Experiences with national standardization of research information systems in Scandinavia

Experiences with national standardization of research information systems in Scandinavia Gunnar Sivertsen Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education, Oslo, Norway

Overview of this presentation 1. A necessary background: Performance-based funding of research institutions in Scandinavia 2. The CRIStin system in Norway 3. The solutions in Denmark and Finland 4. Two important dimensions Central versus local systems Top-down or bottom-up

In evaluations and project funding: Bibliometrics may inform, but not replace peer review

In performance-based funding of institutions? Can bibliometrics or peer review be used alone?

1986

1986 2003

1986 2003 2003

2005 1986 2003 2003

2005 1986 2003

2005 2006? 2003 2003

Peer review and bibliometric methods Bibliometrics may inform, but not replace peer review

Peer review and bibliometric methods We are not covered!!!

Books Indexed journals Journals and series Coverage of 70,500 scholarly publications from the higher education sector in Norway 2005-2012. 100% 90% 80% Scopus ISI Web of Science 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Health Sciences Natural Sciences Engineering Social Sciences Humanities

2005 1986 2003 2003

2005 2009 1986 2003 2003

2005 2009 1986 2009 2003 2003

2005 2009 1986 2009 2009 2003

2005 2015 2009 1986 2009 2009 2003

2005 2015 2018? 1986 2009 2009 2003

«The Norwegian Model from the viewpoint of Sweden»

Local use of «Norwegian publication points» at nine Swedish Universities

Principles behind the use of institutional data in a shared national Current Research Information System Completeness: All scholarly publications and other results from research are included Transparency: Every institution can see and check all other institutions data. The national database is also online and open to society at large. Multiple use of the data: CV s, applications, evaluations, annual reports, internal administration, bibliography for Open Archives, links to full text, etc.

Shared by: The 8 universities and the 44 other institutions in the higher education sector The 40 major hospitals in the health sector 60 independent research organizations in the government sector The Ministry of Education and Research, The Ministry of Health, and the Research Council of Norway

Four modules Results from research Individual researcher profiles Projects Institutions

Delimitation of scholarly publication data by definition Definition A scientific or scholarly publication must: 1. present new insight 2. in a form that allows the research findings to be verified and/or used in new research activity 3. in a language and with a distribution that makes the publication accessible for a relevant audience 4. in a publication channel with peer review*) *) In addition: Publication channels with authors coming mainly from only one institution are not included.

Three main publication types 1) Article in ISSN-title 2) Article in ISBN-title 3) ISBN-title Channel Type E.g. scientific article in Nature or scholarly ISBNtitle on Oxford University Press.

Before 2004: 22 spelling variations for the Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association 107 Tidsskr Nor Lægeforen 77 Tidsskrift for Den norske lægeforening 11 Tidsskrift for Den norske Lægeforening 8 Tidsskrift for den norske lægeforening 7 Tidsskrift for Den Norske Lægeforening 5 Tidsskr Norske Lægefor 4 Tidsskrift for den Norske Lægeforening 3 Tidsskrift for den norske legeforening 2 Tidsskr Den nor lægeforen 2 Tidsskr Nor Laegefor 2 Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2 Tidsskr Nor Lægeforening 2 Tidsskr Norsk Laegeforen 2 Tidsskriftet Norsk Lægeforening 1 Tidskrift til Den Norske Legers Forening 1 Tidssk Nor Lægeforen 1 Tidsskr Den Nor Lægeforen 1 Tidsskr for Den nor lægeforen 1 Tidsskr Nor Legeforen 1 Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening 1 Tidsskrift for Den norske lægeforeningen 1 Tidsskrift for Norsk Lægeforening 242 TOTALT

Dynamic records of scientific and scholarly ISSN-titles and ISBN-publishers 22,000 ISSN-titles and 1,200 book publishers so far 0001-9887 Africa Today 0001-9909 African Affairs 1062-4783 African American Review 0263-0338 African Archaeological Review 0001-9933 African Arts 1017-6772 African Development Review 0145-2258 African Economic History 1021-3589 African Entomology 1472-5843 African Identities 1684-5315 African Journal of Biotechnology 1021-9730 African Journal of Crop Science 0141-6707 African Journal of Ecology 1438-7890 1684-5378 African Journal of Environmental Assessment and Management African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition 1015-8618 African Journal of Neurological Sciences 0065-4000 African Literature Today CABI Publishing Cambridge University Press Cappelen Akademisk Forlag Carfax Publishing Carl Heymanns Verlag Carlsson bokförlag Catholic University of America Press Central European University Press Channel View Publications Chinese University Press Christian Ejlers s Forlag

All channels can be searched, and new channels can be suggested

2005 2015 2009 2009

Moves to Bergen, Norway (The Norwegian Social Science Data Services) Becomes a dynamic register, new journals will be included continuously on certain (strict) criteria The quality tiers (INT1, INT2, NAT) will not be used any more Will also include the (rest of the) social sciences

Publication points Publication type Level 1 Level 2 Article in ISSN-title 1 3 Article in ISBN-title 0,7 1 ISBN-title 5 8 Publication points are fractionalized if the publication originates from more than one institution Publication Author 1 Author 2 Author 3 Institution A Institution B Institution C Institution C

An evaluation of the indicator in Norway was published ten days ago In Danish, but with a ten page summary in English

1351-510 References imported from WoS

References to book and article in book added by me References imported from WoS

Atira in Aalborg, Denmark, developed the CRIS system Pure

The solutions in Denmark and Finland Each institution has a local system: All Danish universities have local versions of PURE. Helsinki University has PURE. The other Finnish universities have different local solutions. Data are harvested centrally by the government every year for the publication indicator These solutions represent collaboration between: The goverment and the rector s conference (association of universities) in Denmark The goverment, the rector s conference (association of universities), and the Association of Learned Societies in Finland The publication indicator is designed and used in similar ways in Denmark, Norway and Finland The research information systems gain complete publication data because the indicator is used for institutional funding

Central versus local systems I use the word shared rather than central : The system should serve the institutions and their interests One of these interests is their need for comparable data and statistics across all institutions! If only a solution with closed local systems is possible, do not impose the compensating central system on the institutions, but develop it in collaboration with them. If trouble arises: Researchers understand the need for shared information better than administrators do.

Top-down or bottum-up?

Impact template as Word file!

A top-down submissions system at the cost of the institutions

Peer review of societal impact (Evaluation of the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, in 2012)

Case studies or stories based on evidence

Case studies or stories based on evidence in the media

Bottom-up! Principles behind the use of institutional data in a shared national Current Research Information System Completeness: All scholarly publications and other results from research are included Transparency: Every institution can see and check all other institutions data. The national database is also online and open to society at large. Multiple use of the data: CV s, applications, evaluations, annual reports, internal administration, bibliography for Open Archives, links to full text, etc.