#  1\. Data Management Principles and Guidelines

##  1.1 Introduction

The Rif Field Station (RFS: Annex A) has a responsibility to promote and
ensure the proper management of data and information resulting from activities
conducted at RFS. Effective data stewardship is essential to ensure that
valuable data resources are accessible now, and in the future, to advance our
knowledge and understanding, promote public awareness, and support informed
decision making. In addition, accurate and retrievable data are an essential
component of research and are necessary to verify and defend, when required,
the process and outcomes of research.

This Document describes the principles and guidelines for management of data
and information generated through monitoring and research conducted at RFS.
These principals and guidelines support the long-term preservation of and
timely access to important Arctic datasets and information. The Document has
been developed through a collaboration between Polar Knowledge Canada;
Greenland Ecosystem Monitoring and Zackenberg Research Station; The
Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna and RFS.

This Document is informed by:

  * The Management Principles and Guidelines for Polar Research and Monitoring in Canada (POLAR 2017) 

  

  * Zackenberg Research Station Data Management Plan (2018) 

  

  * The International Arctic Science Committee’s (IASC) Statement of Principles and Practices for Arctic Data Management (IASC 2013); 

  

  * Management planning for arctic and northern alpine research stations – Examples of good practices (INTERACT 2014); 

  

  * The Circumpolar Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring Plan (Christensen et al 2013); 

  

  * The Circumpolar Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring Plan (Culp et al 2013); and 

  

  * Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP) Strategic Plan 2018-2021 (CAFF 2018). 

  

This Data Management Plan (DMP) will be revised after 1 year to determine if
it needs to be revised based upon lessons learned and feedback from users.

##  1.2 Goals and Objectives

The goal of this DMP is to ensure that there is comprehensive inventory of the
projects conducted at RFS and the data they produce. Metadata records are
intended to provide a comprehensive searchable and publicly accessible
inventory of these projects and datasets.

This Document serves as a guide to assist RFS and those conducting research at
RFS in applying consistent approaches to data management, and to clarify roles
and responsibilities of researchers and collaborators.

##  1.3 Principles of Data Management

RFS seeks to ensure long-term preservation of and access to data through
application of the following principles:

  * Data are preserved by collecting, storing, and retaining data using formats that preserve the data beyond the duration of the original research project; 

  

  * Data are discoverable by applying commonly accepted standards and reporting protocols in the use of metadata; 

  

  * Data are accessible by supporting full, free, and open access with minimal delay, using a secure and curated repository or other platforms; and 

  

  * Data are ethically managed by respecting legal and ethical obligations, including consent, privacy, and confidentiality; secondary use of data; and data linkage. 

  

This Document will be reviewed periodically by RFS to ensure the principles
and guidelines herein remain relevant.

##  1.4 Types of Data and Definition

###  1.4.1 Data and Metadata Considerations

RFS in collaboration with the international Arctic data management community,
seek to promote the highest standards in the stewardship of data and metadata
resources resulting from Arctic research and monitoring activities.

###  1.4.2 Definition of Data

These principles and guidelines take a very broad approach to the concept of
data, recognizing that it may take many forms, and, depending on the field of
research or monitoring, can mean different things. This includes but is not
limited to: survey results, written observations, software, interview
transcripts, photographs, automatic measurements, hand-drawn maps, stories and
video footage (FAO 2018). Thus, this Document’s definition of data
incorporates Western/academic and local knowledge.

There are five primary categories or sources of data:

  * Institutional Data: Data systematically collected or produced as part of baseline monitoring conducted at RFS. 

  

  * Funded Data: Data collected or produced by funded projects at RFS. 

  

  * External Data: Data from external repositories or data providers, including existing operational data streams and historical sources, industry, international institutions, or others, as relevant. 

  

  * Rescued Data: Data retrieved from unpublished sources, e.g., field notebooks, records on outdated storage media, or photographic records, which are often at risk of loss. 

  

  * Local Knowledge (LK): is the knowledge that people in a given community has developed over time and continue to develop. 

