Datasets:

frnka
/

dmps

filename stringlengths 18 35	content stringlengths 1.53k 616k	source stringclasses 1 value	template stringclasses 1 value
0002_APPLICATE_727862.md	# EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This plan is based on the H2020 FAIR Data Management Plan (DMP) template designed to be applicable to any H2020 project that produces, collect or processes research data. This is the same plan as OpenAIRE is referring to in their guidance material. The purpose of the Data Management Plan is to describe the data that will be created and how, as well as the plans for sharing and preservation of the data generated. This plan is a living document that will be updated during the project. APPLICATE follows a metadata-driven approach where a physically distributed number of data centres are integrated using standardised discovery metadata and interoperability interfaces for metadata and data. The APPLICATE Data portal, providing a unified search interface to all APPLICATE will also be able to host data. APPLICATE promotes free and open access to data in line with the European Open Research Data Pilot (OpenAIRE). Within this plan an overview of the production chains for model simulations is provided as well as an initial outline of dissemination. This version of the plan is an update on the first version submitted in June 2017. A second update to the plan are scheduled for October 2019\. # Introduction ## Background and motivation The purpose of the data management plan is to document how the data generated by the project is handled during and after the project. It describes the basic principles for data management within the project. This includes standards and generation of discovery and use metadata, data sharing and preservation and life cycle management. This document is a living document that will be updated during the project in time with the periodic reports (project months 18, 36 and 48). APPLICATE is following the principles outlined by the Open Research Data Pilot and The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship (Wilkinson et al. 2016). ## Organisation of the plan This plan is based on the H2020 FAIR Data Management Plan (DMP) template 1 designed to be applicable to any H2020 project that produces, collect or processes research data. This is the same plan as OpenAIRE is referring to in their guidance material. # Administration details <table> <tr> <th> Project Name </th> <th> APPLICATE </th> </tr> <tr> <td> Funding </td> <td> EU HORIZON 2020 Research and Innovation Programme </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Partners </td> <td> Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI) - Bremerhaven, Germany Barcelona Supercomputing Center - Barcelona, Spain European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) - Reading, United Kingdom University of Bergen (UiB) - Bergen, Norway Uni Research AS - Bergen, Norway Norwegian Meteorological Institute (MET Norway) - Oslo, Norway Met Office - Exeter, United Kingdom Catholic University of Louvain (UCL) - Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium The University of Reading (UREAD) - Reading, United Kingdom Stockholm University (SU) - Stockholm, Sweden National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS-GAME) - Paris, France (with contributions from Météo France) European Centre for Research and Advanced Training in Scientific Calculation (CERFACS) - Toulose, France Arctic Portal - Akureyri, Iceland University of Tromsø (UiT) - Tromsø, Norway P.P. Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, Russian Academy of Sciences (IORAS) - Moscow, Russia Federal State Budgetary Institution Voeikov Main Geophysical Observatory (MGO) - St. Petersburg, Russia </td> </tr> </table> # Data summary The overarching mission of APPLICATE is _To develop enhanced predictive1 capacity for weather and climate in the Arctic and beyond, and to determine the influence of Arctic climate change on Northern Hemisphere midlatitudes, for the benefit of policy makers, businesses and society_ . Therefore, APPLICATE is primarily a project in which numerical models (for weather and climate prediction) are used. As such it depends on observations (e.g. for model evaluation and initialization), but the data generated by the project is primarily gridded output from the numerical simulations. The APPLICATE data management system will be used to collect information of relevant third-party datasets that the APPLICATE community could benefit from, and to share and preserve the datasets APPLICATE is generating, both internally and externally. A full overview of the datasets to be generated is yet not fully known, but there is an overview of the production chains. This was prepared in the proposal and is provided in Tables 1–3 below. ## Data overview ### Types and formats of data generated/collected APPLICATE will primarily generate gridded output resulting from numerical simulations and metrics based on these core datasets. The models used produce a number of output formats which is not known in detail, but specific requirements apply for data sharing and preservation (see below). Self-explaining file formats (e.g. NetCDF, HDF/HDF5) combined with semantic and structural standards like the Climate and Forecast Convention will be used. The default format for APPLICATE datasets are NetCDF following the Climate and Forecast Convention (feature types grid, timeseries, profiles and trajectories if applicable). This includes the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) requirements. The NetCDF files must be created using the NetCDF Classic Model (i.e. compression is allowed, but not groups and compound data types). The ESGF CMOR is recommended for conversion of model output. Some datasets may be made available as WMO GRIB or BUFR. Where no clear standard is identified initially, dedicated work will be attributed to identifying a common approach for those data. APPLICATE will exploit existing data in the region. In particular operational meteorological data made available through WMO Gobal Telecommunication System will be important for the model experiments. No full overview of third party data that will be used is currently available, but since the start of the project SYNOP data from WMO GTS have been available to the APPLICATE community. Work is in proigress for more data from GTS. If necessary (required by the scientific community in APPLICATE) metadata describing relevant thirdparty observations will be harvested and ingested in the data management system and through this simplifying the data discovery process for APPLICATE scientists. There is however no plan initially to harvest the data. Furthermore, model data produced in the context of CMIP5 and CMIP6 will be used as a baseline against which model improvements will be tested. ### Origin of the data Data will be generated by a suite of numerical models, including operational weather prediction and climate models. A preliminary list was provided in the proposal and is included below. APPLICATE is primarily a project in which numerical models are used. As such it depends on observations (e.g. for model evaluation and initialization), but the data generated by the project is primarily gridded output from numerical simulations. A summary of the numerical models to be used is provided in Tables 1-3. Table 1: List of climate models. <table> <tr> <th> Model </th> <th> AWI-CM </th> <th> EC-Earth CNRM-CM </th> <th> NorESM </th> <th> HadGEM </th> </tr> <tr> <td> Partner </td> <td> AWI </td> <td> BSC, UCL, SU CNRSGAME, CERFACS </td> <td> UiB, UR, Met.no </td> <td> MO, UREAD </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Atmosphere </td> <td> ECHAM6 T127 L95 </td> <td> IFS ARPEGE-Climat T255/T511 L91 T127/T359 L91 </td> <td> CAM-OSLO 1o×1o L32 / L46 </td> <td> MetUM N216/N96 L85 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Ocean </td> <td> FESOM Unstruct. mesh 15-100 km L41 4.5-80 km L41 </td> <td> NEMO NEMO 1o , 0.25o L75 1o, 0.25 o L75 </td> <td> NorESM-O (extended MICOM) 1o, 0.25o L75 </td> <td> NEMO 1o×1o L75 0.25o×0.25o L75 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Sea ice </td> <td> FESIM </td> <td> LIM3 GELATO </td> <td> CICE </td> <td> CICE </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Surface </td> <td> JSBACH </td> <td> HTESSEL SURFEX </td> <td> SURFEX </td> <td> JULES </td> </tr> <tr> <td> CMIP6 </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Yes Yes </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Yes </td> </tr> </table> Table 2: List of subseasonal to seasonal prediction systems. <table> <tr> <th> Model </th> <th> EC-Earth </th> <th> CNRM-CM </th> <th> IFS </th> <th> HadGEM/GloSea </th> </tr> <tr> <td> Partner </td> <td> BSC, UCL, AWI </td> <td> CNRS-GAME </td> <td> ECMWF </td> <td> MO, UREAD </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Atmosphere </td> <td> IFS T255/T511 L91 </td> <td> ARPEGE Climat T255/T359 L91 </td> <td> IFS T511-T319 L91 </td> <td> MetUM N216 L85 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Ocean </td> <td> NEMO 1°/0.25° L75 </td> <td> NEMO 1°/0.25°, L75 </td> <td> NEMO 1°, L75 </td> <td> NEMO 0.25o×0.25o L75 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Sea ice </td> <td> LIM3 </td> <td> GELATO </td> <td> LIM2/3 </td> <td> CICE </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Land </td> <td> HTESSEL </td> <td> SURFEX </td> <td> HTESSEL </td> <td> JULES </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Data assimilation </td> <td> Ensemble Kalman filter </td> <td> Extended Kalman Filter SAM2 </td> <td> 4D-Var </td> <td> 4D-Var, NEMOVAR 3D-Var FGAT </td> </tr> </table> Table 3: Numerical weather prediction systems. <table> <tr> <th> Model </th> <th> ARPEGE </th> <th> AROME </th> <th> IFS </th> <th> AROME-Arctic </th> </tr> <tr> <td> Partner </td> <td> CNRS-GAME </td> <td> CNRS-GAME </td> <td> ECMWF </td> <td> Met.no </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Atmosphere </td> <td> ARPEGE T1198, stretched HR </td> <td> AROME 1.3km / 500m, 90 vertical </td> <td> IFS T1279 L137 </td> <td> AROME 2.5 km L65 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> (7.5km on grid pole), L105 </td> <td> levels </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Ocean </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> N/A </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Sea ice </td> <td> GELATO </td> <td> GELATO </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> SICE </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Land </td> <td> SURFEX </td> <td> SURFEX </td> <td> HTESSEL </td> <td> SURFEX </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Data assimilation </td> <td> 4D-Var </td> <td> dynamical adaptation </td> <td> 4D-Var </td> <td> 3D-Var </td> </tr> </table> In the original version of this data management plan, the total amount of data was not known. This is still not known in detail, but some information on the expected volumes for publication is known (this is a consequence of the “partial dissemination” term used in Table 4). The ECMWF YOPP dataset is excluded from this overview currently. The major volumes to be disseminated through the data management system are the ECMWF YOPP dataset, and seasonal forecasts and potentially climate forecasts from WP5. Preliminary estimates (maximum values) of the volumes (Tb) planned for dissemination are currently: * ECMWF YOPP dataset ◦ Analysis and forecast dataset, including process tendencies, amounting to a total volume of 300 Tb. * WP 5 Seasonal forecasts ◦ Three different models, each producing in total approximately 20 Tb throughout the project. In total approximately 60 Tb. * WP 5 Climate change simulations ◦ One model in standard resolution approximately 20 Tb. ◦ One model in high resolution as well, approximately 685 Tb, would be available for dissemination. However, in practice only a subset of the data will be useful to the wider community, and hence significant data volume reduction is being considered for dissemination. ### ECMWF YOPP data Within APPLICATE, ECMWF has begun to generate an extended two-year global dataset to support the World Meteorological Organization’s Year of Polar Prediction (YOPP). The start of production was timed to coincide with the official launch of YOPP in Geneva, Switzerland, on 15 May. The dataset is intended to support YOPP’s goal of boosting polar forecasting capacity. In addition to the usual forecast data stored at ECMWF, it will include additional parameters for research purposes. These include ‘tendencies’ in physical processes modelled in ECMWF’s Integrated Forecasting System (IFS). More information on the ECMWF YOPP dataset is available from ECMWF. The actual data is available through the ECMWF YOPP Data Portal. This are discoverable through APPLICATE Data Portal as well as the YOPP Data Portal. ## Making data findable, including provisions for metadata [fair data] APPLICATE is following a metadata driven approach, utilizing internationally accepted standards and protocols for documentation and exchange of discovery and use metadata. This ensures interoperability at the discovery level with international systems and frameworks, including WMO Information System (WIS), Year of Polar Prediction (YOPP), and many national and international Arctic and marine data centers (e.g. Svalbard Integrated Arctic Earth Observing System). APPLICATE data management is distributed in nature, relying on a number of data centres with a long-term mandate. This ensures preservation of the scientific legacy. The approach chosen is in line with lessons learned from the International Polar Year, and the ongoing efforts by the combined