or
renewed decision-making rather than trying to cater for eternity. Also, it is important to realize that open
approaches themselves have a role to play in long-term preservation, as is evidenced by the LOCKSS
system, which is an open-source, library-led digital preservation system predicated on the principle that
lots of copies keep stuff safe
139
.
Long-term preservation is a much bigger agenda than Open, but specific attention to it in the context of
Open is important also because it may help build trust among researchers. They need to know that this
development is not a hype that may disappear in four years time when the project funding is over. The
issue of the trusted party is highly important here: the responsibility should not be left to commercial
parties with a stake in research publishing. The fact that they do have a stake could make them eligible
funding partners.
4.3.1.1 Governance
Equally important in terms of continuity and trust-building is the necessity to find governance models for
open developments that start out as projects. Even if projects initially manage to continue in the form of
a new project, at some point a model needs to be found to guarantee its continuity. A project that is
considered to be successful and worthwhile should be able to find such a model; that it can be done is
shown by numerous examples in the worlds of Open Source Software, Open Standards and also by way of
example the European Research and Higher Education network. The European NRENs have found a
modality by setting up a jointly owned not-for-profit, limited liability company, responsible for operational
management and project management for new developments. Another example can be seen in the
Apache Software Foundation (ASF) which is a foundation, functioning as a meritocracy, built around the
principles of open development. Both examples show that governance models may use traditional legal
entities and operate in traditional or completely new and experimental ways. Both have developed from
existing cooperation as projects that felt it was necessary and worthwhile to collaborate in a more
permanent form. Funding sources vary, but may (and do) include commercial parties. The ASF is a good
example of how the interests of the open source community and those of commercial partners can be
combined without detrimental effect to open source principles and development.
140


137
National open access and preservation policies in Europe, Analysis of a questionnaire to the European Research Area Committee, EC-DG for
Research and Innovation, p 38
138
http://brtf.sdsc.edu/about.html
139
http://www.lockss.org/about/principles
140
OSS watch provides two governance templates for academic open source projects based on two well- known governance models in open
source communities: 'meritocratic' and 'benevolent dictator' http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/meritocraticGovernanceModel.xml and
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/benevolentdictatorgovernancemodel.xml
Page 43 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

4.3.1.2 Sustainability
How can this project be made sustainable? is an issue in practically all opens. Several questions come
to mind in this context. Firstly, do all projects need to be sustained? Secondly, why set up a new activity
or service as a project in the first place rather than as a regular new activity or service? Thirdly, in addition
to asking how a project can become sustainable the question that could (and perhaps should) be asked is
how the project can contribute to the sustainability of an effective, efficient and innovative research and
higher education system. This shift in perspective means that the narrow project focushow can we
keep our project aliveis widened to include the projects place in the entire research and higher
education ecosystem. This wider and more outward looking approach may make it easier to identify, or
open up to, possible new applications and funding sources; or integrate it into regular activities or
services. In the latter case, asking the sustainability question also means asking how those new activities
and services impact the existing organisation(s) and how that can free up resources. It also means that a
wider group of stakeholders may get involved in dealing with the question, rather than just the original
project group. As the experience from the Open Development area shows this is an important success
factor.
Sustainability is not a popular topic in not-for-profit sectors, nor a natural one in sectors where activities
are often organised in project-form. The Open Source Software and Standards Development shows it can
be done and provides a variety of examples for approaches. One size does not fit all. Each project will
have to find an approach most fitting to its purpose and needs. Annex C provides a survey of available
sustainability approaches.
OSS Watch also has guidance on this topic, guidance which is especially useful to researchers who start
planning for the sustainability of their projects at bid writing stage
141
. To keep it actively in the project
focus from day one and treat finding the answers as a process throughout the project increases the
chance that sustainability is achieved as long as it is required. This calls to mind the approach advocated
by the Blue Ribbon Task Force for long-term preservation: sustainability as a process, rather than as a
fixed solution. The recently issued Knowledge Exchange Report on Sustainability of Open Access Services
reinforces this message
142
.
Another lesson to be learned from the OSS/ODM field is that the involvement of for-profit organizations
can contribute to sustainability. Maintaining the open principles and approaches as a requirement in the
collaboration will keep things honest, as has been shown by Open Standards development and the ASF.
This principled pragmatism does, however, require firm negotiation skills.
It is important to realize as well that sustainability is only partly about money; it is equally about things
such as tools, infrastructure, work processes, people, time, skills. Obviously, money is a facilitator, but no
amount of money will suffice if the people with the necessary skills are lacking. And skilled people often
appear capable of achieving a lot with relatively little money, given time. Money and time are always
scarce; creativity and skill will compensate for much if recognition of achievements is clear and
appropriate.
The often-used concept business model may actually contribute to the confusion and resistance in the
sustainability discussion. For though it is a wide ranging concept it may easily be misunderstood, or
interpreted narrowly as a financial model. Furthermore, its commercial origins may cause unnecessary
resistance in not-for-profit environments where the emphasis is on delivering services for the public good

141
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/planningsustainability.xml
142
Sustainability of Open Access Services, Report Phase 1 and 2: Scoping the challenge and consulting the stakeholders, http://www.knowledge-
exchange.info/Default.aspx?ID=536
Page 44 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

instead of on doing business. There is more involved than just semantics when we would replace the
phrase business model by sustainability approach.
4.4 Diversity
In the implementation of infrastructure projects or concepts across a wide range of countries, regions,
disciplines, sectors, organisations and people, diversity is always remarked upon as an issue. We also see
this happening with the various opens, especially in the area of open data where disciplines regularly
raise the issue of their subject-specific requirements, the implication being that they are different to
those of other disciplines.
As diversity is the rule, not the exception, it could perhaps be treated as a given rather than an issue. One
of the reasons that diversity becomes an issue is that the one size fits all approach is widely considered
to bring about efficiency (particularly in process such as, for example, the maintenance of systems). This
notion is understandable, and up to a certain point is no doubt true. But the efficiency that may exist at
the technical implementation level gets seriously compromisedif not wiped outby the inefficiencies
that appear at the wider organisational, disciplinary or other aggregation levels.
Dealing with diversity is also often considered to be difficult. From the one size fits all perspective this is
often the case. It is also true in the sense that dealing with diversity means trying to understand and
assess the views, needs and wishes of people and groups from completely different backgrounds than
ones own. This takes up valuable time.
Taking diversity as a given means adopting a wider perspective on efficiency. One way of doing this is by
asking whose efficiency? It also means taking a wider perspective on implementation than efficiency.
Effectiveness, contribution to communication, innovation, advancement of knowledge, other societal
impacts, may also come into play. This is true for geographical and disciplinary diversity, as well as for
diversity in levels of development.
In open source communities diversity is actually encouraged as the one of the most important factors for
community growth and for the improvement of the product being developed. For Mrten Mickos, former
CEO of MySQL, diversity is a quintessence for innovation, which is:
most likely to happen when people encounter each other in social spaces where
different views and solutions can be explored. Diversity brings long-term sustainability
precisely because diverse people pursuing their own self-interests within a community
are likely to end up working together for the benefit of everyone.
143

4.5 Skills
Section 3, and preceding paragraphs in this section, have shown that implementation of the various opens
requires the development of new skills sets for almost everyone involved. It concerns both specialist and
management skills. Examples include:
Library staff involved in Open Access publishing and dissemination via institutional repositories
have to learn to deal in a much more pro-active way with researchers and in different phases of
the research cycle than they have been used to, to inform them about and assist them in OA
publishing; including, but not limited to, dealing with copyright in the appropriate way.
Journal editors, authors and reviewers may want to learn to work with open review.