  

###  1.4.3 Definition of Metadata

Metadata provides the information about a dataset, specifically the _what,
where, how, when,_ _by whom_ it was collected, its current location, and any
access information. Metadata facilitates the understanding, use, and
management of data and is a means for networking and collaboration.
Standardized metadata records consist of a defined set of information fields
that must be completed to allow automatic sharing of records via
interoperability between metadata management facilities and data portals.
Metadata submitted to RFS should conform to the Darwin core (TDWG 2009).

###  1.4.4 Physical Samples as Research Data

The products of research and monitoring activities _may_ also include physical
samples, preserved and living biological specimens including microbiological
cultures, and other non-digital material. Researchers are responsible for the
preservation, documentation, and ethical use of these physical samples
according to existing standards relevant to the type of sample collected.

Researchers are expected to allow scientific sharing and investigation in
accordance with relevant standards and other guidance from a museum, research,
or other applicable community. Such non-digital holdings should be described
in a metadata record submitted to RFS.

###  1.4.5 Ethically _Open_ Access

In order to support open access practices to maximize the benefit of the
efforts put into proper stewardship of data, the RFS, through this Document,
requires data contributors to make research and monitoring data available
fully, freely, and openly, with minimal delay.

The only exceptions to the requirement of full, free, open, and permanent
access are

  * Where human subjects are involved or in situations where small sample sizes may compromise anonymity, confidentiality shall be protected as appropriate and guided by the principles of informed consent and the legal rights of affected individuals; 

  

  * Where LK is concerned, rights of the knowledge holders shall not be compromised; 

  

  * Where data release may cause harm or compromise security or safety, specific aspects of the data may need to be protected (for example, locations of nests of endangered birds); 

  

  * Where pre-existing data are subject to access restrictions, access to data or information using this pre-existing data may be partially or completely restricted; and 

  

  * Where disclosure of information is not in accordance would be in conflict with the mandate of the organization in question or other unforeseen circumstance which require action from the RFS. 

  

##  1.5 Roles and Responsibilities

###  1.5.1 General Responsibilities

The RFS metadata repository (Arctic Biodiversity Data Service (ABDS, Annex
B)), data contributors, project sponsors, and external collaborators (Annex C)
will work in partnership to implement good practices and meet relevant
requirements.

###  1.5.2 Responsibilities of RFS

  * RFS in partnership with ABDS will provide advice to facilitate efficient and accurate metadata and data entry. 

  

  * Archiving and access requirements of all metadata records, datasets, or other research products involving LK will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 

  

###  1.5.3 Responsibilities of Those Conducting Research and Monitoring
Activities at RFS

Compliance with the requirements in this Document including:

  * Providing metadata that is accurate, complete and reliable; 

  

  * Submitting metadata detailing the data products they produce to RFS, as early in the project as possible, typically within the year of collection and ensure any revisions needed so that it accurately describes the final state of the data; 

  

  * Ensuring that their data are accessible to the general public, consistent with appropriate ethical, data sharing, and open access principles; 

  

  * Providing a persistent locator, for data collected at RFS. If possible provided in the form of a unique digital object identifier (DOI). This recognizes the intellectual work required to create a useful dataset and allows the dataset to be recognized and cited through formal publication activities, including formal publication of the data itself; 

  

  * Data creators acknowledge RFS where appropriate, in relevant presentations and publications; and 

  

  * Those conducting research and monitoring activities at RFS requiring a repository to archive their data, can contact the ABDS for advice. 

  

#  2 Data Handling and Data Products

This document details how metadata and data from research conducted at RFS are
to be managed and submitted throughout a research project lifecycle (Fig 1).

##  2.1 Research Project Lifecycle

In order to properly frame the responsibilities of researchers operating in
the RFS’s extensive and intensive monitoring areas (Fig 2), a common research
project lifecycle is presented, and specific responsibilities at each stage
are noted.