SAON/IASC Arctic Data Committee to establish an Arctic data ecosystem. APPLICATE promotes the implementation of Persistent Identifiers at each contributing data centre. Some have this in place, while others are in the process of establishing this. Although application of globally resolvable Persistent Identifiers (e.g. Digital Object Identifiers) is not required, it is promoted by the APPLICATE data management system. However, each contributing data centre has to support locally unique and persistent identifiers if Digital Object Identifiers or similar are not supported. Concerning naming conventions, APPLICATE requires that controlled vocabularies are used both at the discovery level and the data level to describe the content. Discovery level metadata must identify the convention used and the convention has to be available in machine readable form (preferably through Simple Knowledge Organisation System). The fallback solution for controlled vocabularies is the Global Change Master Directory vocabularies. The search model of the data management system is based on GCMD Science Keywords for parameter identification through discovery metadata. At the data level the Climate and Forecast Convention is used for all NetCDF files. For data encoded using WMO standards, GRIB and BUFR, the standard approach at the host institute is followed. All discovery metadata records are required to include GCMD Science Keywords. Furthermore, CMOR standards will be employed for some of the climate model simulations, especially those contributing to CMIP6. Versioning of data is required for the data published in the data management system. Details on requirements for how to define a new version of a dataset is to be agreed, but the general principles include that a new version of a model dataset is defined if the physical basis for the model has changed (e.g. modification of spatial and temporal resolution, number of vertical levels and internal dynamics or physics). Integration of datasets (e.g. to create a long time series) is encouraged, but these datasets must be clearly documented. The APPLICATE data management system can consume and expose discovery metadata provided in GCMD DIF and ISO19115. If ISO19115 is used, GCMD keywords must be used to describe physical and dynamical parameters. Support for more formats is being considered. More specifications will be identified early in the project. As ISO19115 is a container that can be used in many contexts, APPLICATE promotes the application of the WMO Profile for discovery metadata. This is based on ISO19115. APPLICATE will be more pragmatic than WMO accepting records that not fully qualify in all aspects. The dialogue on what is required will be aligned with the ongoing efforts of the combined SAON /IASC Arctic Data Committee to ensure integration with relevant scientific communities. APPLICATE will integrate with the YOPP Data Portal to make sure that APPLICATE datasets are discoverable through the YOPP Data Portal. This will be implemented letting the YOPP Data Portal harvest the relevant discovery metadata from the APPLICATE data catalogue. ## Making data openly accessible [fair data] All discovery metadata will be available through a web based search interface available through the central project website (applicate.met.no 2 ). Some data may have temporal access restrictions (embargo period). These will be handled accordingly. Valid reasons for an embargo period on data are primarily for educational reasons, allowing Ph.D. students to prepare and publish their work. Even if data constrained in the embargo period, data will be shared internally in the project. Any disagreements on access to data or misuse of data internally are to be settled by the APPLICATE Executive Board. Data in the central repository will be made available through a THREDDS Data Server, activating OPeNDAP support for all datasets and OGC Web Map Service for visualisation of gridded datasets. Standardisation of data access interfaces and linkage to the Common Data Model through OPeNDAP 3 is promoted for all data centres contributing to APPLICATE. This enables direct access of data within analysis tools like Matlab, Excel 4 and R. Activation of these interfaces to data are recommended for other contributing data centres as well. Metadata and data for the datasets are maintained by the responsible data centres (including the central data repository). Metadata supporting unified search is harvested and ingested in the central node (through applicate.met.no) where it will be made available through human (web interface) and machine interfaces (OAI-PMH, support for OpenSearch is considered). Datasets with restrictions are initially handled by the responsible data centre. Generally, the metadata will be searchable and contain information on how to request access to the dataset. An example of a dataset with access restrictions is the ECMWF YOPP dataset where user registration is required. Access to information about the dataset does however not require registration ## Making data interoperable [fair data] In order to be able to reuse data, standardisation is important. This implies both standardisation of the encoding/documentation, as well as the interfaces to the data. Further up in the document, it is referred to documentation standards widely used by the modelling communities. This includes encoding model output as NetCDF files, following the Climate and Forecast convention or the WMO GRIB format. The WMN formats are table driven formats where the tables identify the content and makes it interoperable. NetCDF files following the CF convention is self-describing and interoperable. Application of the CF conventions implies requirements on the structure and semantic annotation of data (e.g. through identification of variables/parameters through CF standard names). Furthermore, it requires encoding of missing values etc. To simplify the process of accessing data, APPLICATE recommends all data centres to support OPeNDAP. OPeNDAP allows streaming of data and access without downloading the data as physical files. If OPeNDAP is not supported, straightforward HTTP access must be supported. In order to ensure consistency between discovery level and use level metadata, a system for translation of discovery metadata keywords (i.e. GCMD Science keywords) to CF Standard names is under development. This implies that e.g. controlled vocabularies used in the documentation of data may be mapped on the fly to vocabularies used by other communities. This is in line with current activities in the SAON/IASC Arctic Data Committee. ## Increase data re-use (through clarifying licenses) [fair data] APPLICATE promotes free and open data sharing in line with the Open Research Data Pilot. Each dataset needs a license attached. The recommendation in APPLICATE is to use Creative Commons attribution license for data. See https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ for details. APPLICATE data should be delivered in a timely manner meaning without un-due delay. Any delay, due or un-due, shall not be longer than one year after the dataset is finished. Discovery metadata shall be delivered immediately. APPLICATE is promoting free and open access to data. Some data may have constraints (e.g. on access or dissemination) and may be available to members only initially. Furthermore, some of the data will be used for modelling development purposes and are thus of limited interest to the broader community; these data will not be made publicly available. A draft dissemination plan was outlined in the proposal and is provided in Table 4. This will be updated as the project progresses. Table 4: Draft dissemination plan. <table> <tr> <th> Purpose </th> <th> Model systems </th> <th> Experimental design </th> <th> Data </th> </tr> <tr> <td> Determine the impact of model enhancements on process representation and systematic model error (WP2) </td> <td> * AWI-CM * EC-Earth * CNRM-CM * NorESM * HadGEM </td> <td> Baseline data: CMIP6-DECK experiments Implement the model changes suggested in WP2 in coupled models: • 200-yr pre- industrial control experiments • CMIP6 historical experiments • 1% CO 2 increase experiments </td> <td> Partial Dissemination </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Determine Arctic- lower latitude linkages in atmosphere and ocean (WP3) </td> <td> Coupled models * AWI-CM * EC-Earth * CNRM-CM * NorESM * HadGEM </td> <td> Large ensembles (50-100 members) of 12-months experiments starting June 1st with sea ice constrained to observed and projected sea ice fields Multi- decadal experiments with and without artificially reduced Arctic sea ice (enhanced downwelling LW radiation over sea ice); use of tracers for the ocean Repeat with enhanced models </td> <td> Full Dissemination </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Atmospheric models * ECHAM6 * IFS * ARPEGE- Climat * CAM-OSLO * MetUM </td> <td> Large ensembles (50-100 members) of 12-months experiments starting June 1st with sea ice constrained to observed and projected sea ice fields Various corresponding sensitivity experiments to explore the role of the background flow, and the prescribed sea ice pattern Repeat with enhanced models </td> <td> Full Dissemination </td> </tr> </table> <table> <tr> <th> </th> <th> Seasonal prediction systems • EC-Earth • CNRM-CM </th> <th> Seasonal prediction experiments with and without relaxation of the Arctic atmosphere towards ERA-Interim reanalysis data: 9-member ensemble forecasts with members initialized on Nov 1st, Feb 1st, May 1st and Aug 1st for the years 1979-2016 and 19932016 for EC-Earth and CNRM-CM, respectively. </th> <th> Full Dissemination </th> </tr> <tr> <td> Arctic observing system development (WP4) </td> <td> Atmospheric model • IFS </td> <td> Data denial experiments with the IFS for key observations (snow, surface pressure, wind, moisture) and different seasons. </td> <td> Partial dissemination </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Seasonal prediction * EC-Earth * HadGEM * GloSea </td> <td> \- Perfect model experiments to characterize basic sensitivity of forecasts to initial conditions. - Different configurations of initial conditions using reanalyses, new observations, ocean reruns forced by atmospheric reanalyses. - Experiments focused on sea-ice thickness, snow and spatial data sampling </td> <td> Partial dissemination </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Determine the impact of APPLI- CATE model enhancements on weather and climate prediction (WP5) </td> <td> Atmospheric model * ARPEGE * AROME * IFS * AROME-Arctic </td> <td> Test recommendations for model enhancements made in WP2 in pre- operational configurations Explore the impact of nesting, driving model and resolution </td> <td> Partial dissemination </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Seasonal prediction * EC-Earth * CNRM-CM * HadGEM </td> <td> Test recommendations for model enhancements made in WP2 in pre- operational configurations </td> <td> Partial dissemination </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> Climate change * AWI-CM * EC-Earth * NorESM * AWI-CM </td> <td> Establish the impact of model enhancements developed in WP2 on climate sensitivity by carrying out experiments using the same initial conditions and time period (1950—2050) employed in HiResMIP climate sensitivity by carrying out experiments using the same initial 2050) employed in HiResMIP climate sensitivity by carrying out experiments using the same initial conditions and time period (1950—2050) employed in HiResMIP </td> <td> Partial dissemination </td> </tr> </table> The quality of each dataset is the responsibility of the Principal Investigator. The Data Management System will ensure the quality of the discovery metadata and that datasets are delivered according to the format specifications. Numerical simulations and analysed products will be preserved for at least 10 years after publication. # Allocation of resources In the current situation, it is not possible to estimate the cost for making APPLICATE data FAIR. Part of the reason is that this work is relying on existing functionality at the contributing data centres and that this functionality has been developed over years. The cost of preparing the data in accordance with the specifications and initial sharing is covered by the project. Maintenance of this over time is covered by the business models of the data centres. A preliminary list of data centres involved is given in Table 5. Table 5: As of autumn 2018, the following data centres are contributing to the APPLICATE project. <table> <tr> <th> Data centre </th> <th> URL </th> <th> Contact </th> <th> Comment </th> </tr> <tr> <td> BSC </td> <td> https://www.bsc.es/ </td> <td> Pierre-Antoine Bretonniére </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> ECMWF </td> <td> https://www.ecmwf.int </td> <td> Manuel Fuentes </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> DKRZ </td> <td> http://www.dkrz.de </td> <td> Thomas Jung </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Norwegian Meteoro- logical Institute/Arctic Data Centre </td> <td> https://applicate.met.no/ </td> <td> Øystein Godøy </td> <td> This subsystem will provide a unified search interface to all the data APPLICATE is generating. It will also host data not being hosted by other data centres contributing to APPLICATE. Metadata interfaces are available, data interoperability supported using OGC WMS and OPeNDAP. Will integrate relevant data from WMO GTS. </td> </tr> </table> Each data centre is responsible for accepting, managing, sharing and preserving the relevant datasets. Concerning interoperability interfaces the following interfaces are required: 1. Metadata 1. OAI-PMH serving either CCMD DIF or the ISO19115 minimum profile with GCMD Science Keywords. Dedicated sets should be available to identify APPLICATE data in large data collections. 