143
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/openinnovsoftware.xml
Page 45 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Management of Open Data is a whole new field, with a call for new types of staff and expertise
(for example selecting appropriate storage, metadata and classification, legal issues); in the
broader definition of Research Data, the Data librarian is a relatively new role.
In Open Source projects, basic licensing knowledge is needed to avoid building or bundling
together bits of code released under conflicting licenses. Also needed is specific knowledge and
experience of building communities of users and developers around the software being produced
in order to create sustainable ecosystems.
Project leaders involved in Open Research projects need to acquire new management and
leadership skills to maximize the benefits of involvement of external experts and/or the general
public.
Project managers need to learn how to build in sustainability approaches into their projects
effectively. Strong negotiation skills to deal with commercial partners in collaborations on open
projects need to be developed. As do the skills required to deal effectively with diversity.
For successful further implementation of the various opens, individually and collectively, awareness of
the necessity to develop such skills is important, as is the development or provision of training
programmes. It is also important not to discourage people who have already acquired such skills in using
them as tends to happen now to young people entering into research.
More important is the necessity that due recognition be given to the new jobs and skills required to create
a fully functioning open ecosystem. The required career paths need to be made attractive if people are
going to want to adopt them. Researchers with an interest in the application of ICT in their field of
expertise and the possibilities for data management may well turn to these careers if they get the
appropriate credit for it, and are not treated as second-rate researchers (see also section 4.2 above).
Page 46 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

5 Ways forward
The previous sections have shown that the Open Agenda consists of a patchwork of developments in a
series of individual opens and have explored, to some extent, the state of play of those various opens.
In Section 2 it was stated that there is need for and possible benefit in undertaking a more coordinated
approach to the development of those various opens in order to truly realize the full potential of the
Open Agenda; that is to say a more effective, efficient and innovative research and higher education
system. This section looks at this claim more closely and explores how it could be realised.
5.1 Research and higher education as an Open Enterprise?
The claim that the research and higher education system will benefit from a greater level of openness
could itself still be subject to criticism (and the various opens do have their critics). Yet, in section 2.3 we
have shown the substantial benefits that are being realised. And, despite the criticism, the notion of free
exchange of knowledge in research is a very basic one that is shared widely because everyone involved is
aware that that is a necessary ingredient for the advancement of knowledge. Free in this context has the
same meaning as in our definition of Open in section 2.2: free from barriers to access or use. For optimal
free exchange of knowledge, openness is a necessity. This has always been the case, but the traditional
ways of research communicationconferences, one to one communication, and publishingby their
nature limited the achievable level of openness. The modern ICT facilities enable levels of openness that
have never been possible before; and consequently they can facilitate unprecedented step changes in the
advancement of knowledge.
It is clear that openness has its issues and that it changes existing behaviours and power structures in
research and higher education. The issue at question is whether that should be a reason not to go ahead
with it or to slow down its development. The EC has made its choice with its recent Communication and
Recommendation on better access to scientific information
144
. The UK, too, has a clear stance with the
Royal Society report Science as an Open Enterprise
145
. It states that openness is central to scientific
enquiry in that it supports better research, reviewed research and the development of new knowledge.
New technologies open up new improved methods of science and whilst changed behaviour is witnessed
this is piecemeal and there are no systematic policies and fit-for-purpose infrastructures in place; on the
whole, the report states, many behaviours in research still duplicate that of the paper world and the paper
journal and that this is holding back advances in science.
It would seem that Openness has reached the point of no return. Even the question whether it should
be either a possible or the preferred modus operandi may already have been answered in favour of the
latter. To realize the beneficial effects for the entire research and higher education system, Open needs
to be adopted across the board as the preferred modus operandi, notwithstanding the fact that
implementation may be gradual and phased, and situations may remain that require exceptions.

144
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/index.cfm?fuseaction=public.topic&id=1301
145
published in June 2012, http://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/science-public-enterprise/report
Page 47 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

5.2 Individual or coordinated development?
5.2.1 Interconnectedness of open infrastructure, content and process
The technical deployment of a complex e-infrastructure is one step towards fostering new ways of
conducting research. The developments in this area are such that, by now, people are starting to view
information as a part of the research and higher education e-infrastructure: the physical infrastructure
is invisible, the information is the infrastructure and is perceived as a matter of course
146
. Thus, the
hardware, software and content used and produced in the e-infrastructure are all seen as a set of
necessary, interlinked, resources. This perceived interconnectedness is strengthened by the data deluge:
the capture of masses of data that has been facilitated by a massively improved physical infrastructure;
the handling of the mass of data requires ever more powerful infrastructure. The increased complexity
and diversity across varying data collections necessitates increasingly complex e-infrastructures.
The interconnectedness shows why, in a world of increasingly open content, the enabling physical
infrastructure needs to be open as well: if content is open, the means with which to access and process
itmanually and/or through machine processingneeds to be open as well. The international nature of
researchand increasingly of higher educationreinforces this since the research and educational
processes do not stop at institutional or national borders. Although this has long been the case, it
becomes a more pressing matter in the virtual world. Hence also the need for open participatory and
collaborative processes: with increased complexity and specialisation, the colleague with the necessary
knowledge may be located on the other side of the globe or may not even be identifiable beforehand.
An equally important step to the technical deployment is encouraging researchers to use this technical
framework to its full potential. Addressing this issue, a number of reports mention the need to embed the
technical research framework in a 'human infrastructure'. In this context, human infrastructure refers to
the social and organisational arrangements enabling technologies to be used effectively. The AVROSS
report, for example, states that uptake of e-infrastructure is as often hindered by human and
organisational issues as it is by technical ones. Focusing on the UK, it recommends continued technical
innovation in e-research. At the same time, it suggests, the social framework that would allow research
communities to better exploit these technical assets should be improved.
147

5.2.2 Interconnectedness in work on open infrastructure, content and process
The perceived interconnectedness between the open categories described above suggests that the work
to be done in and on them, and the parties involved in that work, should also be interconnected.
e-InfraNets work on Open to date demonstrates this is only partially the case. As with many
innovations, the development of individual opens has started bottom-up, each community having their
own reason for embracing Open.
Although it is clear that each of these opens has its own specific characteristics, audiences, and issues,
there are important generic concerns. Solutions or approaches found and developed in one area might
well be of benefit to other areas. Furthermore, at some point in time bottom-up development needs top-
down policy and funding support to become stronger and to spread. This is evidenced by the
developments in Open Access and Open Data, where the coordinated policy support of the EC has
provided serious impetus for developments at the national level. Policy support makes it clear that the
new development is taken seriously at the highest levels.

146
http://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/publication/2445229
147
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/researchinfrastructure.xml
Page 48 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Leaving the individual opens to continue their separate development is an option in theory, and may seem
superficially less complex. Developments that have been around and incrementally developing for 10 to
20 years have, by definition, proven to be viable and no doubt further progress could be made in a similar
way. However, the present fragmentation also poses a number of important risks and disadvantages:
Fragmentation in development easily leads to fragmentation in understanding of the importance
of the development, especially in relation to the entire system of research and higher education.
Each community has its own rationale for the development; each open will impact different
stakeholders in different ways (see Annex A). Within a fragmented perspective, it is easy to make
decisions on the development of one open that may adversely affect the development of others
and thus of the entire system.
Fragmentation, and the resulting lack of clarity, can slow down or even undermine efforts in
advocacy, debate, policy development and implementation; and it can hide from view that each
open contributes to, and forms part of, an overall important cultural change.
Fragmentation leads to sub-optimization in the sense that each open is judged separately on
issues such as sustainability.
Fragmentation between groups hinders learning from each others experiences and development
methods.
In short, fragmentation leads to sub-optimal development decisions and progress, and hampers the
innovation of the research and higher education system as a whole by trying to optimize the development
of its constituent parts.
No doubt, for practical reasons, the actual work at operational level will primarily remain divided among
the present groups, with probably more conscious attempts at cross-fertilization. Yet, they will need to be
able to look at the European, national and institutional strategic/policy level for guidance and support
which stem from a more unified and forward-looking picture of Open. This will reduce sub-optimization
and foster progress and innovation.
5.3 Implications for policy and implementation
5.3.1 The choice of Open as a modus operandi
Taking Open as the preferred default modus operandi across the research and higher education system,
and adopting a coordinated approach to its further development, implies that at the national, funders and
institutional decision making and policy level a conscious choice is made to follow this route and support
its development. It requires
all stakeholders to be aware that this has implications for all constituent parts of the system
(including the stakeholders themselves) and that these stakeholders will have to work together, or
in any case refrain from working against each other;
that the issues encountered are seen and treated as implementation issues for which approaches
or solutions need to be found; not as arguments for or against Open;
removing existing barriers to implementation, so that natural bottom-up developments and
cooperation across borders (disciplinary, institutional, departmental and so on) can be fostered.
Page 49 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

