Font Size:
Data archives in theory and practice: a comparative analysis of Slovenia and Australia
Sebastian Kocar, Steven McEachern
Building: Holme Building
Room: Sutherland Room
Date: 2016-07-22 09:00 AM – 10:30 AM
Last modified: 2016-05-06
Abstract
The Slovenian Social Science Data Archive (ADP) and the Australian Data Archive (ADA) are the preeminent social science data archives within Slovenia and Australia. They provide national services for the collection and preservation of digital research data, also to make these data available for secondary analysis by academic researchers and other users. The organizations are both members of the International Federation of Data Organisations and are both users of DDI standard for describing statistical and social science data, as well as Nesstar Publisher as a software system for data publishing and online analysis.
As part of a recent staff exchange between the two archives, aimed at enabling exchanging skills and knowledge between ADA and ADP staff, a comparative analysis was undertaken of the policies, procedures and infrastructure the ADP and the ADA. The analysis directly compared the following dimensions of data archiving: microdata access, processes and procedures, DDI metadata schema used, relations with depositors, relations with (micro)data users, organizational management and additional activities that the organizations are involved in.
This paper will present an overview of the findings of this analysis, which revealed some significant differences between the data archives, with a particular focus on understanding the sources of and outcomes of the differentiation between the two archives. Core areas of difference considered include:
- the organizations offer similar data products and services, but under different access conditions
- relations of both organizations with their depositors differ significantly, influenced heavily by the research environments and their data sharing culture
- differences in promotional and cooperation activities, which are a function of both the age of each organisation, and the geographic characteristics of each country
The paper concludes with an evaluation of the learnings from the comparative analysis, and recommendations for the specific archives and for social science archives more generally.
As part of a recent staff exchange between the two archives, aimed at enabling exchanging skills and knowledge between ADA and ADP staff, a comparative analysis was undertaken of the policies, procedures and infrastructure the ADP and the ADA. The analysis directly compared the following dimensions of data archiving: microdata access, processes and procedures, DDI metadata schema used, relations with depositors, relations with (micro)data users, organizational management and additional activities that the organizations are involved in.
This paper will present an overview of the findings of this analysis, which revealed some significant differences between the data archives, with a particular focus on understanding the sources of and outcomes of the differentiation between the two archives. Core areas of difference considered include:
- the organizations offer similar data products and services, but under different access conditions
- relations of both organizations with their depositors differ significantly, influenced heavily by the research environments and their data sharing culture
- differences in promotional and cooperation activities, which are a function of both the age of each organisation, and the geographic characteristics of each country
The paper concludes with an evaluation of the learnings from the comparative analysis, and recommendations for the specific archives and for social science archives more generally.