2. Data (will also use whatever is available and deliver this in original form, for those data no synthesis products are possible without an extensive effort) 1. OGC WMS (actual visual representation, not data) 2. OPeNDAP In the current situation, long-term preservation of 50 Tb for 10 years is covered. Volumes to be preserved are still somewhat uncertain and the storage costs for some of the data produced in the project are covered by other projects/activities, e.g. the CMIP6 data and operational models. For some of these data only preservation of minor datasets is required by APPLICATE. All data that will contribute to CMIP6 will be stored in data centres contributing to the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF). APPLICATE data centres contributing to this will be shown in the table above. For APPLICATE, the experiments contributing to the Polar Amplification Model Intercomparison Project (PA-MIP) will be managed in a ESGF data centre. # Data security Data security relies on the existing mechanisms of the contributing data centres. APPLICATE recommends ensuring the communication between data centres and users with secure HTTP. Concerning the internal security of the data centre, APPLICATE recommends the best practises from OAIS. The technical solution will vary between data centres, but most data centres have solutions using automated check sums and replication. The central node relies on secure HTTP, but not all contributing data centres support this yet. # Ethical aspects APPLICATE is not concerned with ethical sensitive data and follows the guidance of the IASC Statement of Principles and Practises for Arctic Data Management. # Other APPLICATE is linked to WMO’s Year of Polar Prediction activity. In this context APPLICATE is relating to the WMO principles for data management identified through the WMO Information System.	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0005_Made4You_780298.md	Introduction The Made4You project is committed to high quality output and responsible research and innovation. Thus, this document defines a set of procedures that the consortium is committed to adhere to and to improve in the course of the project. Openness and transparency are two of the guiding principles that the reader will see reflected in the different processes and methods described. At the same time there is a strong awareness within the consortium related to privacy and data protection of individual citizens. These core principles underlying the research work in Made4You correspond with the practices related to Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). Section 2 below describes the management structures, including the nominees for the various boards. Section 3 is dedicated to specific quality management procedures, including communication structures and tools, the peer reviewing process for high quality deliverables as well as risk management, SWOT and other quality assurance means. In Section 4 the technical infrastructure for communication and collaboration is presented. Section 5 presents the RRI policies and identifies the most relevant aspects for Made4You. It includes the ethical approach and guidelines that the project is following (together with deliverables D8.1 and D8.2). In Section 6 the consortium’s strategy towards openness is described and relates to open source in terms of software as well as open access in terms of publications and other project results. Finally, Section 7 draws the conclusions that are relevant for a high quality implementation of the project. The appendix includes examples of templates mentioned throughout the document. 2 Management structure Both the Grant Agreement (GA) and the Consortium Agreement (CA) specify a number of bodies for the management of the project. Though the GA and CA, being legal documents, take precedence over this handbook, the following sections specify the operational view of these bodies. Made4You is a large-scale innovation action aiming at a wide community on a global scale. Therefore, the management structure and procedures work in a flexible manner in order to: * Achieve integration of all consortium members and to mobilise their expertise, knowledge and networks in every stage of the project * Efficiently coordinate the processing of the work plan in a collaborative environment * Continuously involve contextual expertise and knowledge of relevant stakeholders (patients, families, healthcare professionals, makers) and their networks Our approach is a combination of integration and decentralisation strategies. _Integration_ is achieved through the composition of a consortium with complementary skills and knowledge, the development of a joint framework, the agreement on common guidelines for co-design activities, the joint work on the platform and community development, and project workshops and meetings. The resources of all partners will be mobilised by _decentralisation of responsibilities_ through the assignment of leadership for work packages and defined work package tasks with a clear task sharing based on the different competence fields of the partners. Figure 1: Made4You – Management Structure: responsible roles in management The management structure defines the basic roles and responsibilities. The Coordinator (Dr. Barbara Kieslinger, ZSI) is responsible for the overall line of actions and the day-to-day management carried out by the project. Additional ZSI staff is providing financial and administrative support to the coordinator. The Project Coordinator is supported by the WP leaders in the strategic coordination of the innovation action. In addition, the Community Manager, who is also coordinating the dissemination and exploitation WP, is responsible for the coordination of the Made4You extended network. In close cooperation with the project manager the community manager will take care of the broad visibility of the project, amongst specific stakeholder groups and will have a special interest in the exploitation and transferability of the project results. ## 2.1 Work Package (WP) The work package (WP) is the building block of the project. The WP leader * organizes the WP and coordinates the different tasks, * prepares and chairs WP meetings, * organizes the production of the results of the WP, • represents the WP in the Project Management Board. Each work package has been appointed a Work Package Leader who is responsible for the progress within the work package and who is supported by task leaders and other members of the consortium involved in each of the WPs. Clear responsibilities (based on the competences of each partner) are described in the Work Package Description. Current WP leaders are shown in Table 1. <table> <tr> <th> Workpackage </th> <th> Lead partner </th> <th> Name </th> </tr> <tr> <td> WP1 Engagement & Community Growth </td> <td> WAAG </td> <td> Jurre Ongering </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP2 Pilot Open Solutions </td> <td> MAKEA </td> <td> Daniel Heltzel </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP3 Platform & Tooling </td> <td> OPEN </td> <td> Enrico Bassi </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP4 Evaluation & Impact Assessment </td> <td> ZSI </td> <td> Teresa Schäfer </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP5 Dissemination & Outreach </td> <td> GIG </td> <td> Sandra Mamitzsch </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP6 Lethal & Ethical Aspects </td> <td> KUL </td> <td> Erik Kamenjasevic </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP7 Project Management </td> <td> ZSI </td> <td> Barbara Kieslinger </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP8 Ethical requirements </td> <td> ZSI </td> <td> Barbara Kieslinger </td> </tr> </table> Table 1 Current WP leaders ## 2.2 Project Management Board (PMB) The project is managed through the Project Management Board (PMB). It provides the overall direction for the project, both strategic and operational. The PMB maintains the project directions and obtains advice from the Work Package Leaders, to ensure that the project meets its stated and implied goals. The PMB ultimately supervises all project management processes, including initiation, planning, execution, control, and closure of project phases. Within this framework, the Work Package Leaders coordinate the detailed planning, execution and control of the technical tasks to meet the project’s scientific and technical objectives relevant to their work packages. The Project Management Board is responsible for the proper execution and implementation of the decisions of the General Assembly and makes suggestions to the General Assembly on pending decision such as: * Accept or reject changes to the work plan, changes in the Grant Agreement and amendments to the Consortium Agreement * Make changes in the Project Management structure The PMB is chaired by the Project Coordinator and composed of the Work Package Leaders plus a representative from partners not leading a work package. The PMB is currently composed of the persons listed in Table 2 below. <table> <tr> <th> Partner </th> <th> Partner manager </th> </tr> <tr> <td> ZSI </td> <td> Barbara Kieslinger </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WAAG </td> <td> Jurre Ongering </td> </tr> <tr> <td> OPEN </td> <td> Enrico Bassi </td> </tr> <tr> <td> GIG </td> <td> Sandra Mamitzsch </td> </tr> <tr> <td> MAKEA </td> <td> Daniel Heltzel </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WEV </td> <td> Richard Hulskes </td> </tr> <tr> <td> KUL </td> <td> Erik Kamenjasevic </td> </tr> <tr> <td> TOG </td> <td> Chiara Nizzola </td> </tr> </table> Table 2: Partner managers ## 2.3 General Assembly (GA) The General Assembly is the ultimate decision-making body of the consortium and functions as highest authority, as last resort of all relevant project decisions. The body consists of one representative per partner. A face-to-face general assembly comprising all project consortium partners will take place at least once a year, to coordinate overall project work. Additional extraordinary meetings can be held at any time upon request of the PMB or 1/3 of the members of the GA. Within the project, the general assembly will function as highest authority, as last resort of all relevant project decisions. Decisions taken by the General Assembly include the content, e.g. changes in the Description of Action (DoA), finances and intellectual property rights. This body also has the right to decide on the evolution of the partnership (e.g. entry of new partner), and the project as such (e.g. termination of the project). ## 2.4 Made4You Advisory Board The Made4You Advisory Board (MAB) is a group of persons from outside the project. The MAB will be consulted for important decisions that affect the direction of research and/or are related to adoption of the results from the Made4You project. The MAB members are listed in Table 3. <table> <tr> <th> MAB member </th> <th> Affiliation </th> </tr> <tr> <td> Sherry Lassiter </td> <td> President of Fab Foundation, MIT </td> </tr> <tr> <td> John Schull </td> <td> Co-founder eNABLE </td> </tr> <tr> <td> David Ott </td> <td> Global Humanitarian Lab </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Raul Krauthausen </td> <td> Sozialhelden </td> </tr> </table> Table 3: MAB members During the Kick-off meeting it was decided that this group of external experts can still be expanded with 2-3 persons for strategic purpose. ## 2.5 Consortium Agreement (CA) Before the start of the project a consortium agreement has been signed by all partners. It defines the specific operational procedures for the different project bodies described above. This includes, amongst other aspects, the responsibilities of the parties and their liabilities towards each other as well as the governance structure, financial provision and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) issues. The consortium agreement also describes the decision making structures and defines the General Assembly as the ultimate decision making body. # 3 Quality procedures and Code of Conduct Quality assurance is of high priority in collaborative research, such as Made4You, and the consortium is committed to a set of quality procedures to guarantee high quality project output. Measures to ensure good quality include e.g. the definition of internal communication structures, regular internal reflections on risks and a proper SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats Analysis) as well as a defined peer review process for any project deliverable. The detailed procedures will be described in more detail in the following sections. ## 3.1 Internal communication structures & procedures Internal communication is first and foremost based on the concept of openness and transparency. An active communication strategy is implemented to establish a strong project identity in order to obtain maximum transparency for all partners involved, and to increase synergy in cooperation. Daily communication among the WPs, the partners, etc. is established mainly through . e-mails and a central mailing list including all project partners, . a Slack group for quick communication across teams and partners, . a project space hosted at the ZSI (Nextcloud) for internal exchange and online storage of all documents as well as offline communication; https://wolke1.zsi.at/, . web-conferencing (Skype) for regular online