Make Project detail page showing all related datasets
18458
Reporter: kbraak
Type: Bug
Summary: Make Project detail page showing all related datasets
Priority: Unassessed
Status: Open
Created: 2016-05-02 15:47:56.127
Updated: 2016-06-22 16:49:57.702
Description: Projects such as BioFresh and OpenUp generate a lot of primary biodiversity data. It is important to highlight these projects, give credit to their funders, and showcase all the data they help mobilise. This could in turn lead to reinvestment by the same funders in future projects for example.
Currently, datasets belonging to the same project CAN be linked together using the Project.id field, added to the GBIF Metadata Profile in version 1.1. Unfortunately, GBIF still doesn't parse/show version 1.1 in GBIF.org - see blocking issue POR-2560]]>
Author: kbraak@gbif.org
Comment: [~kylecopas] can you please evaluate whether this new page should be added to the reengineered portal? Thanks
Created: 2016-05-02 15:49:23.558
Updated: 2016-05-02 15:49:23.558
Author: kylecopas
Created: 2016-05-02 16:09:41.728
Updated: 2016-05-02 16:09:41.728
Wrt to data mobilization, are these projects functionally the same as standing less-time- or project-funding-limited networks like NBN or OBIS?
It's clearly a different DwC field, though...
Author: kbraak@gbif.org
Created: 2016-05-03 15:43:39.438
Updated: 2016-05-03 15:43:39.438
As an example, BioFresh was a time limited EU funded project that ran from November 2009 until April 2014.
In GBIF.org, BioFresh gets represented as the [publisher and owner of 23 datasets|http://www.gbif.org/publisher/b872b075-9ab5-4e27-b6c6-5add6b890379].
Ideally, it would be better to assign credit directly to BioFresh's [19 European and global partners| http://project.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/index.php/project/our-team] where possible instead.
[EU BON|http://www.eubon.eu/show/project_2731/] is another project with a duration from December 2012 to May 2017. When one of [EU BON’s 31 partners from 18 countries|http://www.eubon.eu/show/partners_2735/] publishes a dataset related to the project, the partner is registered as a data publisher and receives credit directly, however, there is no connection made to the project. That's the case for [this sample event dataset|http://www.gbif.org/dataset/9a57e938-3616-4f8c-985a-c9b66e7a1347] from Biological Station of Doñana (CSIC). Ideally the metadata for this dataset could make the connection to the project, so that it could be grouped together will all datasets related to EU BON on a project page. This would be a more appropriate representation of datasets mobilized as part of a project, while allowing partners to retain full credit for their efforts.
Author: rdmpage
Created: 2016-05-03 16:13:05.984
Updated: 2016-05-03 16:13:05.984
Thinking strategically, what matters more, projects or funders? Projects are often short-lived (relative to, say, GBIF), funders may also be around a lot longer. Would it not make sense to think about tracking funders in GBIF? I wonder whether, from GBIF's perspective, it may be helpful long term to be able to show that GBIF hosts data that funders x, y, and z have funded. This may help (a) GBIF make the case that it provides valuable service to the community of researchers a funder supports, (b) thus perhaps helping Heads of Delegation make the case for annual funding for GBIF, and (c) help researchers make the case for support for getting data into GBIF (they can point to other data sets that funder has supported).
Note that many funding agencies now have DOIs, and are being tracked in CrossRef (as funders of publications), and by data stores such as Zenodo.
Not saying we can't track funders and also recognise projects, but it seems to me that there's a bigger game here than playing nice with projects (as much as we want to do that, obviously it is nice to be able to provide information for projects on what data they've generated).
EU BON is a European project that ends May 2017, that's a year from now. GBIF will still be around, as will funding agencies. Shouldn't we be thinking about the longer term relationship (albeit indirect) with funders?
Author: kylecopas
Comment: You raise a good point, Rod, but I'm not sure that it's either/or.
Created: 2016-05-03 16:19:27.127
Updated: 2016-05-03 16:19:27.127
Author: rdmpage
Created: 2016-05-03 16:27:08.261
Updated: 2016-05-03 16:27:08.261
Sure, genius of "AND" etc., etc.
I guess I just perceive GBIF to be anxious to have good relations with projects, when it may be just as important (if not more so) to have the relationships with the funders.