In the ever-evolving landscape of scientific research, the importance of Open Science has never been more pronounced. Transparency, accessibility, and collaboration lie at the heart of the European Union's Horizon Europe programme, which requires researchers to share their findings through trusted repositories. But how ready are these repositories to meet the programme’s stringent Open Science requirements?
A recent study commissioned by the European Research Council Executive Agency (ERCEA) sheds new light on this pressing question, offering an updated assessment of repository readiness to facilitate compliance with the Horizon Europe Model Grant Agreement (HE MGA) requirements. This study not only provides critical insights into the current state of repositories but also guides ERC grantees in navigating the complex terrain of Open Science obligations.
Understanding the Study’s Objectives
The primary goal of the study is to evaluate how well repositories support researchers in fulfilling Open Science requirements, particularly regarding metadata standards. The assessment aimed to:
- Map the available repositories for literature and research data across various scientific fields.
- Identify trusted repositories widely used by ERC-funded researchers.
- Assess how these repositories comply with HE MGA requirements, especially in terms of metadata provision.
- Offer guidance to ERC grantees on which repositories best support their Open Science obligations.
By delving into these objectives, the study equips researchers with valuable information to make informed decisions about where to deposit their outputs.
Methodology: A Rigorous Approach
A comprehensive methodology underpinned the study, which analysed 241 repositories, ultimately identifying 186 as trusted. The assessment incorporated community feedback, surveys, and desk research to ensure accuracy and relevance. A key refinement in this updated version was the introduction of three readiness categories — Exemplary, Essential, and Close to Essential — reflecting the varying degrees to which repositories meet HE MGA requirements.
The study also acknowledged the unique challenges in evaluating repositories, particularly when gauging abstract concepts like community endorsement and international recognition. Despite these obstacles, the researchers meticulously classified repositories according to their trustworthiness and compliance.
Key Findings: A Mixed Picture
The findings paint a nuanced picture of repository readiness:
- Coverage Gaps: While Social Sciences and Humanities repositories are well represented, the Physical Sciences and Engineering domain remains underserved.
- Metadata Standards: Most repositories offer basic metadata fields such as author names, titles, and descriptions, but many fall short when it comes to providing separate metadata fields for grant information.
- Trustworthiness: The majority of trusted repositories were endorsed by their respective communities, although only a handful demonstrated exemplary compliance with all mandatory and recommended metadata requirements.
- Types of Repositories: Disciplinary repositories dominate the landscape (74%), followed by institutional (30%) and general-purpose repositories (22%).
- OpenAIRE Integration: Just over half of the repositories were declared to be harvested by OpenAIRE, a key component of the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC).
Who Stands Out?
Among the standout repositories, HAL (Hyper Article en Ligne) and AUSSDA (Austrian Social Science Data Archive) achieved exemplary readiness, setting a benchmark for others to follow. Essential-level repositories include Zenodo, DANS Data Station Archaeology, and <intR>²Dok. Meanwhile, widely used repositories like ArXiv, OAPEN Library and Europe PMC showed the possibility of readiness but still have room for improvement.
Challenges and the Path Forward
Despite notable progress, the study highlights significant hurdles that ERC beneficiaries face when selecting compliant repositories. The lack of common standards for preservation, curation, and security policies further complicates the decision-making process.
Moving forward, the report underscores the urgent need for:
- Standardized policies across repositories.
- Greater metadata harmonization.
- Increased adoption of FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles.
- Continuous community engagement to align repositories with evolving Open Science requirements.
Conclusion
These studies mark a pivotal step in understanding how repositories support Open Science compliance in Horizon Europe. By providing a detailed inventory and readiness assessment, it empowers researchers to choose the right platforms for sharing their outputs. However, bridging the existing gaps will require collective action from repository providers, policymakers, and the scientific community.
As Open Science continues to reshape the research landscape, this report serves as both a guide and a call to action — reminding us that the journey towards transparency and accessibility is one that we must embark on together.
Read the full studies here: https://zenodo.org/records/7728016 & https://zenodo.org/records/13919643