meetings, . face-to-face communication (during physical project meetings). The consortium partners meet approximately every three to four months face-to- face (at synchronisation points) to coordinate the progress.Each month, at least one virtual consortium meeting takes place via video conferencing, currently Skype. These meetings ensure the internal communication among partners, allow the WP Leaders/thematic leaders to coordinate the various tasks, and report the progress of work to the team members. During the meeting “live minutes” will be produced and are made accessible to all partners, to view at a later time. Each team reports about latest updates before a meeting in a shared document, all participants are invited to get an update before the meeting starts and the most relevant issues are then discussed during the meetings. The minutes are available on the Nextcloud. In addition to these virtual consortium meetings, thematic groups (similar to WPs, but overlapping in some cases) have started to emerge during the kick-off meeting and virtual meetings are organised by these working groups. Similar to the consortium meetings notes and recordings are available on the Nextcloud and each member of the consortium is invited to attend any of these meetings. ## 3.2 External communication structures & procedures The communication strategy also aims to effectively communicate with parties outside the consortium, especially since Made4You is an innovation action that aims at reaching and engaging a broad audience to create impact. Stakeholders will be addressed via the community engagement and communications strategy, which is coordinated in a collaborative effort by WP1 and WP5. The “ComCom” working group is elaborating the details for the external communication in terms of procedures and material. Basically different communication options will be elaborated for the different target groups. Most importantly, it should be mentioned that Made4You decided to promote the name of the platform, Careables (http://www.careables.org) , and to use the project name Made4You mainly for administrative purposes. ## 3.3 Quality of (non-)deliverables and peer review A peer-review process for the Made4You project is set up in order to obtain and guarantee the quality of the deliverables (documentation, reports, prototypes, etc.) that will be produced during the course of the project and delivered to the European Commission, offered to the Made4You stakeholders and more globally to the general public. This section describes standards for the Made4You deliverables and presents the peer-review procedure. A checklist for the deliverables and a template for peer-review reports are given in Appendices to this document. ### 3.3.1 Deliverables Made4You deliverables serve different purposes. They are a communication means within the consortium and communication with other people outside the consortium. They are aimed at transferring the know-how, to exploit the results and knowledge generated by the project. Deliverables should be written with their target readers in mind. They should be concise and easy to follow. The readability of a document is a vital ingredient for its success. The following general structure should be followed and is as such provided in the deliverable template of the project: * Cover page * Amendment History * List of Authors/Contributors * Table of Contents * Abbreviations/Acronyms * Executive summary * Introductory part * Core part * References * Annexes (optional) Annex I includes a checklist that should serve as a guideline when preparing a deliverable. A Made4You deliverable may be comprised of one or more volumes and may consist of the following parts: * The _Main part_ is the part that summarises the results for high-level executives, technical managers and experts with decision-making competence. It is typically one document and may contain Appendices * _Annexes_ are optional and have detailed technical information for experts and implementers. They are added to the main part at the end of the document Project deliverables may be classified according to different confidentiality levels, such as public (PU), restricted (RE) or confidential (CO). Following an open access strategy, which the project partners are committed to, all Made4You deliverables have been classified as PU regarding their dissemination level in the DoA. PU means completely public access and thus, all deliverables will be made available on the project website and/or specific open repositories (see data management plan further below. In the case consortium members want to change the level of confidentiality of any of the deliverables this requires a decision by the General Assembly and needs to be convincingly argued. In the following, steps to be taken for publishing a deliverable are listed: 1. These parts form the basis for the deliverable * Title and description of the project deliverables * The name(s) of the deliverables editor(s) * The deliverable history including names(s) of contributors and internal reviewer(s) in charge of the peer review for the deliverable 2. The people appointed to generate parts of the Deliverable – the authors – provide their contribution to the editor. 3. The editor(s) prepare draft 0.1 of the Deliverable by assembling and integrating all contributions. This draft is discussed with all authors. It is recommended to involve the internal reviewers already at this stage. 4. When the editors and the authors are satisfied with the results achieved, the editor issues draft 1.0 and puts it on the Made4You Nextcloud and sends a note to the consortium. 5. They inform the internal reviewers and ask for a quality check, opinions and constructive comments within a defined deadline (normally one week). 6. The editor deals with all the comments and problems raised, if necessary with the help of the authors. This is a critical phase due to the many interactions involved. It may be necessary to have a meeting (physical, audio- or video conference) in order to speed up the process for reaching a consensus on the amendments. 7. The editor prepares draft 2.0, puts it on the Made4You Nextcloud and informs the project manager (Dr. Barbara Kieslinger) and the whole consortium that the deliverable has reached final status and can be submitted to the EC and the reviewers. 8. The deliverable is sent to the PO and the EC reviewers only by the project manager. ### 3.3.2 Peer review process One of the feasible means to enhance the quality of the project deliverables is an internal peer review system. Made4You deliverables shall be evaluated by 2-3 reviewers so as to gather diversified and balanced viewpoints. Deliverables can be reviewed by members of the core project team or colleagues from the partner institutions as well invited external experts, for example Advisory Board members. Peer reviewers should be nominated by the editor(s) at least 3 weeks before the due date of the deliverable and communicated to the consortium. Nominated peer reviewers can turn down the invitation with clear justification (e.g. lack of expertise) and would thus be requested to nominate another candidate. Consented peer reviewers are required to produce a peer review feedback within 7-10 days after receiving the deliverable from the editor. In case of any expected delay, peer reviewers should notify the editor and the project manager immediately. During the review process, peer reviewers are encouraged to discuss the problems identified in the deliverable with the main author/editor. Peer reviewers are advised to pay particular attention to the following points: * Is the deliverable aligned with the objectives of the project and relevant work packages? * Does the deliverable make a significant contribution to the project or not? * Is the content of the deliverable focused on the intended purpose? Is the content of the deliverable presented in a precise and to-the-point manner? * Is the length of the deliverable justified? Are there superfluous or irrelevant parts that should be deleted? Are there overlong parts that should be shortened? Are there any parts that are written in flowery language and/or that are unspecific or redundant? * Are there many grammatical errors and/or typographical errors and/or incomprehensive sentences? Specifically, clear annotations indicating errors and suggested corrections are very helpful for the authors of the deliverable. The annotated deliverable may be sent back to the editor/authors via email together with the peer review report. * Does the deliverable require substantial revision or rewriting? If yes, it will facilitate the revision process if some concrete suggestions on how to improve the deliverable are given. Peer review results are described in a peer review report/e-mail (see Annex III), which contains the following information: * Basic information about the deliverable, author and peer reviewer * Comments on the length and content of the deliverable * Major strengths and weaknesses of the deliverable * Review summary If minor or substantial revisions are necessary, authors of the deliverable should make changes and produce the final version of the deliverable before due submission date. The final responsibility for the content of the deliverable remains with the editor and authors and it is thus their final decision about how to address and integrate the feedback from the peer reviewers. The review reports will be made available internally for the consortium only. Figure 2 : Peer review process ### 3.3.3 Non-deliverables For non-deliverables, such as publications and dissemination material, the procedure for deliverables will be used where applicable and with a timeline that fits the material. Since there are many types of material, this handbook cannot provide details for all cases. We distinguish the following broad categories of material. * Dissemination material (flyer, website, leaflets, popular science publications, etc.) Default reviewer is the communication manager, supported by project manager. * Scientific publication or conference presentation Reviewed by one or more team members according to focus and contributions ## 3.4 Internal surveys Made4You is committed to a continuous improvement process on the project management level. In addition to open and transparent communication and decision-making, the project management uses anonymous surveys for specific input on process management, risks and critical issues. These surveys are kept brief to ensure broad participation by each project member. The survey is distributed according to needs (no pre-defined schedule), but at least once a year (ideally before a GA meeting) to cover the following: * _Project management._ In this section, participants are asked to share their positive and negative observations about the project management processes. * _Current topics._ The second section focuses on topics that are currently important within the project. This can range from collaboration infrastructure, to satisfaction about certain results, or specific WP-level topics. A recurring topic will be questions regarding Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in order to sensitise project partners for the most relevant aspects of RRI for Made4you. * _Expectations and perceived risks_ . The third section focuses on the future and asks participants to share their perception about risks and expectations. An essential element of this survey process is that the results are discussed and reflected upon in the consortium, preferably during a face-to-face meeting. This allows for reacting to arising issues quickly and addressing them collaboratively, e.g., by adapting the agenda. ## 3.5 Risk management As stated above, internal surveys and discussions are used to check perceived concerns and risks by all consortium partners. In addition, the quarterly reports that each partner submits online (on Nextcloud) also include a section on possible risks, deviations or corrective actions to be reported to the project management. The basic risk management methodology to be followed in the project consists of four subsequent steps: * Risk identification – areas of potential risk are identified and classified. * Risk quantification – the probability of events is determined and the consequences associated with their occurrence are examined. * Risk response – methods are produced to reduce or control the risk, e.g. switch to alternative technologies. * Risk control and report – lessons learnt are documented. Risks with medium or high probability and severe impact are handled with particular caution during the project. At this point, it is expected that the project safely achieves its expected results. This is also supported by the preliminary risk analysis. Normal project risks are managed via “good- practice” project management and rely on the experience from the successful research projects that the partners have been performing. The close supervision and tight control both by the project management and by the various Boards ensure that results are available in time and with adequate quality. At the kick-off meeting a first risk analysis was performed for each of the work packages. Before the kick-off, all partners were asked to reflect on “dreams” and “fears” that they would associate with the work packages. The following two images summarise on the one hand the dreams and expectations and on the other hand the fears and risks associated with each of the work packages. Work package leaders will follow up on these aspects and reflect on contingencies should any of the identified risks, or emerging risks, start having an influence on the activities progress. In the course of