5.3.2 An open approach to the implementation of Open
Making the choice for Open requires an open approach to its implementation, and this may be a bigger
paradigm shift than the choice for Open itself. The Open choice can be rationalized, but an open
approach to implementation impacts behaviour.
The choice for Open does not necessitate a one size fits all approach, nor a centralized approach. In fact,
Open inherently requires a distributed network approach, not only at the technical level, but also at the
organisational and financial level. This allows for diversity in development speed which can ease
implementation pressures on countries, disciplines and institutions. It also allows for diversity and
phasing in approaches and in levels of openness (as exemplified by the 5 star-system mentioned in section
4.1.1.2) which can alleviate privacy, security and competition issues. It is a practical way for people to get
used to the new approach, and to gradually upgrade or replace necessary systems and software.
A key concept in openness is interoperability (as opposed to homogeneity); interoperability in hardware,
software, formats and between people. The focus is not on how to change them, but on how they can
work together. This requires use of open standards
148
, for hardware, software and formats, as well as for
cooperation between people (in the use of open licences, transparent governance rules, and so on).
There is no end point or fixed timeline for the development of Open. It would therefore benefit from
being approached as a continuing process with transparent governance principles among dedicated
stakeholders, rather than as a final project (as advocated by the Blue Ribbon Taskforce for long-term
preservation and sustainability and the principles of the Open Development Method). Adopting this
approach will ease implementation issues and contribute to its sustainable development, as
demonstrated by Open Development of Open Software and Standards. It will also help to build
confidence among the various stakeholders (and in particular researchers).
The sustainability question needs to be considered at least at research and higher education system level
(or perhaps even higher in the hierarchy) rather than just at the level of each different Open and each
different open project, to reduce the sub-optimization effect. Just how each different open project
contributes to a sustainable open research and higher education system requires different stakeholders to
cooperate on the question; this methodology also fosters cross-fertilization and reduces the unnecessary
duplication of efforts. It simultaneously builds the dedicated communities necessary for sustainable
development
149
. It shifts the focus from the individual interests at project level to the larger interests at
systems level, which opens up new development and funding possibilities.
Furthermore, if the sustainability question is included in such discussions as part of the open development
of Open its integration is ensured from the outset. This increases the likelihood of actually achieving a
sustainable Open, especially if specialists from, for example, Human Resources and Finance are involved
in the discussions. It is also important that the scope of the sustainability question is widened from purely
economic costs/benefits to include aspects such as people, skills, timeframes and societal impacts.
An important lesson from the Open Development Method, also espoused by Open Access and Research
advocates like Cameron Neylon
150
, is that the development of Open relies on the inclusion of diverse
parties, including people and organisations that are traditionally not part of the research and higher
education system; in other words the general public and the commercial sector. Their inclusion or
exclusion has in the past been framed as part of an ideological debate. Practically speaking, however,

148
Or in any case standards of which the specifications are open.
149
See the OSS Watch literature on (the relation between) sustainability and community building, http://www.oss-
watch.ac.uk/resources/buildingcommunities.xml
150
http://cameronneylon.net/about/
Page 50 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

they are necessary participants in the process of open innovation. The Open Development model shows
that, as long as the principles of transparent governance, community building and sustainable
development are preserved, everyone should be able to use, adapt or re-distribute the product, including
those who wish to use it for commercial purposes. A similar principle in the Open Content area can be
found in the so called Data/Services model (see Annex D): the basic data/information is published under
an open licence; on top of that commercial services are possible as long as these do not pose any
restrictions on the availability and use of the basic open content originally provided. This Data/Services
model underpins the respective roles of repositories, OA journals, peer review and the like in the research
communication cycle and reduces the importance of the Green or Gold debate. It can also provide
guidance in the sustainability discussions: at what level of data and/or service provision does an
institution, funder or nation want or need to operate to safeguard Open and what can be left to other
parties.
The development of Open involves a variety of stakeholder groups, who each have a vital role to play.
The involvement and cooperation of researchers, in their various roles: author, reader, editor, reviewer,
conductor of research, project leader, decision maker etc is essential. Without them, Open is just an
empty container.
In the 10 to 20 years of development of the various opens, we have seen researchers get involved out of
personal interest and/or an interest in the public cause. But these researchers are still primarily a
minority group of early adopters. The larger group of researchers is still not on board. And the most
quoted reason for this is that it doesnt help them in their career. Whether this is correct or not, it is in
any case the overriding perception and it is perhaps the most significant factor in researchers behaviour
and willingness to cooperate in anything else but research.
Efforts so far to change this seem to focus on different types and means of usage statistics and citation
analysis. Although this can help, it is not sufficient to solve the problem, for it still focuses on the final,
peer-reviewed publication as the measure of good research and for career assessment.
If a change is really wanted, a change in perspective is needed. Research and researchers assessment
needs to be based on a broader set of criteria that focus on the contribution to the advancement of
knowledge. Such a contribution can be made in many different ways: by publishing an article, but also by
educating students, by communicating about research questions in forums and blogs, by making datasets
available, by cooperating in open projects to name but a few examples.
The call is often made to offer rewards or incentives for researchers who cooperate in open projects or to
force them to cooperate. The only thing that really needs to be done is to take away the barrier imposed
by the publish or perish imperative. This can be done by introducing multi-criteria evaluation for
research and researchers based on research communication in aid of advancement of knowledge, rather
than on research publication in aid of career advancement.
Such a measure will means that researchers will stand to gain from cooperation in open developments.
Young researchers do not need to be re-socialized into traditional research and publishing behaviour
anymore and their knowledge of the use of new tools and ways of working can be put to good use in, and
speed up, the further development of Open.
The measure can have additional important effects as well. It can for example reduce the importance of
the Green or Gold route debate and ease the copyright worries, because the role of the traditional journal
and their publishers is no longer all important. It can also boost the integration of research into teaching.
Most importantly, it can result in better research.
Page 51 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

5.3.3 The importance of open education as training ground for future researchers
For many, working on Open, in an open development setting, is new, so it requires support, training and
educating. It can, and will in the shorter term often be training on the job, by participation in projects.
However, the new developments in higher education with respect to learning and teaching have an
important role to play too. The development of OER contributes to innovation of education and learning
as a practice, and as a field of research, with respect to technologies, processes as well as content. As the
MITx and edX projects show, in an open educational environment which includes open development
methodologies, students from all levels and backgrounds (including professionals and retirees) and tutors
both teach and learn from each other about the effect of online tools and means on their learning and
teaching processes. Open Education (as a form of ODM) nourishes a participatory culture of learning,
creating, sharing and cooperation and it therefore is a vital and natural training ground for current and
future researchers and educators, turning them into confident users and designers of open approaches in
research and higher education. Open Education therefore has an important contribution to make to the
sustainable development of an effective and innovative Open research and higher education system.
Page 52 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

6 Conclusions and recommendations
This policy document has looked at the development of a range of Open approaches to ascertain
whether a more coordinated Open policy framework would benefit the growth of each of them and their
joint contribution to a more effective, efficient and innovative research and higher education system. This
fits the e-InfraNet projects purpose to further the integration of national, European and global e-
infrastructure programmes and to work towards a more efficient use of resources, the adoption of best
practice in national e-infrastructure programmes, a convergence of funding programmes and avoiding
unnecessary overlap.
There are clear differences in context, drivers, communities and maturity between the various opens. To
a certain extent this diversity is a necessity for learning and growth (section 4.4). Yet it is also necessary to
strike a careful balance between diversity and commonalities. To realize the benefits from diversity as
well as the balance a coordinated approach is needed to create opportunities for the different
communities to get to know each other; and to stimulate them to work together on common issues. The
cooperation and cross-fertilization achieved in this way will bring solutions that all can benefit from, but
that no single community can achieve on its own.
A number of the open approaches are sufficiently mature to enable a move to a more coordinated
approach for Open in general. Evidence for this can be found in a new collaborative initiative like the
TERENA/LIBER report on Authentication and Authorization
151
, and projects like EUDAT (section 3). This
development can and should be strengthened and stimulated by the adoption and implementation of a
generic Open policy framework. e-InfraNet s recommendations for this are in line with its focus on the
generic level.
1. e-InfraNet recommends that European and National governments and funding organisations, and
research and higher education institutions adopt the policy that for publicly funded activities,
Open is the default modus operandi.
Open applies to the entire e-Infrastructure for research and higher education including content,
as well as to the use of the e-infrastructure in open processes.
Within this policy, restrictions to access, (re)use and participation can be legitimate but must be
justified.
For the actual implementation of the policy a practical, phased approach is recommended that
allows for different speeds for the different open strands and the different national and
disciplinary contexts and cultures.
Acceleration could be made on those strands which are more mature (such as open content and
open infrastructure). In the less mature strands more exploratory work could be facilitated.
2. e-InfraNet recommends the adoption of the principles of the Open Development Methodology
for the further coordinated development of Open in publicly funded projects. These principles
include transparent governance and development processes, building of stakeholder communities
and sustainable development with relevant partners.
o The EC and other funding organisations should build into their Funding Calls (and the
presentations of these Calls) requirements for projects to comply with these open
development principles and information on how to do this throughout the project life

