Mini journal logo  Home Issue Contents All Issues

Data Management Policies and Practices of Digital Archaeological Repositories

Guntram Geser, Julian D. Richards, Flavia Massara and Holly Wright

Cite this as: Geser, G., Richards, J.D., Massara, F. and Wright, H. 2022 Data Management Policies and Practices of Digital Archaeological Repositories, Internet Archaeology 59. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.59.2

Summary

This article presents the results of a survey of data management policies and practices of digital archaeological repositories in Europe and beyond. The survey was carried out in 2021 under the auspices of the European project ARIADNEplus and the COST Action SEADDA. Its main purpose was to collect and analyse information about current policies that determine access to and reuse of data held by digital archaeological repositories, and to investigate the guidance and support needed to make these repositories and data FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable).

These policies comprise the regulations of heritage and research authorities/agencies, councils and other institutions at different levels (European, national/regional, local) as well as the repository rules governing deposition, access to, and reuse of archaeological data. The repositories are operated both by heritage sector institutions and by the research and higher education sector.

The survey represents a bottom-up approach by focusing on the actual policies and practices of digital archaeological repositories, which may reflect higher level regulations. A reality check in this regard can enable heritage and research authorities, councils and other institutions to reinforce or put in place regulations that bring current repository policies and practices closer to the ideal of providing FAIR and open access data. The survey results show that there is room for improvement in this regard and some suggestions are made here for future initiatives.

  • Google Scholar
  • Keywords: archaeological data management, digital repositories, FAIR principles, Open Access
  • Accepted: 2 Feb 2022. Published: 28 March 2022
  • Funding: This publication has been funded by the COST Action SEADDA
  • PDF download (main article text only)

Corresponding author: Julian D. RichardsORCID logo
julian.richards@york.ac.uk
Archaeology Data Service, UK

Guntram GeserORCID logo
Salzburg Research Institute, Austria

Flavia MassaraORCID logo
Central Institute for the Union Catalogue of Italian Libraries, Italy

Holly WrightORCID logo
Archaeology Data Service, UK

Full text

Figure 1: Pie chart showing distribution of types of organisation at which repositories are based. N=60

Figure 2: Pie chart showing main tasks/responsibilities of survey respondents. N=60

Figure 3: Bar chart showing number of staff members per repository. N=55

Figure 4: Bar chart showing number of years for which repositories have been in operation. N=41

Figure 5: Pie chart showing which types of archaeological projects are deposited at surveyed repositories. N=60

Figure 6: Bar chart showing the length of time after completion of archaeological fieldwork by which data is usually provided to the repository. N=60

Figure 7: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories where a deposit charge is levied. N=59

Figure 8: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories where depositors can set an embargo period. N=60

Figure 9: Bar chart showing measures applied concerning personal data related to or within deposited content? N=60

Figure 10: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories using external vs internal solutions for long-term storage and preservation. N=60

Figure 11: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories where deposited data are assigned globally unique and persistent identifiers. N=60

Figure 12: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories where deposited data are described with rich metadata. N=60

Figure 13: Pie chart showing vocabularies supported. N=60

Figure 14: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories that provide a metadata search interface. N=60

Figure 15: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories that make metadata available to external search platforms or engines. N=60

Figure 16: Pie chart showing repository policy on copyright in deposited data. N=60

Figure 17: Pie chart showing licence frameworks supported. N=60

Figure 18: Pie chart showing which factors repositories felt would most help support open data access and reuse policies. N=56

Figure 19: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories for which national legislation determines which archaeological documentation has to be provided to a repository. N=60

Figure 20: Pie chart showing proportion of European Union repositories believed to fall under the Directive (EU) 2019/1024. N=46

Figure 21: Pie chart showing means by which users can access data in the repository. N=60

Figure 22: Bar chart showing what repositories felt would help them most to improve data access. N=60

Figure 23: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories which collect and analyse access data. N=56

Figure 24: Pie chart showing whether repositories had an increase or decrease of access during the COVID-19 pandemic. N=27

Figure 25: Pie chart showing proportion of repositories which collect information about data reuse. N=56

