This article explores the global implementation of the FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific management and data stewardship,which provide that data should be findable,accessible,interoperable and reusable.The implem...This article explores the global implementation of the FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific management and data stewardship,which provide that data should be findable,accessible,interoperable and reusable.The implementation of these principles is designed to lead to the stewardship of data as FAIR digital objects and the establishment of the Internet of FAIR Data and Services(IFDS).If implementation reaches a tipping point,IFDS has the potential to revolutionize how data is managed by making machine and human readable data discoverable for reuse.Accordingly,this article examines the expansion of the implementation of FAIR Guiding Principles,especially how and in which geographies(locations)and areas(topic domains)implementation is taking place.A literature review of academic articles published between 2016 and 2019 on the use of FAIR Guiding Principles is presented.The investigation also includes an analysis of the domains in the IFDS Implementation Networks(INs).Its uptake has been mainly in the Western hemisphere.The investigation found that implementation of FAIR Guiding Principles has taken firm hold in the domain of bio and natural sciences.To achieve a tipping point for FAIR implementation,it is now time to ensure the inclusion of non-European ascendants and of other scientific domains.Apart from equal opportunity and genuine global partnership issues,a permanent European bias poses challenges with regard to the representativeness and validity of data and could limit the potential of IFDS to reach across continental boundaries.The article concludes that,despite efforts to be inclusive,acceptance of the FAIR Guiding Principles and IFDS in different scientific communities is limited and there is a need to act now to prevent dampening of the momentum in the development and implementation of the IFDS.It is further concluded that policy entrepreneurs and the GO FAIR INs may contribute to making the FAIR Guiding Principles more flexible in including different research epistemologies,especially through its GO CHANGE pillar.展开更多
This article investigates expansion of the Internet of FAIR Data and Services(IFDS)to Africa,through the three GO FAIR pillars:GO CHANGE,GO BUILD and GO TRAIN.Introduction of the IFDS in Africa has a focus on digital ...This article investigates expansion of the Internet of FAIR Data and Services(IFDS)to Africa,through the three GO FAIR pillars:GO CHANGE,GO BUILD and GO TRAIN.Introduction of the IFDS in Africa has a focus on digital health.Two examples of introducing FAIR are compared:a regional initiative for digital health by governments in the East Africa Community(EAC)and an initiative by a local health provider(Solidarmed)in collaboration with Great Zimbabwe University in Zimbabwe.The obstacles to introducing FAIR are identified as underrepresentation of data from Africa in IFDS at this moment,the lack of explicit recognition of situational context of research in FAIR at present and the lack of acceptability of FAIR as a foreign and European invention which affects acceptance.It is envisaged that FAIR has an important contribution to solve fragmentation in digital health in Africa,and that any obstacles concerning African participation,context relevance and acceptance of IFDS need to be removed.This will require involvement of African researchers and ICT-developers so that it is driven by local ownership.Assessment of ecological validity in FAIR principles would ensure that the context specificity of research is reflected in the FAIR principles.This will help enhance the acceptance of the FAIR Guidelines in Africa and will help strengthen digital health research and services.展开更多
The FAIR principles have been widely cited,endorsed and adopted by a broad range of stakeholders since their publication in 2016.By intention,the 15 FAIR guiding principles do not dictate specific technological implem...The FAIR principles have been widely cited,endorsed and adopted by a broad range of stakeholders since their publication in 2016.By intention,the 15 FAIR guiding principles do not dictate specific technological implementations,but provide guidance for improving Findability,Accessibility,Interoperability and Reusability of digital resources.This has likely contributed to the broad adoption of the FAIR principles,because individual stakeholder communities can implement their own FAIR solutions.However,it has also resulted in inconsistent interpretations that carry the risk of leading to incompatible implementations.Thus,while the FAIR principles are formulated on a high level and may be interpreted and implemented in different ways,for true interoperability we need to support convergence in implementation choices that are widely accessible and(re)-usable.We introduce the concept of FAIR implementation considerations to assist accelerated global participation and convergence towards accessible,robust,widespread and consistent FAIR implementations.Any self-identified stakeholder community may either choose to reuse solutions from existing implementations,or when they spot a gap,accept the challenge to create the needed solution,which,ideally,can be used again by other communities in the future.Here,we provide interpretations and implementation considerations(choices and challenges)for each FAIR principle.展开更多
文摘This article explores the global implementation of the FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific management and data stewardship,which provide that data should be findable,accessible,interoperable and reusable.The implementation of these principles is designed to lead to the stewardship of data as FAIR digital objects and the establishment of the Internet of FAIR Data and Services(IFDS).If implementation reaches a tipping point,IFDS has the potential to revolutionize how data is managed by making machine and human readable data discoverable for reuse.Accordingly,this article examines the expansion of the implementation of FAIR Guiding Principles,especially how and in which geographies(locations)and areas(topic domains)implementation is taking place.A literature review of academic articles published between 2016 and 2019 on the use of FAIR Guiding Principles is presented.The investigation also includes an analysis of the domains in the IFDS Implementation Networks(INs).Its uptake has been mainly in the Western hemisphere.The investigation found that implementation of FAIR Guiding Principles has taken firm hold in the domain of bio and natural sciences.To achieve a tipping point for FAIR implementation,it is now time to ensure the inclusion of non-European ascendants and of other scientific domains.Apart from equal opportunity and genuine global partnership issues,a permanent European bias poses challenges with regard to the representativeness and validity of data and could limit the potential of IFDS to reach across continental boundaries.The article concludes that,despite efforts to be inclusive,acceptance of the FAIR Guiding Principles and IFDS in different scientific communities is limited and there is a need to act now to prevent dampening of the momentum in the development and implementation of the IFDS.It is further concluded that policy entrepreneurs and the GO FAIR INs may contribute to making the FAIR Guiding Principles more flexible in including different research epistemologies,especially through its GO CHANGE pillar.