151
https://confluence.terena.org/display/aaastudy/AAA+Study+Home+Page;jsessionid=48255D13910F9F0AABD5AED4FE01896B
Page 53 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

cycle (from bid stage to final evaluation of project results). Compliance should also be
included in the project monitoring and evaluation systems.
o Institutions should build the open development principles into their project management
methods.
3. e-InfraNet recommends that the involvement and cooperation of researchers in the further
development of Open is actively stimulated and that barriers are removed by:
a) the adoption of appropriate evaluation and reward systems
b) provision of support and advice in copyright and licensing issues
o European and national funding organisations and institutions should expand present
research evaluation and reward systems from those based primarily on quantitative
publication criteria into multi-criteria-evaluation systems including quantitative and
qualitative criteria. These criteria should focus on open research communication in the
broadest sense of aiding in the advancement of knowledge.
o European and national funding organisations should require that all research outputs
resulting from publicly funded projects are published under non-exclusive licenses
(Creative Commons or similar).
o Institutions should offer structural support and advice with respect to licensing to
researchers and other staff involved in publishing and dissemination of research and
educational materials.
4. e-InfraNet recommends that researchers and other staff who work on Open and in an open
development process are actively supported with appropriate training and support.
In the short term, dedicated training and support should be provided in the context of open
projects.
For the long term, curricula should be developed for the training of specialized research support
staff.
Furthermore, Open Education initiatives should be developed as a vital, natural training ground
for the researcher of the future (and other professionals).
o European and national funding organisations should allow for a portion of open project
budgets to be allocated for dedicated training and support of researchers and other staff.
o Institutions should invest in the appointment and dedicated training of support staff for
Open.
o Institutions are recommended to seek cooperation in the design and development of
curricula for training of professional research support staff specialized in open
approaches.
o European and national funding organisations, and institutions, should invest in the
(collaborative) development of Open Education initiatives as a training ground for the
researcher of the future, to develop the non-technical skills and mindset required for
working in an open environment.
5. e-InfraNet recommends that interoperability of systems, services and content is continuously
supported as a key component in the open e-infrastructure.
o European and national funding organisations and e-infrastructure providers keep
investing in and supporting the development and application of open standards and other
open technical approaches, to improve the interoperability across systems, services and
content.
6. e-InfraNet recommends that the EC continues to invest in research and development work in the
area of Open, with respect to policies, good practices and technical approaches.
Page 54 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

With a clear and conscious choice for Open as the default modus operandi in research and higher
education, the EC, national governments, funders, infrastructure providers and institutions lay a firm basis
for a more coordinated and sustained development of open approaches. This choice wil be a great
support to the communities that shape the development. It will contribute towards more intensive,
shared use of the valuable resources in the research and higher education system. It will also optimize the
conditions for innovative Research and Development, both within and outside academia, which rely upon
openness in infrastructure, content and work processes.
Page 55 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Annexes
Page 56 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1


A


S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

m
a
p


E
n
a
b
l
e
s

r
e
u
s
e

(
e
a
s
i
e
r

d
i
s
c
o
v
e
r
y

a
n
d

a
c
c
e
s
s
,

c
l
e
a
r
e
r

m
o
r
e

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
v
e

r
i
g
h
t
s

p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
,

e
a
s
i
e
r

c
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
)

S
u
p
p
o
r
t
s

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

a
g
i
l
i
t
y

(
p
r
o
m
o
t
e
s

c
h
a
n
g
e
,

e
n
a
b
l
e
s

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
s

t
o

r
e
s
p
o
n
d

w
e
l
l

t
o

c
h
a
n
g
e
,

i
n
n
o
v
a
t
i
o
n

i
n

t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
,

b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s

m
o
d
e
l
s
)

I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
s

c
o
s
t

e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s

(
e
n
a
b
l
e
s

c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

a
n
d


s
h
a
r
e
d

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
e
s
,

r
e
d
u
c
e
s

d
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

e
f
f
o
r
t
,

s
a
v
e
s

t
i
m
e
,

s
u
p
p
o
r
t
s

c
o
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
)

I
m
p
r
o
v
e
s

q
u
a
l
i
t
y

(
b
y

e
n
s
u
r
i
n
g

v
i
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
,

u
s
e
s

p
e
o
p
l
e
s
'

c
o
n
c
e
r
n

w
i
t
h

t
h
e
i
r

r
e
p
u
t
a
t
i
o
n

t
o

s
e
e

b
e
t
t
e
r

q
u
a
l
i
t
y

w
o
r
k

s
h
a
r
e
d
,

s
u
p
p
o
r
t
s

r
e
v
i
e
w

o
f

w
o
r
k
)

E
n
a
b
l
e
s

b
e
t
t
e
r

r
i
s
k

m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

(
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g

e
a
s
i
e
r

c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e

w
i
t
h

l
e
g
a
l
/
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
)

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s
/

T
u
t
o
r
s

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

L
e
a
r
n
e
r
s

(
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
,

l
i
f
e
l
o
n
g
)

m
e
d
i
u
m

l
o
w

l
o
w

m
e
d
i
u
m

l
o
w

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

f
u
n
d
e
r
s

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

C
o
n
t
e
n
t

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

D
a
t
a

c
e
n
t
r
e
s

l
o
w

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

b
o
d
i
e
s

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
s

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
s

m
e
d
i
u
m

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

N
o
n
-
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
s

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

m
e
d
i
u
m

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

h
i
g
h

Page 57 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1



F
i
g
u
r
e

6

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

i
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

7

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

T
e
a
c
h
e
r
s
/
T
u
t
o
r
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

8

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
e
r
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

9

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

L
e
a
r
n
e
r
s

(
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
.

l
i
f
e
l
o
n
g
)

Page 58 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1



F
i
g
u
r
e

1
0

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

f
u
n
d
e
r
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

1
1

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

1
2

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

C
o
n
t
e
n
t

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

1
3

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

D
a
t
a

c
e
n
t
r
e
s

Page 59 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1



F
i
g
u
r
e

1
4

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

b
o
d
i
e
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

1
5

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

1
6

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

1
7

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
s

Page 60 of 78
e
-
I
n
f
r
a
N
e
t

2
4
6
6
5
1



F
i
g
u
r
e

1
8

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

N
o
n
-
c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

o
r
g
a
n
i
s
a
t
i
o
n
s


F
i
g
u
r
e

1
9

S
t
a
k
e
h
o
l
d
e
r

i
m
p
a
c
t

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n


Page 61 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

B Reports and projects consulted
B.1 Reports
i. Open Access to research literature
Accessibility, sustainability, excellence: how to expand access to research publications, Report of the
Working Group on Expanding Access to Published Research Findingsthe Finch Group 2012,
http://www.researchinfonet.org/publish/finch/
In 2011, following the generation of a strong evidence base in support of OA, the UK Government initiated
an independent working group under Professor Dame Janet Finch whose remit was to examine and make
recommendations on both expanding access to UK research outputs, and expanding access for UK
researchers to global research outputs. The report was released in June 2012. Its main recommendations
are that the UK should transition to Gold OA, and that various extensions should be made to licensing
arrangements to ensure good access for UK researchers. The report estimated that an extra 50m-60m
per year would be needed during the transition to pay for Gold OA article processing charges and other
costs. Responses to the report have been varied, but were mainly positive. The UK Government has
endorsed the reports conclusions and recommendations, though suggested a longer embargo period for
Green OA than many hoped. Research intensive universities have expressed some disappointment that
the Finch Report and Government response downplayed Green OA. The UK Research Councils have
released a combined policy on OA, to come into force in April 2013, which requires grant-holders to make
their published papers OA via either Green or Gold OA, and will make block grants available to universities
for article processing charges. The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE)
152
has
announced its intention to consult with the sector about any implications for the Research Excellence
Framework 2020.
National open access and preservation policies in Europe: Analysis of a questionnaire to the European
Research Area CommitteeEC-DG for Research and Innovation 2011,
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/open-access-report-
2011_en.pdf
This report gives an overview of how open access is developing in the European Research Area. Its based
on a survey conducted via the European Research Area Committee and shows that open access is backed
by a growing number of universities, research centres and funding agencies across Europe. In addition it
highlights the dynamic growth of open access. It also stresses, however, that national initiatives and
practices are still fragmented, thus preventing the European Union from realising its full research and
innovation potential.
Survey on open access in FP7EC-DG for Research and Innovation 2012,
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/survey-on-open-access-in-
fp7_en.pdf
In August 2008, the European Commission launched the open access pilot: in seven FP7 research areas
grant beneficiaries are expected to deposit peer-reviewed research articles or final manuscripts resulting
from their projects into an online repository and make their best efforts to ensure open access to those
articles within a set period of time after publication. All projects also have open access fees eligible for

