TY - JOUR
T1 - Research data sharing behaviour of engineering researchers in Norway and the UK
T2 - Uncovering the double face of Janus
AU - Mallasvik, Mari Louise
AU - Martins, Jorge Tiago
N1 - Funding Information:
First, our analysis examined research data sharing policy in both settings. This was subsequently supplemented with narrative interviews undertaken with theoretically sampled () mechanical engineering researchers at leading engineering Higher Education Institutions in Norway and the United Kingdom – three researchers based at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), and four researchers the University of Sheffield, respectively. NTNU is a public research university with its main campus in Trondheim. It has over 8,000 members of staff and over 40,000 students. It has the main national responsibility for education and research in engineering and technology and it is the successor of the Norwegian Institute of Technology, established in 1910 by Parliament decree as Norway's national engineering university. The University of Sheffield is a public research university in the UK established through royal charter in 1905. It has almost 7,000 members of staff and over 30,000 students. Within the UK, the University of Sheffield leads in engineering research income and investment, having attracted £124 million for engineering research in 2017–18 from funders such as Innovate UK, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), the European Commission and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/2/17
Y1 - 2021/2/17
N2 - Purpose: In a context of growing policy pressures to increase the societal impact of Higher Education Institutions (HEI), open access to research data has gained increased significance, in spite of the limited availability of standard procedures and protocols, particularly in the engineering disciplines. In this article, we explore how engineering researchers' engagement with such external environment pressures impacts the conventional dimensions of engineering research work, and how engineering researchers within engineering HEI resolve potential tensions and make sense of their research data sharing practices. Design/methodology/approach: We use an institutional logics theoretical perspective to qualitatively examine research data sharing behaviours of researchers in Norway and the UK as leading engineering research centres, through the use of policy analysis and narrative interviews. Findings: The findings indicate that research data sharing behaviours are heavily mediated by institutional rules and rationalities that inform researchers' attitudes, but the logics that prize openness and sharing co-exist with logics that favour control and self-interest. Originality/value: Our findings suggest that logics-specific variations in engineering researchers' identities and goals are of paramount importance to policymakers, research funders and academic leaders striving to support HEI in their efforts to augment the societal impact of research.
AB - Purpose: In a context of growing policy pressures to increase the societal impact of Higher Education Institutions (HEI), open access to research data has gained increased significance, in spite of the limited availability of standard procedures and protocols, particularly in the engineering disciplines. In this article, we explore how engineering researchers' engagement with such external environment pressures impacts the conventional dimensions of engineering research work, and how engineering researchers within engineering HEI resolve potential tensions and make sense of their research data sharing practices. Design/methodology/approach: We use an institutional logics theoretical perspective to qualitatively examine research data sharing behaviours of researchers in Norway and the UK as leading engineering research centres, through the use of policy analysis and narrative interviews. Findings: The findings indicate that research data sharing behaviours are heavily mediated by institutional rules and rationalities that inform researchers' attitudes, but the logics that prize openness and sharing co-exist with logics that favour control and self-interest. Originality/value: Our findings suggest that logics-specific variations in engineering researchers' identities and goals are of paramount importance to policymakers, research funders and academic leaders striving to support HEI in their efforts to augment the societal impact of research.
KW - research data sharing
KW - open research data
KW - institutional logics
KW - engineering
KW - institutional complexity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097619811&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1108/JD-08-2020-0135
DO - 10.1108/JD-08-2020-0135
M3 - Article
SN - 0022-0418
VL - 77
SP - 576
EP - 593
JO - Journal of Documentation
JF - Journal of Documentation
IS - 2
ER -