the project, management is responsible for close monitoring of the overall progress and risk identification. Risk identification is however also collaboratively encouraged as part of reflective sessions during the project meetings. Early communication of risks is encouraged as well as discussions, in order to achieve a profound understanding of risks. The project management promotes an open communication culture to openly discuss any issues arising. ## 3.6 SWOT A mid-term analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) will be performed on the team and the project. This will be done during a plenary meeting and is to be used to refocus, if needed, the project in the second half of the project. The SWOT analysis is a structured planning method to evaluate the Strengths, Weaknesses Opportunities and Threats of a particular undertaking, be it for a policy or programme, a project or product or for an organization or individual. It is generally considered to be a simple and useful tool for analysing project objectives by identifying the internal and external factors that are favourable and unfavourable to achieving that objective. Strengths and weaknesses are regarded internal to the project while opportunities and threats generally relate to external factors. Strengths can be seen as characteristics of the project that give it an advantage over others while weaknesses are regarded as characteristics that place the team at a disadvantage relative to others. Opportunities comprise elements that the project could exploit to its advantage whilst threats include elements in the environment that could cause trouble for the project. Question to be answered during the SWOT analysis comprise: _Strengths (S):_ * What do we do well? What are our assets? * What advantages does the project have? What do we do better than anyone else? What unique resources can we draw upon that others can't? * What are our core competencies? What is the Unique Selling Proposition (USP)? * What do other people see as our strengths? _Weaknesses (W)_ : * What could we improve? What can we do better? * What should we avoid? * Where do we lack resources? * Which factors minimise the outcome? * What are external people likely to see as weaknesses? _Opportunities (O)_ : * Which good opportunities can we spot? What are the emerging political and social opportunities? * What interesting trends are we aware of? What are the economic trends that benefit us? * What new needs of PES and other future users could we meet? _Threats (T):_ * What obstacles do we face? * Where are we vulnerable? * Could any of our weaknesses seriously threaten our results? What are the negative political and social trends? To develop strategies that take into account the SWOT profile, a matrix can be constructed. The SWOT matrix (see below) includes strategies that make best use of strengths and opportunities and minimise weaknesses and threats. SO- Strategies pursue opportunities that are a good fit to the strengths. WO- Strategies overcome weaknesses to pursue opportunities. ST-Strategies identify ways in which the project can use its strengths to reduce its vulnerability to external threats. WT-Strategies establish a defensive plan to prevent the weaknesses from making it highly susceptible to external threats. <table> <tr> <th> SWOT Matrix </th> <th> Strengths </th> <th> Weaknesses </th> </tr> <tr> <td> Opportunities </td> <td> SO-Strategies </td> <td> WO-Strategies </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Threats </td> <td> ST-Strategies </td> <td> WT-Strategies </td> </tr> </table> Figure 5: SWOT Matrix After the first matrix has been drawn from the answers by the consortium, the following questions should be answered during the discussion and establishment of the project strategy: * How to make best use of strengths and opportunities? * How to best minimise weaknesses by making best use of opportunities? * How to make best use of strengths by reducing risk of threats? * How to best minimise weaknesses even with the expected threats? While SWOT can be a good complementary tool for analysing the project and redefining strategy, it has also several blind spots. These comprise, for instance that SWOT is a linear analysis and an expert's or group’s monophonic analysis. In the case of the Made4You project some external view, e.g. from the Advisory Board would give an important complementary interpretation of the project development. Overall, SWOT is an easy usable tool that provides quick access to the positive and negative aspects of a project and its environment and seems appropriate for the Made4You project to be performed mid-term. ## 3.7 Project templates Made4You intends to use a consistent ‘project style’. This is implemented by providing templates for deliverables and reports, presentations, posters and other dissemination and communication material. More project style templates can be produced by the communication and outreach team when needed. At the kick-off meeting the consortium decided to name the central platform of the project “Careables”. Thus, the main message in any promotional material will focus on the advertising Careables (http://www.careables.org). All available project style templates are available on the shared workspace on Nextcloud. # 4 Tools and collaboration infrastructure While the previous section was concerned with the processes of communication and collaboration there is also a technical side to this and a number of technical tools are used to provide the Made4You collaboration infrastructure. It consists of several pieces: * Made4You mailing list is used for project-wide asynchronous communication. The address of the mailing list is: [email protected]_ * Slack for ad-hoc communication to the whole team as well as to different subgroups and individual team members; * Skype is used for regular web conferencing (monthly meetings) * Nextcloud (https://wolke1.zsi.at/) is used for sharing files and for real-time cocreation of documents * e-mail and telephone are used for bilateral communication * Careables Website (http://www.careables.org) is the main portal for sharing open healthcare solutions and also used for presenting our work to the public The choice for this collaboration structures has been made taking into consideration practical aspects as well as privacy and data protection issues related to the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Figure 6 : Nextcloud Workspace for Made4You 5 Responsible research and innovation (RRI) 5.1 What is RRI? Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has been formulated and widely promoted as guiding principle and policy concept by the European Commission to better align science with society and to meet the so called grand challenges 1 . It has been promoted as a cross-cutting issue within the H2020 research programme. A widely accepted definition describes RRI as “a transparent, interactive process by which societal actors and innovators become mutually responsive to each other with a view on the (ethical) acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability of the innovation process and its marketable products” (Schomberg, 2013). Others’ definitions of RRI (c.f. Jacob et al., 2013; Owen et al., 2013) might slightly differ from Von Schomberg’s but as described by Wickson & Carey (2014) the overall common accordance is that responsible research and innovation should (1) address significant socio-ecological needs and challenges, (2) actively engage different stakeholders, (3) anticipate potential problems and assess available alternatives and reflect on underlying values and beliefs and (4) to adapt according to these ideas. Generally speaking, RRI is doing science and innovation with and for society by re- imaging the science-society relationship. According to the European Commission (Jacob et al., 2013), RRI comprises the following key dimensions 2 : 1. Governance : Governance of policymakers to prevent harmful or unethical developments in research and innovation 2. Open Access : Open access to research results and publications to boost innovation and increase the use of scientific results 3. Ethics : Research must respect ethical standards and fundamental rights to respond to societal challenges 4. Gender : Gender equality and in a wider sense diversity 5. Public Engagement : Engagement of all societal actors (researchers, industry, policy makers, civil society) in a reflective research process 6. Science education : Enhancement of current education processes to better equip future researchers and society as a whole with the necessary competences to participate in research processes In addition to these key dimensions, which are reflected in the European policy agendas, RRI can also be defined with regards to its process requirements which include openness and transparency, anticipation and reflection, responsiveness and adaptive change and diversity and inclusion. Figure 7, which stems from the RRI-Tools project 3 where the ZSI has been a core partner, shows an integrative view on these tow perspectives, which complement each other. 2 A different operationalisation is described by Wickson and Carew (2014) who describe RRI from a process perspective with the following quality criteria: 1. Socially relevant and Solution oriented; 2. Sustainability centered and Future scanning; 3. Diverse and Deliberative; 4. Reflexive and Responsive; 5. Rigorous and Robust; 6. Creative and Elegant; and 7. Honest and Accountable 3 http://www.rri-tools.eu Figure 7: Overview of key dimensions and process requirements of RRI according to RRI-Tools project In the following, we briefly describe the six key dimensions and how they related to Made4You. ## 5.2 Governance Among the six key dimensions of RRI, governance has a slightly different function compared to the others, as it is rather an organising and steering principle that determinates the success of all other RRI dimensions. In other words, RRI relies on good governing structures for the promotion of RRI. Governance methods range from foresight techniques (scenario studies, value sensitive design, etc.), assessment (ethical committees, needs assessment, technology assessment, etc.), agenda setting (consultation, co-creation, etc.) to regulation (code of conduct, policies, funding guidelines, etc.). Currently, governance of RRI is rarely seen on a project level; it is rather applied on funding level or within organisations, e.g. to call for organisation-wide RRI guidelines and policies. The Made4You project can be perceived as an attempt to tackle RRI on a project level. However, comprehensive RRI guidelines for projects are still missing and thus this handbook together with the deliverables D8.1 and D8.2 will aim at meeting this need. Also, it has to be acknowledged that governance structures need to be at least on institutional level in order to be sustainable. On a project level however, it makes sense to break down what RRI in the specific context means and how it can be adapted to the project particularities. ## 5.3 Open access In the narrower sense, open access is about enabling or giving access to research results and publications to the public. It addresses only the final stage of research activity, the publication and dissemination phase. With the launch of Horizon 2020 it has become mandatory to follow open access publication strategies (European Commission, 2012) . Open access, in the narrow sense, is different from open science, open innovation and open data, although there are obvious overlaps. For instance, in contrast to open access, open science implies opening up the whole science process in real time to the public, from choosing areas to investigate in, formulating the research questions to choosing the methods, collecting data and finally discussing the results. Open science means democratising science and research, usually through ICT. When talking about open access in the context of Made4You we refer to open access in the narrower sense. Our project will basically follow an open access publication strategy, but will also make data available to the public at an earlier stage where suitable (c.f. chapter 6). ## 5.4 Ethics The European Commission defines ethics as key dimension of RRI as follows: _“European society is based on shared values. In order to adequately respond to societal challenges, research and innovation must respect fundamental rights and the highest ethical standards. Beyond the mandatory legal aspects, this aims to ensure increased societal relevance and acceptability of research and innovation outcomes. Ethics should not be perceived as a constraint to research and innovation, but rather as a way of ensuring high quality results.” (p.4)_ 2 Ethics thereby shall not be perceived as a constraint but rather as a guiding principle to help ensure high quality outcomes and to justify decisions. This is also the case for Made4You. A specific work package (WP6) is dedicated to legal and ethical aspects. We will deal with the three main aspects of ethics as defined by the European Commission (2015), namely 1) Research integrity and good research practice, 2) Research ethics for the protection of research objects, and 3) Societal relevance and ethical acceptability of research and innovation outcomes. Ethics further implies social justice and inclusion aspects: The widest range of societal actors and civil society shall benefit from research and innovation outcomes. In other words, products and services as a result of Research & Innovation (R&I) activities shall be acceptable and affordable for different social groups, which is also a special goal of Made4You. Ethics is an integral