152
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/
Page 62 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

reimbursement during the time of the grant agreement. In May 2011, the Commission identified the 811
projects designated at the time and sent a questionnaire to all project coordinators in order to collect
feedback on their experiences of both the implementation of the pilot and the reimbursement of open
access publishing costs. A total of 194 answers were received by the end of August 2011. They provide
important input for the future of the open access policy and practices in Horizon 2020, and for the
preparation of a communication from the Commission and a recommendation to Member States on
scientific publications in the digital age.
Online survey on scientific information in the digital ageEC-DG for Research and Innovation 2012,
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/survey-on-scientific-
information-digital-age_en.pdf
In preparation of the European Commissions intended communication and recommendation on access to
and preservation of scientific information in the digital age, the Online survey on scientific information in
the digital age (open from 15.07.2011 to 09.09.2011) provided stakeholders with the opportunity to
comment on the state of play, barriers and potential policy actions in the area of access to and
preservation of scientific results. All citizens and organisations concerned were welcomed to contribute
to this consultation. Contributions were particularly sought from governments, research institutions and
universities, libraries, scientific publishers, research funding organisations, businesses, individual
researchers and other interested parties. The consultation spurred great interest among those
stakeholders, with 1140 responses received from 42 countries.
The purpose of the consultation was to gather information from as many sources as possible and receive
important input for the future development of policy options in the area of scientific information in the
digital age.
Open Access success storiesKnowledge Exchange, http://www.oastories.org/
Open Access success stories complements the existing, more scientific, reports on the advantages of Open
Access. The value of the success stories lies in the fact they offer a more personal account of the positive
experiences scientists, editors or publishers have with Open Access and can be used as motivators for
people for OA. The disadvantage is they might be too anecdotal to be used as input for policy
development.
ii. Open Data
Riding the Wave: How Europe can gain from the rising tide of scientific dataHigh level Expert Group
on Scientific Data 2010, http://www.grdi2020.eu/Repository/FileScaricati/c2194260-3ddf-47bd-93e4-
68f8912a3564.pdf
A fundamental characteristic of our age is the rising tide of dataglobal, diverse, valuable and complex.
In the realm of science, this is both an opportunity and a challenge. This report, prepared for the
European Commissions Directorate-General for Information Society and Media, identifies the benefits
and costs of accelerating the development of a fully functional e-infrastructure for scientific dataa
system already emerging piecemeal and spontaneously across the globe, but now in need of a far-seeing,
global framework. The outcome will be a vital scientific asset: flexible, reliable, efficient, cross-disciplinary
and cross-border.
Page 63 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

A Surfboard for Riding the Wave: Towards a four country action programme on research data
Knowledge Exchange 2011, http://www.knowledge-exchange.info/default.aspx?id=469
The Riding the Wave report by the high level expert group on research data (see above) called for a
collaborative data infrastructure that will enable researchers and other stakeholders from education,
society and business to use, reuse and exploit research data to the maximum benefit of science and
society. The Knowledge Exchange partners embraced this vision and commissioned a report that
translates Riding the Wave into actions for the four partner countries and beyond.
This paper builds on the Riding the Wave report and presents an overview of the present situation with
regard to research data in Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. It offers broad
outlines for a possible action programme for the four countries in realising the envisaged collaborative
data infrastructure. An action programme at the level of four countries will require the involvement of all
stakeholders from the scientific community.
The report formulates three long-term strategic goals, and describes an action programme to achieve
them:
Data sharing will be part of the academic culture
Data logistics will be an integral component of academic professional life
Data infrastructure will be sound, both operationally and financially.
Science as an Open Enterprise, final reportUK Royal Society 2012,
http://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/science-public-enterprise/report
The Royal Society report Science as an Open Enterprise was published in June 2012, alongside a plethora
of reports in the UK with regard to opening up access to research and data; it is closely aligned to the UK
Governments Open Data White Paper (see below), although the UK Government White paper is focused
largely on government data and the Royal Society focuses on data produced as part of research. The
report aims to address how science should change in response to technological advances. It states that
openness is central to scientific enquiry in that it supports better research, reviewed research and the
development of new knowledge. However with current technology there are now new ways to
manipulate, store, share and communicate data as part of science. These new technologies open up new
improved methods of science and, whilst we are witnessing changed behaviour, this is piecemeal and
there are no systematic policies and fit for purpose infrastructures in place. The report states that much
behaviour in research duplicates that of the paper world and the paper journal and that this is holding
back advances in science.
The report recognises that openness is central, but that there are key issues that need to be addressed
and recognised. Thus the report proposes intelligently open data as the answer. Intelligently open
means data must be accessible and easy to locate and it must be intelligible. The report does not shy
away from some of the dry technicalities. For example it states that metadata is essential, that citation is
a must, especially to reward open science practice, and the report fully recognises that there will be costs
involved. However, it is acknowledged that the benefits can far outweigh the costs, and that a short term,
limited view must not be taken; this would lead to a tragedy of the commons. An example of the
benefits of intelligently open data is illustrated by the following excerpt:
[] the events following an outbreak of a severe gastro-intestinal infection in
Hamburg in Germany in May 2011. This spread through several European countries
and the US, affecting about 4000 people and resulting in over 50 deaths. All tested
positive for an unusual and little-known Shiga-toxinproducing E. coli bacterium. The
Page 64 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

strain was initially analysed by scientists at BGI-Shenzhen in China, working together
with those in Hamburg, and three days later a draft genome was released under an
open data licence. This generated interest from bio-informaticians on four continents.
24 hours after the release of the genome it had been assembled. Within a week two
dozen reports had been filed on an open-source site dedicated to the analysis of the
strain. These analyses provided crucial information about the strains virulence and
resistance genes how it spreads and which antibiotics are effective against it. They
produced results in time to help contain the outbreak. By July 2011, scientists
published papers based on this work. By opening up their early sequencing results to
international collaboration, researchers in Hamburg produced results that were quickly
tested by a wide range of experts, used to produce new knowledge and ultimately to
control a public health emergency. (p. 15)
The report covers the concerns of privacy and is robust about the fact that personal data is required in
research highlighting that provisions need to be in place with regard to governance and management in
order to provide individuals with protection. Consent is not the way to deal with this issue. It does not
adequately defend interests that go beyond the individual. Of course the report does call for responsible
data sharing that respects privacy and security. Another thorny issue that the report addresses is that of
competitionfor example if the UK opens up its research will it be giving away its knowledge assets?
Besides the point that research is a global endeavour the report outlines that opening up research is
essential and that with
rising scientific powers such as China, India and Brazil and the growth of scientific
efforts in the Middle East, South-East Asia and North Africa we find many have signed
up to the principles of open data through membership of the International Council of
Science (ICSU). In addition, international collaboration that depends on the open data
principle is increasingly supported by inter-governmental funding or funding from
international agencies. Such collaboration focuses on matters of global concern such
as climate change, energy, sustainability, trade, migration and pandemics. The OECD
Global Science Forum Expert Group on Data and Research infrastructure for the Social
Sciences will produce a report in Autumn 2012. (p. 18)
In summary the report recommends:
Openness as standardthe default position is openness and responsible sharing, with only
justifiable and reasonable restrictions on access and use.
Clear policiesall custodians should have transparent policies for custodianship, data quality and
access.
Clear routes to accesspositive action must be taken to facilitate openness through the creation
of clearly signposted data registers.
Pre-specification of data releasewhen and how newly acquired data will be released for reuse
must be specified in advance.
Respect for values that bound opennessgovernance mechanisms need to be in place for
protection of privacy and commercial interests.
Rules of sharing must be made explicit in the terms and conditions for data sharing.
Page 65 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Open Data White Paper, Unleashing the potentialUK Government 2012,
http://data.gov.uk/library/open-data-white-paper
The UK Government undertook a consultation around Open Data in 2011 and in June 2012 released its
White Paper on the matter. The premise is that open data supports transparent government, improved
policy and understanding, innovation and collaborations across public, private and the academic sectors
and citizen participation. The UK Government has undertaken an initiative on open data like many
governments over the past five years, however this new white paper clarifies the position on the benefits,
the standards and infrastructure required and some of the areas where open needs to be managed
carefully. The paper recognises that pushing data out is only part of the answer and that there is a
requirement for up-to-date legislation and common standards for the data to support what the paper calls
"an effective Open Data ecosystem".
Whilst promoting openness to government data to the full, the paper stresses the importance of
anonymity and privacy of the individual and attempts to strike the right balance; calling for the maximum
openness but implementing new structures such as 'data safe havens' that will allow the support of
modern personalised services but not undermine privacy. The Government remains convinced that
transparency and privacy are compatible if the right governance structures are in place. It quotes a case
study from the Ministry of Justice where they worked in partnership with a group of academics, students
and professional data security consultants, and delivered a project that ensured that the anonymity of
individual re-offending and sentencing data would be as secure as possible. This project showed
openness and privacy can work side by side.
In terms of standards and infrastructure for openness the paper promotes open licences for re-use, open
linked data (based on Tim Berners-Lee five stars see section 3 above) and the sharing of APIs for data
sources; alongside this they will enhance the http://data.gov.uk site and ensure data is both available and
useable. Usability is an issue that is believed to be important to openness and transparency, after all
there is little point in being open if the result is more confusion and frustration. The example of the
Tabulation Tool
153
developed by the Department of Work and Pensions is an example of how data
providers can improve the quality and accessibility of their data; in this case the tool allows users to
download national statistics formulated to their own requirements.
However, recognising that standards and usability are not issues that can be addressed immediately, the
UK Government says it will ensure training of staff to comply with necessary standards and also ensure
the public has easy to use channels to address queries. Furthermore, the Freedom of Information
legislation has been altered so that people can ask for a data set in a standard that is useable for them.
Many benefits are referenced, such as the possibility of new discoveries and the use of government data
by the researcher or the citizen to enhance understanding. An example of how the paper sees open data
driving better services and innovations is the Nation Archives work to open up legislation data at
www.legislation.gov.uk:
This has enabled the National Archives to develop a new, transferable operating
model for updating government databases; and delivers an easy to use interface that
makes it easy for anyone to access legislation data by adding /data.xml or /data.rdf to
any web page containing legislation etc. All the data can be re-used free of charge
under the Open Government Licence. This has led to the development of third-party

