Developing criteria to establish trusted digital repositories

7Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This paper details the drivers, methods, and outcomes of the U.S. Geological Survey’s quest to establish criteria by which to judge its own digital preservation resources as Trusted Ðigital Repositories. Drivers included recent U.S. legislation focused on data and asset management conducted by federal agencies spending $100M USD or more annually on research activities. The methods entailed seeking existing evaluation criteria from national and international organizations such as International Standards Organization (ISO), U.S. Library of Congress, and Data Seal of Approval upon which to model USGS repository evaluations. Certification, complexity, cost, and usability of existing evaluation models were key considerations. The selected evaluation method was derived to allow the repository evaluation process to be transparent, understandable, and defensible; factors that are critical for judging competing, internal units. Implementing the chosen evaluation criteria involved establishing a cross-agency, multi-disciplinary team that interfaced across the organization.

References Powered by Scopus

A unified framework for measuring stewardship practices applied to digital environmental datasets

46Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Risk assessment for scientific data

13Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A conceptual enterprise framework for managing scientific data stewardship

13Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The utilisation of open research data repositories for storing and sharing research data in higher learning institutions in Tanzania

3Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Faundeen, J. (2017). Developing criteria to establish trusted digital repositories. Data Science Journal, 16. https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2017-022

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 5

50%

Researcher 4

40%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

10%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Computer Science 6

55%

Arts and Humanities 2

18%

Business, Management and Accounting 2

18%

Decision Sciences 1

9%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
Blog Mentions: 2

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free