NEFIS (WP5) Evaluation Meeting, 15-16 November 2004 Evaluation Data Rights Aljoscha Requardt, University of Hamburg Response Rate: 91% - 10 of 11 partners

Aljoscha Requardt, University of HamburgNEFIS (WP5) Evaluation Meeting, 15-16 November 2004

Evaluation Data Rights

Response Rate:

91% - 10 of 11 partners send questionnaire back

11 questionnaires were evaluated (2x METLA)

37 data sets (Question 1-8)

The response rate per question varies between 89-100%

Varity of data types:

33%

17%22%

28%

NFI data

Geospatial data

Social and Economical Statistics

other forest and environmentalstatistics



Why to talk about Data Rights?

Clarify Data Rights

• within the NEFIS project

• beyond the time of NEFIS project

• some partners seem to be confused about data rights within NEFIS

“Data Rights”, does it concern the actual data? Should not all data presented in NEFIS be “public”?

• some partners seem to be confused about the data rights management within their own institution

NEFIS tables are available for free. On the other hand, same information is part of the on-line system XXX, to which you have a restricted access (restricted-need to purchase). How should we handle this? Confusion...



89%

11%

yes

no

Do you provide public access to your data set?

Of 37 data sets: 33 = public ; 4 = restricted



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

all none internal ID/password foruser groups

others

nr -

dat

aset

For which type of user do you require a user ID and a password registration?



0

5

10

15

20

25

available and accessibleby VTK, no download

available and accessibleby VTK, download

available and accessibleby VTK, no download

available and accessibleby VTK, download

dataset is available for public access dataset is available to a restricted user group

nr -

data

set

If the data set is available for public…?

If the data set is available to a restricted group of users…?



Are these “drop down“ options appropriate for your data set?

Yes : 95%

No : 5%

Which of the "drop down" options (if any) are relevant to your data set?

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Public

Limited

Restricted - need to purchase ($, €)

Restricted -need to be member

Restricted - need to register

nr - dataset



37% "another„ = one partner (13 of 14 datasets)

54%

9%

37%the data provider

EFI (Projectcoordinator)

another authorisedbody

Who is responsible for data access management?



68%

3%

29%all data on a server bythe data provider

only certain data on aserver by the dataprovider

all data on a centralserver

Which form of data storage do you prefer for your data set?



0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

user has to apply - available for free

user has to apply - provided at a cost

no further data or raw data will be accessible

other

nr - dataset

• data which are published for public any how are available for free, any other statistics or raw data would be provided at a cost

• if the request for additional data is excessive and requires a lot of extra work data would be provided at a cost

• cost is for the work to select the data

• further or raw data have to be requested to the main provider

To get further relevant data or raw data…



27%

73%

no

yes

Would you like to provide more data within the NEFIS project?



33%

67%

no

yes

Are there any obstacles to provide additional data?



• staff resources available for NEFIS

• permission of the government (main provider) will be needed

• the format accepted in the visual tool kit is a limitation (providing data in Excel format requires a lot of time as data have to be extracted from a relational database)

Obstacles to provide additional data are:

11%

45%

11%

0%

22%

11%unclear data rigths management

cost for provider

cost for user

legal restrictions

technical limitations

other limitations



• more efficient links - provide a direct access to providers relational database; more user-friendly tools for metadata entry - please standardise the lists (like entry forms)

• stable specification of input - i.e. not to many changes in the guidelines; easy update of information - either by submission of some files or online

• increase the compatibility of the systems with existing data format; increase the standardisation requirements between national dataset

• the data sets should be same as in national or international (for example FAO) reporting

Demands for further cooperation:

• the cooperation and further data provision are important for us in the future. The cooperation is appropriate in the current way

• a definition of interface between NEFIS server and our “decentralized” data centre is needed. The question is: how shall we (technically) link our data-bank via internet to the visualisation toolkit?

• data should reside on data providers server; data provider should be able to do own updates of both metadata and actual data at any point in time; data provider should be able to block access to data at any time; the overall system should be maintained by a designated unit who guarantee that the system is running continuously and properly…



Demands for further cooperation:

• production costs and available staff resources may be limiting factors. …there should be an agreement which kind of forest statistical data would be useful to be made available

• …sometimes it could be difficult to have time and personnel to prepare data. It needs some extra money...

• we need resources for this work (of course!)

• we are more interested in the description of the data than the provision of them, because of some obstacles (need permission from the government)



0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

metadata data itself

(nr)

the data provider

authorised body whomaintenance the server

other

• the original data provider is the best option, as this organisation knows the datasets best.

• …the authorised body who maintenance the server – like for moving, freshening of the provided data set, but without modifying of the data itself.

If data a stored on a central server (e.g. NEFIS Server), who is the custodian of …



0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

"stale" data data redundancies "stale" data & dataredundancies

(nr)

yes

no

no meaning

If data are hosted on a centralised database, do you forsee problems with:



Discussion



I foresee problems with “stale” data and/or data redundancies, because…

• …if data are stored on a central server, then the ‘responsibility’ is in some way distanced from the data provider… therefore data providers should be encouraged to host the data for exactly this reason.

• …data updating may be regarded only through direct access to providers database, yet to be implemented.

•…at the moment no standards are developed, e.g.: administrative boundaries. Stale and redundancies problems are not relevant at the moment within the NEFIS project but could became relevant in an operational systems.

• …it's additional work for the data provider and if they already are making data available on national homepage, this will be extra work.

• …some data have more than one source, and most of them have their own system of dissemination and the present actualisation process does not include the actualisation in the central “NEFIS” database.



• In principle, there needs to be a central institution with the responsibility for connecting the decentralized data. This central body can easily check and avoid redundancies between the central and decentralized servers. The main “problem” will be the technical know-how at the decentralized centres.

I do not foresee problems with stale data and/or data redundancies, because…

• The idea of an European Forest Information System is based on the principle of distributed databases. That allows the data provider to be in control of both metadata and data….by this way problems like “stale” data and/or data redundancies will not occur and if they do it is in the responsibility of the data provider.

I do foresee problems to some extent

• …with a right regulation and cooperation the problems could be avoided.

Documents

NEFIS (WP5) Evaluation Meeting, 15-16 November 2004 Evaluation Data Rights Aljoscha Requardt, University of Hamburg Response Rate: 91% - 10 of 11 partners