A Review of the History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans

Data management plans (DMPs) have increasingly been encouraged as a key component of institutional and funding body policy. Although DMPs necessarily place administrative burden on researchers, proponents claim that DMPs have myriad benefits, including enhanced research data quality, increased rat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nicholas Andrew Smale, Kathryn Unsworth, Gareth Denyer, Elise Magatova, Daniel Barr
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Edinburgh 1970-01-01
Series:International Journal of Digital Curation
Online Access:http://www.ijdc.net/article/view/525
id doaj-71ca97fba9a74985955db37f3c2b2832
record_format Article
spelling doaj-71ca97fba9a74985955db37f3c2b28322020-11-25T03:26:22ZengUniversity of EdinburghInternational Journal of Digital Curation1746-82561970-01-0115110.2218/ijdc.v15i1.525A Review of the History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management PlansNicholas Andrew Smale0Kathryn Unsworth1Gareth Denyer2Elise Magatova3Daniel Barr4Division of Operations, RMIT VietnamInformation Management and Technology, CSIROFaculty of Science, University of SydneyFaculty of Science, University of SydneyResearch Strategy & Services, RMIT University Data management plans (DMPs) have increasingly been encouraged as a key component of institutional and funding body policy. Although DMPs necessarily place administrative burden on researchers, proponents claim that DMPs have myriad benefits, including enhanced research data quality, increased rates of data sharing, and institutional planning and compliance benefits. In this article, we explore the international history of DMPs and describe institutional and funding body DMP policy. We find that economic and societal benefits from presumed increased rates of data sharing was the original driver of mandating DMPs by funding bodies. Today, 86% of UK Research Councils and 63% of US funding bodies require submission of a DMP with funding applications. Given that no major Australian funding bodies require DMP submission, it is of note that 37% of Australian universities have taken the initiative to internally mandate DMPs. Institutions both within Australia and internationally frequently promote the professional benefits of DMP use, and endorse DMPs as ‘best practice’. We analyse one such typical DMP implementation at a major Australian institution, finding that DMPs have low levels of apparent translational value. Indeed, an extensive literature review suggests there is very limited published systematic evidence that DMP use has any tangible benefit for researchers, institutions or funding bodies. We are therefore led to question why DMPs have become the go-to tool for research data professionals and advocates of good data practice. By delineating multiple use-cases and highlighting the need for DMPs to be fit for intended purpose, we question the view that a good DMP is necessarily that which encompasses the entire data lifecycle of a project. Finally, we summarise recent developments in the DMP landscape, and note a positive shift towards evidence-based research management through more researcher-centric, educative, and integrated DMP services. http://www.ijdc.net/article/view/525
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Nicholas Andrew Smale
Kathryn Unsworth
Gareth Denyer
Elise Magatova
Daniel Barr
spellingShingle Nicholas Andrew Smale
Kathryn Unsworth
Gareth Denyer
Elise Magatova
Daniel Barr
A Review of the History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans
International Journal of Digital Curation
author_facet Nicholas Andrew Smale
Kathryn Unsworth
Gareth Denyer
Elise Magatova
Daniel Barr
author_sort Nicholas Andrew Smale
title A Review of the History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans
title_short A Review of the History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans
title_full A Review of the History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans
title_fullStr A Review of the History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans
title_full_unstemmed A Review of the History, Advocacy and Efficacy of Data Management Plans
title_sort review of the history, advocacy and efficacy of data management plans
publisher University of Edinburgh
series International Journal of Digital Curation
issn 1746-8256
publishDate 1970-01-01
description Data management plans (DMPs) have increasingly been encouraged as a key component of institutional and funding body policy. Although DMPs necessarily place administrative burden on researchers, proponents claim that DMPs have myriad benefits, including enhanced research data quality, increased rates of data sharing, and institutional planning and compliance benefits. In this article, we explore the international history of DMPs and describe institutional and funding body DMP policy. We find that economic and societal benefits from presumed increased rates of data sharing was the original driver of mandating DMPs by funding bodies. Today, 86% of UK Research Councils and 63% of US funding bodies require submission of a DMP with funding applications. Given that no major Australian funding bodies require DMP submission, it is of note that 37% of Australian universities have taken the initiative to internally mandate DMPs. Institutions both within Australia and internationally frequently promote the professional benefits of DMP use, and endorse DMPs as ‘best practice’. We analyse one such typical DMP implementation at a major Australian institution, finding that DMPs have low levels of apparent translational value. Indeed, an extensive literature review suggests there is very limited published systematic evidence that DMP use has any tangible benefit for researchers, institutions or funding bodies. We are therefore led to question why DMPs have become the go-to tool for research data professionals and advocates of good data practice. By delineating multiple use-cases and highlighting the need for DMPs to be fit for intended purpose, we question the view that a good DMP is necessarily that which encompasses the entire data lifecycle of a project. Finally, we summarise recent developments in the DMP landscape, and note a positive shift towards evidence-based research management through more researcher-centric, educative, and integrated DMP services.
url http://www.ijdc.net/article/view/525
work_keys_str_mv AT nicholasandrewsmale areviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT kathrynunsworth areviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT garethdenyer areviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT elisemagatova areviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT danielbarr areviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT nicholasandrewsmale reviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT kathrynunsworth reviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT garethdenyer reviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT elisemagatova reviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
AT danielbarr reviewofthehistoryadvocacyandefficacyofdatamanagementplans
_version_ 1724593121563508736