Table 1: Number of repositories per country present in the survey. N=60

Table 2: The repository is (will be) based at (the selected type of organisation). N=60

Table 3: What are your main tasks/responsibilities? (multiple answers possible). N=60

Table 4: How many members of staff work for the repository? Consider only members whose work relates mainly or in substantial part to the repository. N=55

Table 5: How long has the digital repository already been operative? N=41

Table 6: Results of what archaeology related work is (will be) deposited in your repository? Select only 2 options most important for your repository. N=60

Table 7: What vocabulary does the repository support? N=60

Table 8: What is your organisation's policy on copyright in deposited archaeological work (e.g. reports, data)? N=60

Table 9: Which licence frameworks does the repository support? N=60

Table 10: What would help the repository most to support open data access and reuse policies? N=56

Table 11: How can people access data in the repository? N=60

Table 12: What would help the repository most for improving data access? N=60

Aloia, N., Binding, C., Cuy, S., Doerr, M., Fanini, B., Felicetti, A., Fihn, J., Gavrilis, D., Geser, G., Hollander, H., Meghini, C., Niccolucci, F., Nurra, F., Papatheodorou, C., Richards, J., Ronzino, P., Scopigno, R., Theodoridou, M., Tudhope, D., Vlachidis, A. and Wright, H. 2017 'Enabling European archaeological research: the ARIADNE E-Infrastructure', Internet Archaeology 43. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.43.11

Boeckhout, M., Zielhuis, G.A. and Bredenoord, A.L. 2018 'The FAIR guiding principles for data stewardship: fair enough?', European Journal of Human Genetics 26, 931-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-018-0160-0

Communia 2014 Policy Paper on the Re­use of Public Sector Information in Cultural Heritage Institutions, November 2014. https://www.communia-association.org/policy-papers/the-re-use-of-public-sector-information-in-cultural-heritage-institutions/

Cousijn, H. and Lammey, R. 2018 Why Data Citation matters to publishers and data repositories. In Crossref blog, 8 November 2018. https://www.crossref.org/blog/why-data-citation-matters-to-publishers-and-data-repositories/

David, R., Mabile, L., Specht, A., Stryeck S. Thomsen, M., Yahia, M., Jonquet, C., Dollé, L., Jacob, D., Bailo, D., Bravo, E., Gachet, S., Gunderman, H., Hollebecq, J-E., Ioannidis, V., Le Bras, Y., Lerigoleur, E., Cambon-Thomsen, A. and Alliance SHAring Reward and Credit (SHARC) Interest Group, T.R.D. 2020 'FAIRness literacy: the Achilles' Heel of applying FAIR principles', Data Science Journal 19(1), 32. http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2020-032

Deloitte 2018 Study to support the review of Directive 2003/98/EC on the re-use of public sector information. Prepared for the European Commission, DG Communications Networks, Content & Technology. http://doi.org/10.2759/373622

Devaraju, A., Huber, R., Mokrane, M., Herterich, P., Cepinskas, L., de Vries, J., L'Hours, H., Davidson, J. and White, A. 2020 FAIRsFAIR Data Object Assessment Metrics. Zenodo, 12 October 2020. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3775793

Devaraju, A., Mokrane, M., Cepinskas, L., Huber, R., Herterich, P., de Vries, J., Akerman, V., L’Hours, H., Davidson, J. and Diepenbroek. M. 2021 'From conceptualization to implementation: FAIR assessment of research data objects', Data Science Journal 20(1), 4. http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2021-004

Directive 2019/1024 (EU) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on open data and the re-use of public sector information. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/1024/oj

Directive 2013/37/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 amending Directive 2003/98/EC on the re-use of public sector information. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2013/37/oj

Dunning, A., de Smaele, M. and Böhmer, J. 2017 'Are the FAIR Data Principles fair?', International Journal of Digital Curation 12(2), 177-94. http://www.ijdc.net/article/view/567/493

Dunning A., Sansone, S.A. and Teperek, M. 2019 'The layered cake of FAIR coordination: how many is too many?', Scientific Data blog, 22 October 2019. http://blogs.nature.com/scientificdata/2019/10/22/the-layered-cake/

