In molecular biology, sharing data - via archiving sequences - is typical and most people realize that sharing data is a good thing, with the benefits of access to other people's data providing scope for greater scientific outputs than everyone holding onto their own data. In ecology we are slowly moving towards the expectation that papers publishing results should also publish the data (in e.g. Dryad). Bill Gates, at a meeting in Washington said, "no matter how smart you are, and how much you think you can get the most out of your data, there are always other smarter people out there who can get more out of it".
Following this logic, there is a G8-sponsored move called GODAN - G8 Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition - that is aiming to promote organisations and countries opening their data for global consumption. This may be sequence data, environmental data (e.g. soils, weather), social data and data on nutritional status. For me, this makes sense, the more data one has the better (especially from different times, places and management: closing yield gaps requires optimising Gene x Environment x Management interactions and therefore you need ExM data at fine spatial resolution).
However, some people have suggested that this is a dangerous initiative as those who are best positioned to exploit open data, especially for developing world solutions, are developed world institutions who have the power and resources to mine the data. Some of these will inevitably be "big ag". Thus the G8 initiative can be seen as potentially "neo-colonialist" in promoting an innovation landscape that may be most likely to be exploited by developed world institutions (even if in partnership with developing world ones".
So, my question to you is: do the benefits of sharing data outweigh the risks?
The first point will be the source of the data. Is it from a credible and reputable source? Can it be verified and validated? In my opinion open data is likely to be produced in developed areas such as the EU and US. Big Ag, because of financial interests may want to get their own data.
I believe that sharing data is a brilliant idea. Sharing data is the perfect means to solve many of the problems that the world is facing today. However, I also believe that the data should not merely be put out there for everyone to use. Also the data should be validated for accuracy in some way or another. Authors should be given the option to make their data available on request from other researchers or institutions who aim to use the data for larger projects. A platform should therefore be created for researchers to be in contact with one another, and the data to be stored safely. This will give the authors of the original data more control as to who will have access to the data and how it will be used. This will also provide a means to determine whether the data is credible or not.
Dear Tim,
I think that for the overall progress of science (and society), sharing data outweigh the risks. However, it is a pitty that "overall progress" use to be at the expense of the undeveloped ones.
Regards,
Alfredo J. Escribano.
Dear Prof. Tim
It is a good idea to have open and free data, but can you believe or take it without any doubts. For me, I cannot. Any free data how much it is valuable and big and important must be checked from many side: the source , the measuring procedure, the uncertainty, and the data gathering procedure. If all these variables are OK, then, this data must be validate for the local environment whether it was agriculture or any other field of science.
Regards
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Ecology