part of responsible research, from the conceptual phase to the publication of research results. The consortium of Made4You is clearly committed to show appreciation of potential ethical issues that may arise during the course of the project and has as such defined a set of procedures on how to deal with ethics in a responsible way. The main aspects the project is dealing with in regards to ethics are the protection of identity, privacy, obtaining informed consent and communicating benefits and risks to the involved target groups. The activities performed in Made4You may include data collection from individuals and organisations remotely as well as on site. In the following, we outline the basic processes of ethical compliance of the project with a general view on the scientific data collection. Complementary, there is also Deliverable D8.2, which describes in more detail how the patient data collection, processing and storing on the Made4You platform, called “Careables”, is compliant with the GDPR. ### Data protection and privacy During any data collection process, data protection issues with regards to handling personal data will be addressed by the following strategies: Participants, who volunteer to being enrolled in our activities, will be exhaustively informed so that they are able to autonomously decide whether they consent to participate or not. The purposes of the research, the procedures as well as the handling of their data (protection, storage) will be explained. For online interviews these explanations will be a part of the initial briefing of interviewees. For face-to-face interventions, informed consent (provided in D8.1) shall be agreed and signed by both, the study participants as well as the respective research partner. The data exploitation will be in line with the respective national data protection acts. Since data privacy is under threat when data are traced back to individuals – they may become identifiable and the data may be abused – to mitigate this risk, we will anonymise all data. Data gathered through questionnaires, interviews, observational studies, focus groups, workshops and other possible data gathering methods during this research will be anonymised and therefore the data cannot be traced back to the individual. Data will be stored only in anonymous forms so the identities of the participants will only be known by the research partners involved. Raw data like interview protocols and audio files will be shared within the consortium partners only after having signed the confidentially agreement (See Annex I). Reports based on interviews, focus group and other data gathering methods will be based on aggregated information and will comprise anonymous quotations respectively. The collected data will be stored on password-protected servers at the partner institution responsible for data collection and analysis. The data will be used only within the project and will not be made accessible for any third party, unless anonymised. Sensitive data or personal will not be stored after the end of the project (incl. the time for final publications) unless required by specific national legislation. The stored data do not contain the names or addresses of participants and will be edited for full anonymity before being processed (e.g. in project reports). ### Communication strategy Study participants will be made aware of the potential benefits and identified risks of participating in the project at all times. The main means of communicating benefits and risks to the individual is the informed consent (see Deliverable D8.1). Prior to consent, each individual participant in any of the studies in MADE4YOU will be clearly informed of its goals, its possible adverse events, and the possibility to refuse to enter or to retract at any time with no consequences. This will be done through a project information sheet or the informed consent form and it will be reinforced verbally. In order to make sure that participants are able to recall what they agree upon when signing, the informed consent forms will be provided in the native language of the participants. In addition, the consortium partners will make sure that the informed consent is written in a language suitable for the target group(s). Different informed consents will be made available, e.g. consent of adult participants, parental consent, informed assent for children/minors. For media material (e.g. photos, videos) produced during any of the Made4You events a media waiver will be distributed to participants to make sure that participants are aware of this and agree/disagree to the production and use of such material by the project partners. A template for the waiver is provided in the Annex IV of this document. ### Informed consent/informed assent As stated above informed consent/assent will be collected from all participants involved in Made4You studies. The declaration of consent forms is provided in the deliverable D8.1. _Relevant regulations and scientific standards _ The consortium is following European regulations and scientific standards to perform ethical research. The following lists some of the basic regulations and guidelines. The Made4You project will fully respect the citizens’ rights as reported by EGE and as proclaimed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000/C 364/01), having as its main goal to enhance and to foster the participation of European citizens to education, regardless of cultural, linguistic or social backgrounds. Regarding the personal data collected during the research the project will make every effort to heed the rules for the protection of personal data as described in Directive 95/46/EC 3 . In addition, the consortium is following the following European Regulations and Guidelines: * The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: * European Convention on Human Rights http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf * Horizon 2020 ethics self-assessment http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/doc/call/h2020/h2020-msca-itn- 2015/1620147-h2020_-_guidance_ethics_self_assess_en.pdf * EU Code of Ethics: * European Textbook on Ethics in Research https://ec.europa.eu/research/sciencesociety/document_library/pdf_06/textbook-on-ethics-report_en.pdf * European data protection legislation * RESPECT Code of Practice for Socio-Economic Research * Code of Ethics of the International Sociological Association (ISA) ### National and Local Regulations and Standards In addition to the more general and EU-wide guidelines, project partners have to adhere to, and respect, national regulations and laws as well as to research organisational ethical approval as requested by the own institutions. All partners are aware of their responsibilities in that respect and will follow the respective guidelines. ## 5.5 Gender Gender equality generally means equal rights, opportunities, and responsibilities for both genders so that individuals can exploit and realise their full potentials independently from their sex. Gender equality as key dimension of RRI comprises two main aspects (European Commission, 2015), namely to strive for gender balanced teams in research and innovation (at operational as well as at decision making level) and the inclusion and integration of gender perspectives in research and innovation content and process. Gender analysis and gender monitoring throughout the project shall aim at looking at both aspects of gender equality, at the human capital dimension (where possible, apart from institutional conditions) and the research aspect of gender (Föger et al., 2016). In Made4You gender is mostly relevant when it comes to internal processes, such as the composition of project teams, of work package leaders, of advisory group, the use of gender sensitive language and the awareness of producing gender sensitive content. We are aware of the current imbalance in the advisory board and we will consider gender specifically in any new allocations. In line with the Toolkit on Gender in EU-funded research (European Commission, 2009) Made4You will strive at doing gender-sensitive innovation. Particularly in the following project steps gender has to be addressed and taken into account: * Project design and methodology: we will make sure that for any of our approaches in co-design and other engagement activities, we will aim at representative data in the sense that different gender perspectives will be described, where relevant. * Project implementation: Data-collection tools such as questionnaire, interview guidelines, etc. need to be gender sensitive and use gender-neutral language and have to allow for differentiation between gender perspectives. In the evaluation data analysis we will particularly pay attention whether there are differences between males and females, for instance, in terms of artefacts that are produced, in terms of communicating and sharing, etc. * Dissemination phase – reporting of data: We will use gender-neutral language in our publications. Furthermore, we will sensitively decide which visual materials to use. In addition, we will aim at publishing gender specific results. ### Science Education Science education under the RRI umbrella is meant to meet several objectives (European Commission, 2015; Föger et al., 2016): 1. To empower the society to critically reflect and to improve on their skills to be able to challenge research, thus to make them “science-literate” (in this sense, there is a great overlap with the key dimension of public engagement) 2. To enhance future researchers and other societal actors to become good RRI actors 3. To make science attractive to children and teenagers with the purpose to promote science careers, especially in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) 4. To close the gap between science and education. There is still a significant distance between the two areas. Co-design is regarded as a possible empowering tool for science education as it enables participants to shape the development of certain technologies or services according to the RRITools project. In Made4You we plan to include children in the co-design process for certain cases. In addition, educational activities and student engagement are part of the WP1 activities. They are targeted at students in the field of medicine, paramedical professions, design & arts, biomedical engineering and Fab Academy and aim to familiarise them with co-design processes. Also, the maker spaces involved in the Made4You project regularly offer educational activities to young people and schools as the maker movement has started to get attention from schools and educational authorities. ## 5.6 Public Engagement In recent years, science communication has moved from the one-way- communication approach to basically inform the general public towards public engagement, which means more elaborate and active involvement of citizens leading to collaboration and empowerment. There is a vast range of tools and methods with different levels of participation available, e.g. public consultations, public deliberations for decision making, public participation in R&I processes, Citizen Science, etc. The goal by opening up research and innovation processes to the public is to better meet the values, needs and expectations of society and thus to improve R&I and to find solutions to the so called grand challenges that society is facing (Cagnin, Amanatidou, & Keenan, 2012). Thus, realising this key dimension of RRI is an important goal in Made4You and two work packages are jointly working together to reach high quality public engagement. WP1 and WP5 are closely working on a joint strategy and have created a working team at the kick-off meeting to jointly define and execute the engagement and communication strategy of the project. ## 5.7 RRI management in Made4You The notion of Responsible Research and Innovation does not offer a checklist or one universal guideline how to do RRI. It is also not in the spirit of RRI to have such set of measures, as RRI is rather perceived as a process that requires continuous questioning and reflection. Thus, mechanisms have to be installed and embedded in the project by work package 6 and 7 to stimulate reflection of the consortium and to keep these alive throughout the lifetime of the project. We would like to point out that not all key dimensions are equally relevant for Made4You as can be inferred from the discussion above. In the following we will therefore concentrate on these key dimensions which will be dealt with in more detail. However, also the remaining dimensions shall remain in our mind- sets as we would like so continuously stimulate reflection and discussion on RRI. In order to stimulate reflection and deliberation on Responsible research and innovation and to keep these alive we have foreseen several instruments: * Ethical and legal questionnaire : a questionnaire addressing specific ethical and legal aspects has been distributed to all project partners at the beginning of the project. Questions range from the data that is being stored at the Careables platform to the data being collected to the compliance of the platform with the GDPR as well as data subjects’ rights. This questionnaire especially informs the deliverables D8.1 and D8.2 and partially also this handbook. * RRI Self-Reflection-Tool : The RRI-Tools project has developed the so called “RRI SelfReflection-Tool”. It is an online tool for different stakeholder groups and for people with different levels of knowledge on RRI. The tool is meant to comprise food for thought and to sensitise for RRI and to stimulate reflection on RRI key dimensions and process requirements. Participants