EOSC-NORDIC 2021 EOSC-NORDIC FAIRification Study Testing FAIRsFAIR F-UJI tool, 1 September 2021. https://www.eosc-nordic.eu/eosc-nordic-fairification-study-testing-fairsfair-f-uji-tool/

European Archaeological Council 2018 Making Choices: Valletta, Development, Archaeology and Society. A Report of the 'Making Choices' Working Group of the Europae Archaeologiae Consilium, March 2018. https://www.europae-archaeologiae-consilium.org/making-the-case-for-development-led

European Commission 2011 Commission Recommendation of 27 October 2011 on the digitisation and online accessibility of cultural material and digital preservation (2011/711/EU). http://data.europa.eu/eli/reco/2011/711/oj

European Commission 2012 Commission Recommendation of 17 July 2012 on access to and preservation of scientific information (2012/417/EU . http://data.europa.eu/eli/reco/2012/417/oj

European Commission 2015 Access to and Preservation of Scientific Information in Europe. Report on the implementation of Commission Recommendation C(2012) 4890 final; http://doi.org/10.2777/975917

European Commission 2018a Commission Recommendation (EU) 2018/790 of 25 April 2018 on Access to and Preservation of Scientific Information. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reco/2018/790/oj

European Commission 2018b Access to and Preservation of Scientific Information in Europe. Report on the implementation of Commission Recommendation C(2012) 4890 final; May 2018. http://doi.org/10.2777/642887

European Commission 2020a Access to and Preservation of Scientific Information in Europe Report on the Implementation of Commission Recommendation C(2018)2375 final; July 2020. http://doi.org/10.2777/950244

European Commission 2020b Factual Summary Report on the Open Public Consultation on Digital for Cultural Heritage. Consultation results, 7 December 2020 (Ref. Ares(2020)6653094, 12/11/2020). https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/factual-summary-report-open-public-consultation-digital-cultural-heritage

European Commission 2021 Commission Staff Working Document: Evaluation of the Commission Recommendation of 27 October 2011 on the Digitisation and Online Accessibility of Cultural Material and Digital Preservation. SWD(2021) 15 final, Brussels, 29.1.2021. https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/

Expert Group on FAIR Data 2018 Turning FAIR into Reality. Final Report and Action Plan from the European Commission Expert Group on FAIR Data, November 2018. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. http://dx.doi.org/10.2777/1524

Figshare 2018 The State of Open Data 2018, Digital Science Report, October 2018. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7195058

Figshare 2019 The State of Open Data 2019, Digital Science Report, October 2019. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.9980783

Figshare 2020 The State of Open Data 2020, Digital Science Report, December 2020. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13274744

Geser, G. (ed) 2019 ARIADNEplus Community Needs Survey 2019, Report, 15 November 2019. http://ariadne-infrastructure.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ARIADNEplus-Survey-2019-Report.pdf

Geser, G. 2021a Impact of COVID-19 on Archaeology and Cultural Heritage. ARIADNEplus, 29 October 2021. https://ariadne-infrastructure.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/COVID-19_impact-archaeology-and-cultural-heritage_29Oct2021.pdf

Geser, G. 2021b Survey of Data Management Policies and Practices of Digital Archaeological Repositories. Report, December 2021.

Gobbato, S. 2020 'Open Science and the re-use of publicly funded research data in the new Directive (EU) 2019/1024', Journal of Ethics and Legal Technologies 2(2), 145-61. https://jelt.padovauniversitypress.it/2020/2/7

Huggett, J. 2018 'Reuse remix recycle: repurposing archaeological digital data', Advances in Archaeological Practice 6(2), 93-104, https://doi.org/10.1017/aap.2018.1. Manuscript available at http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/161510/1/161510.pdf

Ivanović, D., Schmidt, B., Grim, R. and Dunning, A. 2019 FAIRness of Repositories & Their Data. A Report from LIBER's Research Data Management Working Group. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3251593