###  2.1.1 Research Project Inception

When an individual or organization wishes to conduct research at RFS, an
application is made to the RFS. At this time, the applicant is responsible for
providing the following:

  * Information about the Principal Investigator (PI) 

  

  * A description of the project 

  

  * An inventory of expected project outcomes and deliverables 

  

  * Logistical requirements 

  

  * An overview of potential impacts, and plans for impact mitigation 

  

  * How many participants expected to travel to RFS 

  

These data are stored as a metadata record in the metadata catalogue, and the
application is passed to RFS for consideration.

###  2.1.2 Research Project Consideration, Review, and Subsequent Approval or
Rejection

When an application has been made to the RFS, it undergoes review and is
either accepted or rejected:

  * If a project is rejected, the applicant will receive an explanation of the justifications resulting in rejection. At this point, the applicant may revise their application and resubmit, however there is no obligation to do so. 

  

  * There are no data or metadata responsibilities for either the applicant or RFS at this stage. 

  

  * If a project is accepted, the applicant proceeds to the project initiation phase. 

  

Fig 1: RFS Project lifecycle and data overview

Fig 2: Extensive Monitoring Area and Intensive Monitoring Areas

###  2.1.3 Project Initiation

When an application is accepted, the RFS will provide the following:

  * The RFS Monitoring Plan 

  

  * The RFS Data Management Plan 

  

  * Field Safety Guides 

  

  * Informative background data pertinent to the RFS 

  

  * Logistical assistance 

  

  * A preliminary metadata record to provide an overview of the project 

  

  * The RFS project metadata excel tool 

  

At the same time, the applicant is responsible for understanding and complying
with the regulations and conditions described in the DMP and RFS Monitoring
plan

###  2.1.4 Annual Project Update

At the end of each field season of active research, the applicant is
responsible for:

  * Updating the project metadata to properly represent data in production, or published by the research project; 

  

  * Visiting the published, revised (public facing) project metadata to validate the revision; and 

  

  * Pushing versioned, intermediate data to a repository if the preliminary data is deemed of immediate value to the scientific community, or if desired by the principal investigator. 

  

###  2.1.5 Project Closure

At the conclusion of a research project, the applicant is responsible for:

  * Updating the project metadata record to properly represent the final data product(s) of the research project; 

  

  * Visiting the published, revised (public facing) project metadata to validate the revision; and 

  

  * Pushing final quality assured data to a public repository. If a researcher requires a repository to archive datasets, this can be accommodated in the ABDS; and  Ensuring a separate detailed metadata entry is present for each dataset. 

  

##  2.2 Metadata and Data Standards, Requirements, and Best Practices

###  2.2.1 Detailed Metadata

Metadata is essential for users to understand how the data can be used to
determine the accuracy and validity of the initiative. To ensure accuracy and
accessibility of both project data and metadata, researchers are responsible
for ensuring the guidelines below are met when submitting metadata and
publishing data:

  * Metadata collected should be consistent with metadata requirements as stated in this DMP (See Annex C). 

  

  * The metadata must clearly describe the datasets, their contents and all relevant information about the monitoring conducted including methods used, monitoring location and date, monitors and their skill level, etc. 

  

  * Best practices in the documentation of data collection procedures should be followed. Methodologies used must be included in the metadata, along with any discrepancies in applied methodologies. 

  

To ensure metadata is accurate, accessible, and ingestible to the Arctic
Biodiversity Data Service (ABDS) the metadata is to be provided by completing
the RFS detailed metadata form, which is provided by RFS as an Excel document.
See Annex D for a list of the minimum mandatory elements required for
metadata.

###  2.2.2 Data standards and requirements

Data recording and data quality standards are the responsibility of the
researcher. RFS encourages data generators at RFS to comply with IPY Data
Policy on the delivery of free biodiversity data to the public and equivalent
legislation in the European Union for spatial information, such as the INSPIRE
Directive. Data formats should adhere to the Darwin Core. Acknowledgement is
mandatory when publications utilize data collected at RFS.

##  2.3 Contact Information

Questions arising from this document can be addressed to: Rif Field Station
(RFS), +354 856 9500, rif@rifresearch.is