can choose which questions they would like to reflect upon (since not all of them will be relevant) and receive suggestions at the end how to further improve in terms of RRI. Further resources such as best practice examples, tools or literature will be recommended. In Made4You we will invite the project partners to regularly make use of the SelfReflection –Tool. * Legal and ethics workshop : At selected consortium meetings WP6 is running a legal and ethics workshop to discuss relevant topics based on the results of the questionnaire and the experiences made by the consortium. To summarise, the main instruments for implementing RRI are the following: * ethical guidelines, including forms for informed consent and confidentiality agreement * open data management plan * RRI self-assessment tool * RRI-related legal and ethics workshops # 6 Open access and open research data The project firmly believes in openness to be a major factor for innovation and this was also one of the main motivations for Made4You, which promotes openness in healthcare. Openness has many facets. The most important ones for the Made4You consortium are, following Carlos Moedas’s (European Commissioner for Research, Science and Innovation) strategy of the 3 Os, Open Science, Open Innovation and Open Data 4 : * Open project collaboration. All partners are committed to developing (working) relationships with external partners for mutual benefit. Making contacts with similar projects and establishing collaboration is considered beneficial for all. Open collaboration in Made4You is understood in a trans-disciplinary way, opening innovation processes to the wider public and allowing new form of collaboration as intended in the co-design activities of the project. * Open source technology. From a technology perspective, the project fosters the sharing of open healthcare solutions to be shared on the Careables platform. A main aim is to share the co-designed technological artefacts with the community. Business models and exploitation strategies are not based on locking down access to project results, but on providing added value through services. * Open access to scientific results. From a scientific perspective, the consortium clearly favours open access to its scientific output, which is supported by several project members’ internal policies of supporting open access in general. * Open access to research data. Made4You is part of a pilot action on open access to research data and is thus committed to providing access not only to project results and processes, but also to data collected during that process. Although Made4You is an innovation action according to the work programme definition and not a research action, some research related data will be collected, mainly from an evaluation perspective. Although the general policy of the Made4You project is to apply “open by default” to its research data, we have to handle privacy issues with special care. Legal rules on anonymity, as described above (chapter 6), are thus highly relevant and need to be agreed with each of the participants. In case of a doubt, data privacy of our participants always prevails over open data policy. Made4You is part of the H2020 Open Research Data Pilot (ORDP), a pilot action on open access to research data, which requires projects to define and execute a data management plan. This deliverable includes the open data management plan for Made4You. The open access strategy will be detailed in the following sections. ## 6.1 Open access strategy for publications In line with the EC policy initiative on open access 5 , which refers to the practice of granting free Internet access to research articles, the project is committed to follow a publication strategy considering a mix of both 'Green open access' (immediate or delayed open access that is provided through self- archiving) and 'Gold open access' (immediate open access that is provided by a publisher) as far as possible. All deliverables labelled as “public” will be made accessible via the Made4You website (careables.org). The publications stemming from the project work will also be made available on the website as far as it does not infringe the publishers rights as well as on the OpenAIRE platform . All outcomes of the project labelled as “public” will be distributed under specific free/open license, where the authors retain the authors’ rights but the users can redistribute the content freely. The following are a few relevant sources for deciding on the specific license for each outcome: * Data: ◦ A definition of Open Data: ◦ Licenses: * Software: ◦ Free Software ▪ The definition: ▪ Licenses: ◦ Open Source Software: ▪ The definition: ▪ Licenses: * Reports, publications, media: ◦ Creative Commons ▪ Explanation: ▪ Licenses: ▪ Choose a license: ◦ Sharing publications on the project website and via OpenAIRE ## 6.2 Data management plan (DMP) This is a first version of the DMP for Made4You, which provides an analysis of the main aspects to be followed by the project’s data management policy. The DMP evolves in the course of the project and will be updated accordingly as data is collected. However, we would like to stress once more that Made4You is an innovation action and large collection of research data is thus not the focus of the project. This data management plan refers mainly to the data collected for the achievement of the project objectives, namely co-designing a platform for sharing open healthcare. Complementary to this data management plan, Deliverable D8.2. (POPD) refers to the handling of personal (sensitive) patient data. Please not that this is not addressed here. At the time of writing it is expected that the project will produce the following data: * WP1: secondary data from stakeholders. e.g. other open healthcare initiatives, associations, healthcare providers, etc. * WP2: secondary and primary data from pilot participants, e.g. demographic data * WP3: platform usage data from Careables.org * WP4: feedback data from participants in activities of other WPs, interview and questionnaire data, log data from the Careables platform, social media data and observational analysis * WP5: data from other open healthcare projects regarding Dissemination, Exploitation, Communication of the Made4You project * WP6: feedback data from participants in activities of other WPs, interview and questionnaire data This initial list includes primary (empirical) and secondary (desk-top, aggregated) data. For the currently identifiable primary research data sets, that the project will produce, we follow the requested template description as define by the European Commission 6 : <table> <tr> <th> Data set reference & name </th> <th> Data set description </th> <th> Standards & metadata </th> <th> Data sharing </th> <th> Archiving & preservation </th> </tr> <tr> <td> DOI_1 Made4You_Co-design_X </td> <td> Feedback documented directly during co-design sessions regarding the codesign process itself as well as documentation standards </td> <td> As indexed on the sharing platform e.g. Zenodo, it will have publication data, Digital Object Identifier (DOI), keywords, collections, license, uploaded by </td> <td> Shared on Zenodo, open digital repository; license will be most probably: Creative Commons Attribution Share- Alike </td> <td> Zenodo is developed by under the EU FP7 project (grant agreement no. 283595); the service is free of charge for those without ready access to an organized data centre; if this policy changes Made4You will provide the data accessible via its website for the duration of at least 5 years after project end. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> DOI_2 Made4You_Survey_X </td> <td> Survey data being collected across the pilot participants and external stakeholders; the data will be anonymised and will refer to aspects of evaluation (e.g. usability and usefulness, process feed-back, etc.) and sustainability (e.g. interest in sharing open healthcare, etc.) </td> <td> As indexed on the sharing platform e.g. Zenodo, it will have publication data, DOI, keywords, collections, license, uploaded by </td> <td> Shared on Zenodo, open digital repository; license will be most probably: Creative Commons Attribution Share- Alike </td> <td> Zenodo is developed by under the EU FP7 project (grant agreement no. 283595); the service is free of charge for those without ready access to an organized data centre; if this policy changes Made4You will provide the data accessible via its website for the duration of </td> </tr> </table> <table> <tr> <th> </th> <th> </th> <th> </th> <th> </th> <th> at least 5 years after project end. </th> </tr> <tr> <td> DOI_3 Made4You_Interview_X </td> <td> Interviews conducted with individuals being associated to any of the pilots needs to be stored anonymously; sometimes only in aggregated from, if too many details would allow to deduced a specific person. The data may be in the following format (depending on the interviews and the specific cases): * audio files * transcripts * aggregated files * interview guidelines </td> <td> As indexed on the sharing platform e.g. Zenodo, it will have publication data, DOI, keywords, collections, license, uploaded by </td> <td> Shared on Zenodo, open digital repository; license will be most probably: Creative Commons Attribution Share- Alike </td> <td> Zenodo is developed by under the EU FP7 project (grant agreement no. 283595); the service is free of charge for those without ready access to an organized data centre; if this policy changes Made4You will provide the data accessible via its website for the duration of at least 5 years after project end. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> DOI_5 Made4You_PlatformUsage_X </td> <td> Platform usage data from Careables.org (anonymous data); the data includes: Communication pattern, usage patterns, uploads, downloads, etc. </td> <td> As indexed on the sharing platform e.g. Zenodo, it will have publication data, DOI, keywords, collections, license, uploaded by </td> <td> Shared on Zenodo, open digital repository; license will be most probably: Creative Commons Attribution Share- Alike </td> <td> Zenodo is developed by under the EU FP7 project (grant agreement no. 283595); the service is free of charge for those without ready access to an organized data centre; if this policy changes </td> </tr> </table> <table> <tr> <th> </th> <th> </th> <th> </th> <th> </th> <th> Made4You will provide the data accessible via its website for the duration of at least 5 years after project end. </th> </tr> </table> D7.1 Data management plan & handbook To summarise, the main open access points for Made4You data, publications, and innovation are: * The project website: * Zenodo: * OpenAIRE for depositing publications and research data ## 6.1 Open access and open data handling process The internal procedures to grant open access to any publication, research data or other innovation stemming from the Made4You project (e.g. technology), are following a lightweight structure, while respecting ethical issues at all time. The main workflow starts at the WP level, where each team is responsible for respecting ethical procedures at all times during the data gathering and processing steps. The WP/working team members are also responsible for any data anonymization, if applicable. Agreement has to be reached within the team for making any outcome openly available; the final approval is done by the Project Management Board (see Figure 8): Figure 8 Open Access work flow : Collecting data Preparing p ublication Ethical guidelines, informed consent Approval by Project Management Board Developing standards Open Repository & www.careables.org Approval within team Anonymization … . Due to the nature of the project, the Data Management Plan may have to be revised during the course of project activities. As the co-design approach is a rather dynamic methodology it is not possible to clearly specify all data sources and collected outcomes from the beginning. Conclusions This handbook describes the main procedures of the Made4You project to operate successfully and effectively in order to achieve high quality project results following a responsible research and innovation (RRI) approach. Open access, ethics, and engagement of all societal actors are amongst the key elements of the European RRI framework (European Union, 2012). Made4You is clearly committed to respond to societal challenges in a responsible way by itself, given its main objective of open healthcare, and by the way the actions in the project are conducted. While this handbook is provided in the form of a report and deliverable, it is a living document in the sense of being updated and challenged by the consortium in the course of the project. The processes described in here are implemented in the daily work of the consortium and most of the elements (e.g. the forms for informed consent, data management plan, etc.) are separately available on the collaboration infrastructure such as Nextcloud. D7.1 Data management plan & handbook The management reports will include updates on any crucial changes in the handbook as well as on the results of specific measures such as the SWOT analysis or any additional elements added to the project structure related to high quality responsible research.	