Jakobsson, U., Novák, D., Richards, J.D., Štular, B. and Wright, H. (eds) 2021 'Digital archiving in archaeology: the state of the art', Internet Archaeology 58. https://doi.org/10.11141/ia.58.23

Keller, P., Margoni, T., Rybicka, K. and Tarkowski, A. 2014 'Re-use of public sector information in cultural heritage institutions', International Free and Open Source Software Law Review 6(1), 1-9. http://doi.org/10.5033/ifosslr.v6i1.104

Khodiyar, V. 2021 Better Research for Better Data - how FAIR is driving open research forwards. Springer Nature website, 25 May 2021. https://www.springernature.com/de/advancing-discovery/springboard/blog/blogposts-open-research/how-fair-is-driving-open-research-forwards/19189878

L'Hours, H., von Stein, I., deVries, J., et al. 2021 CoreTrustSeal+FAIRenabling, Capability and Maturity. FAIRsFAIR M4.3 deliverable (1.0), 31 August 2021. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5346822

Mokrane, M. and Recker, J. 2019 CoreTrustSeal-certified Repositories: Enabling Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR), 16th International Conference on Digital Preservation (iPRES 2019), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, September 2019. https://ipres2019.org/static/pdf/iPres2019_paper_74.pdf

Mons, B., Neylon, C., Velterop, J., Dumontier, M., da Silva Santos, L.O.B. and Wilkinson, M. 2017 'Cloudy, increasingly FAIR; revisiting the FAIR Data guiding principles for the European Open Science Cloud', Information Services & Use 37(1), 49-56. http://content.iospress.com/articles/information-services-and-use/isu824

OpenAIRE 2021 OpenAIRE Factsheet: Public Sector Information - Open Data Directive. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4543088

PARTHENOS 2018 Guidelines to FAIRify Data Management and Make Data Reusable. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2668479

Pilar, J. and Lewandowski, S. 2019 Open Data and Re-use of Public Sector Information. Open Data Directive and HVDs Public Sector Information and Open Data Workshop, Vienna, 14 November 2019. https://www.data.gv.at/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/1-Europaeische-Kommission_Open-data_and_Re-use_of_Public_Sector_Information.pdf

Richards, J.D., Cooper, A., Gosling, K., Kennedy, A., Perry, S., Reed, D., Smith, N., Torreggiani, N. and Wright, H. 2022 Making it FAIR: understanding the lockdown 'digital divide' and the implications for the development of UK digital infrastructures. A Towards a National Collection COVID-19 Project Final Report. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5833767

Richter, H. 2018 'Open science and public sector information – reconsidering the exemption for educational and research establishments under the Directive on re-use of public sector information', Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law 9(1). https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-9-1-2018/4679

SEADDA 2020 Working Group 4: Use and Re-Use of Archaeological Data – Exploratory Workshop, 31 March–2 April 2020 (online), Presentations and video recordings. https://www.seadda.eu/?page_id=1103

SPARC Europe 2019 The Directive on Open Data and the Re-Use of Public Sector Information. Briefing for national legislative implementation in the interest of supporting Open Access to research data and its re-use. October 2019. https://sparceurope.org/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2019/10/Open-DataDirectiveSummary_102019.pdf

Wilkinson, M.D et al. 2016 'The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship', Scientific Data 3, 15 March 2016. http://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618

Wilkinson, M.D. et al. 2019 'Evaluating FAIR maturity through a scalable, automated, community-governed framework', Scientific Data 6, Article 174. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-019-0184-5

Wright, H. and Richards, J.D. 2018 'Reflections on collaborative archaeology and large-scale online research infrastructures', Journal of Field Archaeology 43, supp1, S60-S67 https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2018.1511960

Internet Archaeology is an open access journal based in the Department of Archaeology, University of York. Except where otherwise noted, content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY) Unported licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that attribution to the author(s), the title of the work, the Internet Archaeology journal and the relevant URL/DOI are given.

Terms and Conditions | Legal Statements | Privacy Policy | Cookies Policy | Citing Internet Archaeology

Internet Archaeology content is preserved for the long term with the Archaeology Data Service. Help sustain and support open access publication by donating to our Open Access Archaeology Fund.