文摘This article investigates expansion of the Internet of FAIR Data and Services(IFDS)to Africa,through the three GO FAIR pillars:GO CHANGE,GO BUILD and GO TRAIN.Introduction of the IFDS in Africa has a focus on digital health.Two examples of introducing FAIR are compared:a regional initiative for digital health by governments in the East Africa Community(EAC)and an initiative by a local health provider(Solidarmed)in collaboration with Great Zimbabwe University in Zimbabwe.The obstacles to introducing FAIR are identified as underrepresentation of data from Africa in IFDS at this moment,the lack of explicit recognition of situational context of research in FAIR at present and the lack of acceptability of FAIR as a foreign and European invention which affects acceptance.It is envisaged that FAIR has an important contribution to solve fragmentation in digital health in Africa,and that any obstacles concerning African participation,context relevance and acceptance of IFDS need to be removed.This will require involvement of African researchers and ICT-developers so that it is driven by local ownership.Assessment of ecological validity in FAIR principles would ensure that the context specificity of research is reflected in the FAIR principles.This will help enhance the acceptance of the FAIR Guidelines in Africa and will help strengthen digital health research and services.
基金The work of A.Jacobsen,C.Evelo,M.Thompson,R.Cornet,R.Kaliyaperuma and M.Roos is supported by funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the EJP RD COFUND-EJP N°825575.The work of A.Jacobsen,C.Evelo,C.Goble,M.Thompson,N.Juty,R.Hooft,M.Roos,S-A.Sansone,P.McQuilton,P.Rocca-Serra and D.Batista is supported by funding from ELIXIR EXCELERATE,H2020 grant agreement number 676559.R.Hooft was further funded by NL NWO NRGWI.obrug.2018.009.N.Juty and C.Goble were funded by CORBEL(H2020 grant agreement 654248)N.Juty,C.Goble,S-A.Sansone,P.McQuilton,P.Rocca-Serra and D.Batista were funded by FAIRplus(IMI grant agreement 802750)+13 种基金N.Juty,C.Goble,M.Thompson,M.Roos,S-A.Sansone,P.McQuilton,P.Rocca-Serra and D.Batista were funded by EOSClife H2020-EU(grant agreement number 824087)C.Goble was funded by DMMCore(BBSRC BB/M013189/)M.Thompson,M.Roos received funding from NWO(VWData 400.17.605)S-A.Sansone,P.McQuilton,P.Rocca-Serra and D.Batista have been funded by grants awarded to S-A.Sansone from the UK BBSRC and Research Councils(BB/L024101/1,BB/L005069/1)EU(H2020-EU 634107H2020-EU 654241,IMI(IMPRiND 116060)NIH Data Common Fund,and from the Wellcome Trust(ISA-InterMine 212930/Z/18/ZFAIRsharing 208381/A/17/Z)The work of A.Waagmeester has been funded by grant award number GM089820 from the National Institutes of Health.M.Kersloot was funded by the European Regional Development Fund(KVW-00163).The work of N.Meyers was funded by the National Science Foundation(OAC 1839030)The work of M.D.Wilkinson is funded by Isaac Peral/Marie Curie cofund with the Universidad Politecnica de Madrid and the Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad grant number TIN2014-55993-RMThe work of B.Magagna,E.Schultes,L.da Silva Santos and K.Jeffery is funded by the H2020-EU 824068The work of B.Magagna,E.Schultes and L.da Silva Santos is funded by the GO FAIR ISCO grant of the Dutch Ministry of Science and CultureThe work of G.Guizzardi is supported by the OCEAN Project(FUB).M.Courtot received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No.802750.R.Cornet was further funded by FAIR4Health(H2020-EU grant agreement number 824666)K.Jeffery received funding from EPOS-IP H2020-EU agreement 676564 and ENVRIplus H2020-EU agreement 654182.
文摘The FAIR principles have been widely cited,endorsed and adopted by a broad range of stakeholders since their publication in 2016.By intention,the 15 FAIR guiding principles do not dictate specific technological implementations,but provide guidance for improving Findability,Accessibility,Interoperability and Reusability of digital resources.This has likely contributed to the broad adoption of the FAIR principles,because individual stakeholder communities can implement their own FAIR solutions.However,it has also resulted in inconsistent interpretations that carry the risk of leading to incompatible implementations.Thus,while the FAIR principles are formulated on a high level and may be interpreted and implemented in different ways,for true interoperability we need to support convergence in implementation choices that are widely accessible and(re)-usable.We introduce the concept of FAIR implementation considerations to assist accelerated global participation and convergence towards accessible,robust,widespread and consistent FAIR implementations.Any self-identified stakeholder community may either choose to reuse solutions from existing implementations,or when they spot a gap,accept the challenge to create the needed solution,which,ideally,can be used again by other communities in the future.Here,we provide interpretations and implementation considerations(choices and challenges)for each FAIR principle.