153
http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/index.php?page=tabtool
Page 66 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

applications, including smartphone apps and a service for law lecturers to create and
self-publish relevant extracts of legislation for their courses. (p. 25)
The white paper also promotes the open sharing of research outputs including data and, like the Royal
Society report (Considering science as a public enterprise), wants this to be shared in ways that those
outside of the research community can benefit from it; this is also in line with the UK Governments
Research and Innovation strategy. However, the white paper does recognise some of the special
conditions that surround this and that need to be addressed; these will be examined via a Research
Transparency Sector Board, protecting the integrity of the research and associated intellectual property,
while ensuring access to research for those SME entrepreneurs vital for driving growth. In support of the
vision for Open Data driving innovation the Government has established The Open Data Institute
154
to
demonstrate the commercial value of Open Data by working with the public and private sectors as well as
academia in developing its exploitation.
It is interesting to note that the White Paper recognises the value of key information sets and how
opening these up can help to link data and drive innovation and efficiency. An example of this might be
geographies and the support of the INSPIRE directive so data is geospatially linked. The paper supports
the argument that opening up data should mean that data can be improved by receiving feedback and
that it can also avoid re-keying of the same data, thereby driving efficiencies in the system. An aspiration
of the Government is to look for savings in processes, for example the paper states that the
decennial Census is an example where data is collected for the purpose of counting
the population; this cost nearly 500 million for the 2011 Census. However several
government data collections already have partial coverage of the population and, if
these were brought together and the data re-used, could provide an alternative count
to that from a traditional enumeration at a reduced cost. (p. 38)
Note: The European Commission has recently launched a wide ranging open data initiative which it
expects will generate 140 billion a year of income. The Commission will open its own stores of data
through a new portal.
iii. Open Educational Resources
Trend Report: Open Educational Resources 2012Ria Jacobi and Nicolai van der Woert (edd.), Special
Interest Group Open Educational Resources 2012, https://www.surfspace.nl/media/bijlagen/artikel-
697-ee18ac0f1441bb158e6122818f5f589e.pdf
This report by the Dutch Special Interest Group Open Educational Resources gives an overview on the
status quo of OER in the Netherlands. Twelve articles describe trends in the Netherlands and worldwide,
taking four perspectives: the educational perspective, the content-related perspective, the technological
perspective and the organisational perspective. The report is comprehensive covering both historical
developments as well as inspirational for new initiatives.
Guidelines for Open Educational Resources (OER) in Higher EducationCOL, UNESCO 2011,
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002136/213605E.pdf
These guidelines outline key issues and make suggestions for integrating OER into higher education. Their
purpose is to encourage decision makers in governments and institutions to invest in the systematic

154
www.theodi.org
Page 67 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

production, adaptation and use of OER and to bring them into the mainstream of higher education in
order to improve the quality of curricula and teaching and to reduce costs.
Open Educational Resources, analysis of responses to the OECD country questionnaire, Jan Hyln, Dirk V.
Damme, Fred Mulder, Susan DAntonihttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/open-educational-
resources_5k990rjhvtlv-en
OECDs Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) has worked on Open Educational Resources
(OER) in the past, which led to the publication Giving Knowledge for Freethe Emergence of Open
Educational Resources (2007). This questionnaire for member countries was set up to collect information
regarding the policy context related to OER. The questionnaire was sent to the 34 OECD member
countries in August 2011. It outlined a short informative note about the benefits and challenges of OER.
The analysis of the responses to the questionnaire concludes that almost all OECD member countries
indicate that they are in one way or another active in the area of OER, mostly by involvement with specific
projects or programmes or through the initiative of institutions or engaged individuals. Several countries,
especially those with federal systems, indicate that they have insufficient knowledge about the OER
activities in their educational institutions. The most frequently cited policy reason for OER activity is the
desire to increase access to high-quality learning materials.
In contrast to the conventional understanding that situates OER mainly on the post-secondary educational
level, OER activity seems to be spread across the educational spectrum in the view of officials responding
to the Questionnaire.
The majority of countries surveyed indicated that governments take great responsibility over the
production, financing and distribution of educational resources although most countries have little
information about whether these resources are also available in digital formats. Countries indicate that
the use of licensing (CC licenses in particular) is well distributed. Nevertheless, precise information in this
regard is generally lacking.
Countries attach a high importance to the cited benefits of OER. OER offers open and flexible learning
opportunities. Almost equally appreciated is the cost efficiency of OER as well as the possibility of
increased quality in learning resources and the increased flexibility that OER can offer.
Policy-relevant research on OER exists in some countries, but here again precise information is often
lacking. At present, the two areas best covered by research are raising the quality of learning outcomes
and the widening of access to educational opportunities.
iv. Open Infrastructure and standards
e-Infrastructures in support of the Digital Agendae-IRG , http://www.e-
irg.eu/images/stories/digital_agenda_a5_final.pdf
This survey describes the essential role of the e-Infrastructure community for the realisation of the Digital
Agenda and the importance of a proper e-Infrastructure governance. Recent e-IRG observations,
recommendations and actions issued in White Papers and other e-IRG policy documents are summarized
and linked to the seven problem areas recognised in the Digital Agenda. The aim is to provide guidance
on the developments and actions required to achieve the goals of the Digital Agenda.
Page 68 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Advancing technologies and Federating communities : Study on Authentication, Authorization and
Accounting (AAA) Platforms For Scientific data / information Resources in Europe
TERENA/LIBER/University of Amsterdam/University and Library of Debrecen 2012,
https://confluence.terena.org/download/attachments/30474266/AAA-Study-Report-
0907.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1341850616400
A study by TERENA, LIBER, University of Amsterdam and DEENK Advancing technologies and Federating
communities provides an inventory of the main (federated) access systems currently available and in use
for networks, web applications, the grid, supercomputing and cloud. At the technical level, all studied
infrastructures individually provide seamless access/Single-Sign-On (SSO) for their users, although the
technology used varies per sub-system. It is acknowledged that no technology can be universally
adopted, but there should be mechanisms in place to allow for integration of different technologies.
Apart from the technical dimension, legal, policy and practical aspects also impact the actual level of
openness of the systems. The study points out that for example at network level, the level of
deployment, the participation of institutions and the amount of services available vary significantly
from country to country. Authentication and Authorization (AA) systems for grid and supercomputing are
considered to be fairly complicated and face usability and scalability issues. Cloud infrastructure offers yet
other challenges such as identity management, but possibly also solutions with wider potential in the
entire e-infrastructure.
Legal complications (in particular data protection legislation) play a role here, since there is no common
legal framework and interpretation in Europe. Work is going on to address this at EU level with the
proposed draft Data Protection Regulation.
The current Authentication and. Authorization Infrastructure (AAI) approaches also present a barrier to
access for non-traditional participants in the research and higher educational processes, such as
academically trained professionals in SMEs (as participants in innovation processes), and members of the
general public (as participants in, for example, open/citizens research). The future development of AAI
needs to take these groups of users into account as well.
v. Open Research
Open science at web-scale: Optimising participation and predictive potentialJISC 2009,
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2009/opensciencerpt.aspx
This report has attempted to draw together and synthesise evidence and opinion associated with data-
intensive open science from a wide range of sources. The potential impact of data-intensive open science
on research practice and research outcomes, is both substantive and far-reaching. There are implications
for funding organisations, for research and information communities and for higher education institutions.
Page 69 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