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0008_GREEN-WIN_642018.md	# Background and purpose of a Data Management Plan The GREEN-WIN Project participates in the Open Research Data Pilot , which aims to improve and maximize access to research data generated by the project. The project consortium has decided to participate in this pilot on a voluntary basis, as stated in the article 29.3 of the Grant Agreement (p. 48). The GREEN-WIN Project will therefore be monitored and receive specific support as a participant in the pilot. As stated in the “ _Guidelines on Open Access to scientific publication and research data in_ _Horizon 2020_ ”, the Open Research Data Pilot applies to two types of data: 1. the data needed to validate the results presented in scientific publications; 2\. other data as specified within the data management plan (DMP) . A DMP is a document outlining _how the research data collected or generated will be handled_ during a research project, and after the project is completed. The DMP describes _what data will be collected / generated_ and following what _methodology and standards_ , whether and _how this data will be shared and/or made open_ , and _how it will be curated and preserved_ . The “ _Guidelines on Data Management in Horizon 2020_ ” states that a first version of the DMP must be provided within six months of the project, but that the DMP is not a fixed document; it evolves and gains more precision and substance during the lifespan of the project. The DMP would need to be updated at least by the mid-term and final review to fine-tune it to the data generated and the uses identified by the consortium since not all data or potential uses are clear from the start. # Data set description ## Type of data generated According to the Grant Agreement Annex 1 (Description of Action) Part B (p. 33), the following data will be collected and generated during the GREEN-WIN project: * Qualitative data on relevant policies, policy processes and institutions, including description of actors, interests and actor-networks at national (WP2) and regional to local levels (WP4, WP5-7). * Data on business models described through a standard protocol template associated with estimated capital needs (WP4, WP5-7). * Quantitative data on financial flows, international trade and flows of goods. * Quantitative data on key macroeconomic indicators, environmental and social impacts (mitigation pathways of WP3). Public output papers of Green-Win project will include: * Project deliverables and milestones * Scientific publications * Conference and workshop presentations * Policy briefs * Newsletters * Posters/Flyers * Blogs ## Methods of data collection Both primary and secondary data will be collected. * Primary data on win-win solutions, green business models and enabling environments will be collected via interviews, workshops and participatory observation in field trips and business collaborations/partnerships, e.g. in the case studies of WP5, 6 & WP7. This includes both quantitative and qualitative data. * Primary data will also be generated by the macroeconomic modelling of WP3. * Secondary data will be obtained via databases (Bloomberg, Thompson Reuters, etc.) and the review of policy documents and scientific literature. Furthermore, both quantitative and qualitative data will be collected on win- win solutions and green business models via tailor-made templates (WP4). All work-package leaders are responsible for data management within their work-package. The overall process is overseen by the project coordinator (Jochen Hinkel, [email protected]) and the project administrator (Daria Korsun, [email protected]). ## Formats Qualitative data of interview and workshop may be collected through audio recordings or concurrent note-taking. * Text documents - .doc, .docx, .pdf or .odt files * Images - .png, .jpg and .tif files * Audio - .mp3, .flac and .wav files * Video – .mp4 files Quantitative data will be stored as * Tabular data - .csv .xls, .xlsx or .csv files. # Standards and metadata ## Metadata used and metadata standard Data will be documented following the common standards provided by Horizon 2020 guidance. * The terms “European Union (EU)” and “Horizon 2020 (H2020)” * The name of the action, acronym and the grant number * The publication date, and the length of embargo period of applicable * The authors * A persistent identifier It also includes a description of the document’s content (summary or blog) and key words (tags) for search. Scientific publications deposited in a repository will include bibliographic metadata required by the publisher and use a standard identification mechanism such as Digital Object Identifiers (DOI). Internally, all Green-Win partners use a version numbers format as such: V0, V1, V2, etc for submission of the project papers. # Data sharing ## Ownership The ownership policy is described in the Consortium Agreement section 8 (p. 15) and in the Grant Agreement Article 26 (pp. 43-45). In particular: * “Results are owned by the beneficiary who generates them” (art. 26.1). * Detailed procedure for joint-ownership is stipulated in article 26.2. * Article 26.3 describes the procedure to follow when results obtained by a beneficiary are generated by a third party (transfer of rights, licenses…). * Beneficiaries have the obligation to protect results generated during the project that could be commercially exploited, and when protection is possible, reasonable and justified (Article 27.1). In the case that the beneficiary intends not to protect the results, the Agency may take over ownership under specific conditions described in article 26.4. The ownership of specific results might be protected using Creative Common Attribution Licenses (CC-BY or ODB-By), as stated in the Grant Agreement Annex 1 (Description of Action) Part B, p. 33. ## Access to data generated/collected Datasets will be made available either attached to a published article or published in existing data repositories (cf. table in section 5). Internally, the data is stored on OwnCloud platform accessible to all consortium partners. Externally, the data is accessible on the Green-Win website (green-win- project.eu/deliverables and green-win-project.eu/publications) and on GGKP platform (greengrowthknowledge.org/resources). Data concerning topics of climate change mitigation is also stored on Climate Change Mitigation Platform (climatechangemitigation.eu/about/related-eu-projects/green-win/). The data is available in one of the formats specified in 2.3 Format section. No special software tools are needed. We will thereby follow the requirements of publishers concerning the accessibility of datasets underlying a research article. Data collected/generated but not yet published will remain inaccessible to the public. Furthermore, certain types of data will remain unavailable to the public including: - Data originating from proprietary databases or under license, - Confidential, private or personal data (following section 4.3). ## Specifics regarding anonymity For data collected in interviews and workshops, data handling may need to adhere to practices that ensure the anonymity of research participants is maintained. Whether anonymity needs to be maintained is determined by choice of the research participant and recorded in the GREEN-WIN Informed Consent Forms, which must be completed by all research participants prior to participating in the project (See D9.1 and D9.2). Maintaining the anonymity of participants, when this has been requested, will take precedence over the requirement to make data publicly available. The procedures for ensuring anonymity of those research participants who have elected to remain anonymous have been described in D9.5. # Archiving and preservation ## Data storage Copies of datasets are stored: * On the internal website, * On local computers (of the data producer and of the PMO). The internal website is backed up on a server and synchronized to local computers everyday. We use an Owncloud server to store and archive the data, which is passwordprotected and encrypted (https). ## Data preservation The Green-Win project website will be accessible a year after the end of the project (December 2018). At the end of the project all the output papers will be stored on the GGKP platform as well. The OwnCloud server storing the data will be kept up and running for one year after the end of the project. Afterwards, all data and files on the server will be archived on the GCF file server for 5 years. Some partners will also store the datasets on their own servers, which will also be publicly available (Table 1). _GREEN-WIN Project 642018 RIA; Data Management Plan_ # Summary of data management plan <table> <tr> <th> WP </th> <th> Type of data produced </th> <th> Qualitative/ Quantitative </th> <th> Anonymity measures to be applied (§3.3) </th> <th> Dissemination </th> <th> Data storage </th> <th> Publicly available </th> </tr> <tr> <td> WP1 </td> <td> Narratives from dialogue workshops </td> <td> Qualitative </td> <td> No </td> <td> Peer-review publications solutions potentially featured on: _http://climatechangem_ _itigation.eu_ </td> <td> GCF (personal computers and/or internal servers), internal website: http://green-winproject.eu </td> <td> Yes, documented in a report of the second dialogue workshop Will be presented on Final Green-Win conference in Barcelona in March 2018 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP2 </td> <td> Interview transcripts, financial data to populate models </td> <td> Qualitative & quantitative </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Peer-review publication </td> <td> UCL (personal computers and/or internal servers), </td> <td> Not publicly available (team members) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP3 </td> <td> Model results </td> <td> Quantitative </td> <td> No </td> <td> Report, Peer -review publications </td> <td> E3M (personal computers and/or internal servers), internal website: http://green-winproject.eu </td> <td> Yes, available on project website </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP4 </td> <td> Socioeconomic, technical and organisational information of WinWin strategies and GBMs </td> <td> Qualitative & Quantitative </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Ground_Up Association (Nonprofit) internal database </td> <td> _http://survey.grounduppr oject.org/_ </td> <td> Not public. Only GREENWIN project partners can access it upon approval of Ground_Up. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP4 </td> <td> Interview transcripts & minutes from workshops with investors </td> <td> Qualitative </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Peer-review publication </td> <td> IASS (personal computers and/or internal servers) </td> <td> Not publicly available (team members) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP5 </td> <td> Interview transcripts </td> <td> Qualitative </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Peer-review publication </td> <td> Deltares (personal computers and/or internal servers) </td> <td> Not publicly available (team members) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP6 </td> <td> Interview transcripts & questionnaire responses </td> <td> Qualitative </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Peer-review publication </td> <td> Available upon request to the authors </td> <td> Not publicly available (team members) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP7 </td> <td> Interview recordings & questionnaire responses </td> <td> Qualitative </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Peer-review publication </td> <td> Available upon request to the authors </td> <td> Not publicly available (team members) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WP8 </td> <td> Socioeconomic, technical and organisational information of GBMs. Data is introduced and shared on the platform directly by the entrepreneurs/GBM leaders upon registration. </td> <td> Qualitative & Quantitative </td> <td> Yes </td> <td> Ground_Up Project (Company) platform 7 </td> <td> _http://groundupproject.ne t/_ </td> <td> Only basic company information and contact is public and only for those who register on the platform (investors, entrepreneurs, service providers). GBM description is confidential to all users and becomes available to investors upon request of entrepreneurs. </td> </tr> </table>	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0009_SAFEWAY_769255.md	"# Executive Summary\n\nThis document describes the Data Management Plan (DMP) for the SAFEWAY\npro(...TRUNCATED)	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0010_SlideWiki_688095.md	" 1. Introduction \n\n \n\n \n\nThis deliverable outlines the strategy for data management to be (...TRUNCATED)	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0013_COROMA_723853.md	"# 1\\. DATA SUMMARY\n\n## 1.1 OBJECTIVE\n\nThis document constitutes the first version of the Dat(...TRUNCATED)	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0014_CALIPSOplus_730872.md	"The implementation of a Data Policy can start only with the availability of a\nmetadata catalogue s(...TRUNCATED)	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0016_MURAB_688188.md	"# General information\n\n## MRI and ultrasound Robotic Assisted Biopsy (MURAB)\n\nThe MURAB proje(...TRUNCATED)	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0017_BREAKBEN_686865.md	"# 1 Introduction\n\nThis document outlines the principles and processes for data collection,\nanno(...TRUNCATED)	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020
0022_INTERACT_730938.md	"# 1\\. Data Management Principles and Guidelines\n\n## 1.1 Introduction\n\nThe Rif Field Station (...TRUNCATED)	https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797	Horizon 2020

End of preview. Expand in Data Studio

Info

The dataset contains Data management plans from https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1140797. All DMPs are based on Horizon 2020 or Horizon Europe DMP Template.