B.2 Projects / Initiatives
i. Open Access to research literature
OpenAIREwww.openaire.eu
OpenAIRE is essentially a support infrastructure for the OA policies of the European Commission. The
original scope of the project included the OA Pilot in FP7
155
and the ERC Guidelines on OA
156
, focussing on
peer reviewed articles. With the start of OpenAIREplus in 2011 this scope was expanded to research data.
OpenAIRE combines a human support infrastructure with a technical infrastructure. The latter is a
continuation of the DRIVER infrastructure
157
. Characteristic of OpenAIRE is the distributed approach of
these infrastructures: on a localin this context national and institutionallevel work is done to achieve
the desired results at the central level. The portal of OpenAIRE provides extensive information on the
status quo of OA and Open data in the member states.
OpenAIRE is strongly supported by the EC, and is closely involved in the plans of the EC to open all content
arising from the Horizon 2020 programme
158
.
ii. Open Data
EUDATwww.eudat.eu
The EUDAT project, which started in October 2012, is exploring ways to build generic services that can
support multiple communities and is working with communities from linguistics, earth sciences, climate
sciences, environmental sciences, and biological and medical sciences to create a sustainable, open, cross-
disciplinary and cross-national data infrastructure that provides a set of shared services for accessing and
preserving research data.
The EUDAT vision is to support a Collaborative Data Infrastructure as envisioned by the High level Expert
Group on Scientific Data in its report Riding the wave(see above), which will allow researchers to share
data within and between communities and enable them to carry out their research effectively. EUDAT
aims to provide a solution that will be affordable, trustworthy, robust, persistent and easy to use.
EUDAT aims to:
Help fulfil the vision of a European Data e-infrastructure by providing a sustainable platform of
technologies, tools and services driven by user needs.
Engage users (including individual researchers along with representatives from universities,
research labs, and libraries) in defining and shaping a platform for shared services that makes it
possible for data-intensive research to span all the scientific disciplines.
Produce the common low-level services that are required to provide the level of interoperation
and trust of data that is necessary to support both widespread access to data, and the long-term
preservation of data for use and re-use.
Ensure that the data infrastructure is sufficiently robust to keep pace with the expected
acceleration of the scale and complexity of scientific data being generated within the ERA and
beyond

155
http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/open-access-pilot_en.pdf
156
http://erc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/document/file/erc_scc_guidelines_open_access.pdf
157
http://www.driver-repository.eu
158
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/12/790&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
Page 70 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Research Data Alliance (RDA)http://www.rd-alliance.org
In various regions of the globe, there is now a shared understanding that solutions must be global and
that the development of an integrated and interoperable data domain can only be achieved through
increasing global collaboration. The Research Data Alliance (RDA) is a recent international initiative
aiming to steer the efforts in this area. The vision of RDA is to make it possible for researchers around the
world to share and use research data without barriers. They aim to accelerate international data-driven
innovation and discovery by facilitating research data sharing and exchange, use and reuse, standards
harmonization, and discoverability. This will be achieved through the development and adoption of
infrastructures, policies, practises, standards, and other deliverables. The RDA will be based on working
groups aiming to accelerate progress in concrete ways for specific communities, by increasing innovation,
coordinating the global data community across disciplinary boundaries, and promoting data sharing and
exchange, interoperability, use and re-use, discoverability analysis, stewardship and preservation, and
best practice.
DataCitehttp://www.datacite.org/
DataCite is a not-for-profit organisation formed in London on 1 December 2009 in order to:
establish easier access to research data on the Internet
increase acceptance of research data as legitimate, citable contributions to the scholarly record
support data archiving that will permit results to be verified and re-purposed for future study
It brings together the datasets community to collaboratively address the challenges of making research
data visible and accessible. Members of DataCite meet in person every six months at summer and winter
conferences, and collaborate in established working groups. The focus is on:
supporting researchers by helping them to find, identify, and cite research datasets with
confidence
supporting data centres by providing persistent identifiers for datasets, workflows and standards
for data publication
supporting journal publishers by enabling research articles to be linked to the underlying data
iii. Open Educational Resources
CETIShttp://jisc.cetis.ac.uk/
The Centre for Educational Technology and Interoperability Standards (CETIS) provides advice to the UK
Higher and Post-16 Education sectors on educational technology and standards. The website brings
together educational technology news, comment and analysis, as well as information on community
events. The aim of CETIS is to contribute to current debates and future thinking in this rapidly growing
and changing field.
OER programme of UNESCOhttp://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-
information/access-to-knowledge/open-educational-resources
UNESCO is in favour of OER and collaborates on issues of the production and use of OER. Over the last 10
years, UNESCO has helped spur an international movement in support of OERs. The term Open
Educational Resources (OER) was coined at a 2002 UNESCO Forum on the Impact of Open Courseware for
Higher Education. In 2012 UNESCO hosted the World Open Educational Resources Congress, which
Page 71 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

adopted the 2012 Paris OER Declaration
159
. Furthermore UNESCO hosts the Open Training Platform
160
, a
comprehensive database of OER.
iv. Open Infrastructure and standards
EGI-InSPIREhttp://www.egi.eu/about/egi-inspire/
The EGI-InSPIRE project (Integrated Sustainable Pan-European Infrastructure for Researchers in Europe)
co-funded by the European Commission for four years, started on 1 May 2010 as a collaborative effort
involving more than 50 institutions in over 40 countries. Its mission is to establish a sustainable European
Grid Infrastructure (EGI). EGI-InSPIRE is ideally placed to join together the new Distributed Computing
Infrastructures (DCIs) such as clouds, supercomputing networks and desktop grids, for the benefit of user
communities within the European Research Area.
v. Open Source Software and Open Development
OSS-Watchwww.oss-watch.ac.uk
OSS Watch is the non-advocacy open source software service for UK higher and further education. The
service is funded by Jisc to help academic institutions find the best software solutions for their projects
(either open source or proprietary), and to offer them licence advice and expertise on building sustainable
communities around the developed software. The service, based at the University of Oxford, publishes
reports, briefing documents, blog posts and news about all aspects concerning the procurement, licensing,
developing, exploitation and sustainability of open source software in higher and further education.
Telephone and email support, as well as one-to-one consultations, are freely provided to the sector, and
events are organised regularly on open source topics of interest to the projects. Support with writing the
sections of funding applications concerning resource allocation and management of open source
development is also available.

159
http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/Events/English_Paris_OER_Declaration.pdf
160
http://otp.unesco-ci.org/
Page 72 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

B.3 Other sources
i. Open Access to research literature
Budapest Open Access Initiativehttp://www.soros.org/openaccess
The Berlin Declarationhttp://oa.mpg.de/files/2010/04/berlin_declaration.pdf
OAI-PMHOpen Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting,
http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/openarchivesprotocol.html#Introduction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Archives_Initiative_Protocol_for_Metadata_Harvesting
DRIVER/DRIVER IIhttp://www.driver-repository.eu
Both DRIVER projects were primarily aimed at setting up a network of institutional repositories.
ii. Open Data
OECD Principles and Guidelines for Access to Research Data from Public Funding
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/9/61/38500813.pdf
The Guidelines stress the importance of guaranteeing open access to and use of data from
publicly funded research, as they are an essential and valuable resource to share, to maximise
their benefits for better, more robust research and for innovative solutions to complex and large-
scale problems.
ENVRIhttp://envri.eu/home
Implementation of common solutions for a cluster of ESFRI infrastructures in the field of
"Environmental Sciences" (ENVRI)
DASISHhttp://dasish.eu
This project brings together all 5 ESFRI research infrastructure initiatives in the social sciences and
humanities (SSH)
CRISPhttp://www.crisp-fp7.eu/about-crisp/
Partnership which builds collaborations and creates long-term synergies between research
infrastructures on the ESFRI (European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructure) Roadmap in
the field of physics, astronomy and analytical facilities.
Biomedbridgeshttp://www.biomedbridges.eu/
Joint effort of ten biomedical sciences research infrastructures on the ESFRI roadmap. Together,
the project partners will develop the shared e-infrastructurethe technical bridgesto allow
interoperability between data and services in the biological, medical, translational and clinical
domains.
iii. Open Educational Resources
Open CourseWare Consortiumhttp://www.ocwconsortium.org
OER Commonshttp://www.oercommons.org/
Brief history of OERhttp://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/36224377.pdf
On funding models for OER:
o http://www.ijklo.org/Volume3/IJKLOv3p029-044Downes.pdf , pp. 34-36
o https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/400864-coursera-fully-executed-
agreement.html#document/p40
o http://chronicle.com/article/How-an-Upstart-Company-Might/133065/
Page 73 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

iv. Open Infrastructure and standards
Competing Definitions of Openness on the GII, Jonathan Band, in The Unpredictable Certainty:
White Papers (1997), The National Academies Press,
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6062&page=31
GEANThttp://www.geant.net/About_GEANT/pages/home.aspx
ESFRI (Roadmap)http://ec.europa.eu/research/infrastructures/index_en.cfm?pg=esfri
EGIhttp://www.egi.eu/about/
The European Grid Initiative (EGI) provides the largest capacity computing grid for publicly funded
research in collaboration with National Grid Initiatives (NGIs)
DEISAhttp://www.deisa.eu
DEISA played a key role in setting up a pan-European high performance computing (HPC)
infrastructure for supercomputing applications and a production-quality environment for EU
scientists to exploit.
PRACEhttp://www.prace-ri.eu/About-PRACE-RI?lang=en
The Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe (PRACE) currently represents the top of the
European HPC ecosystem, and provides Europe with cutting-edge world-class HPC systems
D4Sciencehttp://www.d4science.eu/about
D4Science constitutes a continuation of the DILIGENT and D4Science projects. It will bring
together several scientific e-Infrastructures established in areas such as biodiversity, fishery
resources management and high energy physics.
Science Data Infrastructure for PreservationEarth Sciencehttp://www.scidip-es.eu/
Science Data Infrastructure for PreservationEarth Science aims to deliver generic infrastructure
services for science data preservation and to build on the experience of the ESA Earth Observation
Long Term Data Preservation (LTDP) programme to favour the set-up of a European Framework
for the long term preservation of Earth Science (ES) data through the definition of common
preservation policies, the harmonization of metadata and semantics and the deployment of the
generic infrastructure services in ES domain.
v. Open Source Software and Open Development
Open Source Initiativehttp://opensource.org/
Open Source Definitionhttp://opensource.org/docs/definition.php
Free Software Foundationhttp://www.fsf.org/
Open Source Paradigm Shift, Tim OReilly, June 2004, http://tim.oreilly.com/lpt/a/4868
Meritocrats, cluebats and the open development method: an interview with Justin Erenkrantz
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/erenkrantz.xml
The Apache Software Foundation (ASF)http://www.apache.org/
ASF is a not-for-profit organization supporting open development projects. ASF-funders include
for-profit companies, code contributors include people working for for-profit companies. ASF has
built its organization around the open development method. Their distributed peer-review
method and transparent development process ensure high standards. Having not just the source
code open, but also the development method and decisions, has made it possible for newcomers
to contribute to continuous development. This is an important aspect in open development,
because it contributes to the sustainability of products created in temporary projects. Examples
of this are Apache Wookie and TexGen, both software products that were originally made in the
context of a research project. They were subsequently provided Open Source in an Open
Page 74 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

Development community and have become successful in much wider circles, procuring continued
funding from new sources and finding new, unexpected applications.
o Wookie: a case in sustainability, 2011- http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/cs-
wookie.xml
o TexGen: a case study, 2009http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/cs-texgen.xml
vi. Open Education
MITxhttp://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/mitx-faq-1219.html
edXhttps://www.edx.org/
Courserahttps://www.coursera.org/#about
Udacityhttp://www.udacity.com/udacity
Open Learning Initiativehttp://oli.cmu.edu/
The Capetown Open Education Declarationhttp://www.capetowndeclaration.org/
The Cape Town Open Education Declaration arises from a meeting convened in Cape Town in
September 2007 by the Open Society Institute and the Shuttleworth Foundation. The aim of this
meeting was to accelerate efforts to promote open resources, technology and teaching practices
in education. The first concrete outcome of this meeting is the Cape Town Open Education
Declaration: a statement of principle, strategy and commitment. It is meant to spark dialogue, to
inspire action and to help the open education movement grow. The Declaration has already been
signed by hundreds of learners, educators, trainers, authors, schools, colleges, universities,
publishers, unions, professional societies, policymakers, governments, foundations and other
kindred open education initiatives around the world.
OER universityhttp://wikieducator.org/OER_university/Home
vii. Open Peer Review
Scholars Test Web Alternative to Peer Review, The New York Times, August 23, 2010,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/24/arts/24peer.html?pagewanted=all
Opening up BMJ peer review; a beginning that should lead to complete transparency, Richard
Smith, BMJ 1999 January 2; 318(7175): 45,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1114535/
viii. Open Research
What, exactly, is Open Science, Dan Gezelterhttp://www.openscience.org/blog/?p=269, 2009
and http://www.openscience.org/blog/?page_id=44
Open Source Drug Discovery Networkhttp://www.osdd.net/
Galaxy Zoohttp://www.galaxyzoo.org/
Foldithttp://fold.it/portal/
Polymath projecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymath_Project
ix. Open Innovation
Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, Chesbrough et al.,
http://www.openinnovation.net/Book/NewParadigm/Chapters/01.pdf,
Open Source and Open Innovation, http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/openinnov.xml, 2010
Google Summer of Codehttp://code.google.com/soc/
Page 75 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

C Survey of sustainability models
Model Used for Organisation
Firm contributions Linux Linux Foundation
161

Commercial contributions (300+) Eclipse Eclipse Foundation
162

Contributions of capital and effort and firms Kuali Financials
and Student
Kuali Foundation
163

Supporting firms and contributions of effort uPortal JA-SIG
164

Income - percentage of partner revenue;
donations
Moodle Moodle Foundation
165

Membership fees and contributed effort
(and capital)
Sakai CLE
PeerJ/PeerJ Preprints
Sakai Foundation
166

PeerJ
167

Contributions of effort and donations Apache projects Apache Software
Foundation
168

Capital and income from service GEANTnetwork Dante
169

(Venture) capital, subscriptions and
contributions of effort
Alfresco Alfresco
170

Memberships, supporting partners (firms),
sponsorships, donations and contributions
of effort
Drupal Drupal Association
171

Most examples mentioned are Open Source Software products. PeerJ/PeerJ Preprints is a new academic
Open Access journal initiative. GEANT is the collaborative network.
In many of the OSS cases, there is a free version in addition to paid-for versions, dependent on the level of
sophistication of the product or services. This model ties in with the data-services-model presented in
Annex D.
In all cases, sustainability also depends on the efforts of the community of users/contributors around the
product or service (contributions of code; contributions of preprints and peer review services in the case
of PeerJ).

161
http://www.linuxfoundation.org/about
162
http://www.eclipse.org/org/
163
http://kuali.org/
164
http://www.jasig.org/
165
http://moodle.com/partners/about/
166
http://www.sakaiproject.org/sakai-foundation
167
https://peerj.com/
168
http://www.apache.org/foundation/
169
http://www.dante.net/
170
http://www.alfresco.com/tour
171
https://association.drupal.org/
Page 76 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

D Data/Services model
Local services
Institution X
Local services
Institution Y
Local services
Institution Z
Data
Services
Peer review
Subject
portal
Copyright
management
Subject
classification
Research
information
online
Conference
papers
online
Virtual
community

Figure 20Data/Services model

Shown above is the data and services model
172
that underpins repository infrastructure. It comprises: a) a
basic facility (data level) and b) 'services' (services level). These services can be developed using resources
from the basic facility and provide certain added value for specific groups of users.
The data level is where the infrastructure is set up and maintained. Research institutions establish
repositories that store research information from that institution and keep it available for use (or
reuse) according to uniform international standards: working papers/preprints, dissertations,
research reports, datasets, conference reports, multimedia material etc., including the
corresponding metadata.
Services level: basic material from the data level can be used to develop services providing added
value for scientists, students, universities, funders and other interested parties. The possibilities
are numerous, including current or new services
173
(management information or updating of
resumes for example); services the institutions themselves wish to offer, either individually or in
cooperation with others (subject portals); or services provided by third parties such as publishers
(e-journals). Supply and development can take place at the local level (digital display) as well as at
national level (national research information service) or internationally (virtual communities). The

172
This model was developed in the context of the DARE-programme, coordinated by SURF Foundation (www.surf.nl/en/DARE), but is useable as a
more generic model as well; the original text as published by SURF has been slightly modified to reflect this generic applicability, with grateful
acknowledgement to the original source.
173
The services referred to in the diagram and between brackets in the text are intended as examples of the possibilities
Page 77 of 78
e-InfraNet246651

most appropriate level of cooperation can be decided upon depending on the situation in
question: most important is that institutions retain control of their own information.
The advantage offered by the data-services model is that it provides a guide to sound consideration and
decision-making about the costs and expenses involved in the level and extent of services that an
institution wishes to offer. The data level offers every institution a basic facility for the reliable, structured
digital storage of its own research outputs.
If the data level is set up as simply as possible, the basic facility can be offered free of unnecessary extras
and can be guaranteed long-term.
All additions to functionality (and thus work and manpower) aimed at activities above and beyond the
basic facility belong at the services level. This makes it possible to ascertain what the corresponding costs
are for each service, for whom such services are intended, whether they are worth the effort, and how
best to finance them.

Page 78 of 78