/ EUROPEAN COMMISSION
DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR RESEARCH & INNOVATION

Brussels, 15/12/2016

Note for the File

Subject:Open access: the uptake of the Open Research Data Pilot in Horizon 2020. Explanatory note to the updated 2016 dataset.

1. Introduction

Open access to research data refers to the right to access and re-use research data.[1]Opening up research data has the potential to improve the quality of scientific results, avoid unnecessary duplications, involve societal actors, and to significantly contribute to economic growth (through open innovation).

In Horizon 2020 the Commission committed itself to running a flexible pilot on open research data (ORD Pilot). The ORD pilot aims to improve and maximise access to and re-use of research data generated by Horizon 2020 projects. It takes into account the need to balance openness and protection of scientific information, commercialisation and IPR, privacy concerns, security as well as data management and preservation questions. This ORD pilot comprises various selected areas of Horizon 2020 ('core areas'[2]). Projects may also decide not to participate in the pilot ('opt-out') at any stage of the project lifecycle. Projects not covered by the scope of the pilot can participate on an individual and voluntary project-by-project basis ('opt-in'). As of the Work Programme 2017 theORD pilot scope is extended to cover all thematic areas of Horizon 2020 so as to make open research data the default, but retaining opt-out possibilities – however, this does not yet apply to the 2016 dataset analysed below.

The ORD pilot applies primarily to the data needed to validate the results presented in scientific publications. Other data can also be provided by the beneficiaries on a voluntary basis, as stated in their Data Management Plans (DMP). Costs associated with open access to research data, including the creation of a data management plan, can be claimed as eligible costsin any Horizon 2020 grant.

It should be noted that the potential participation in the pilot is not part of the evaluation of proposals: in other words, proposalsare not evaluated more favourably because they are part of the ORD pilot and are not penalised for opting out of the ORD pilot.

The legal requirements for projects participating in this pilot are contained in article 29.3 of the Model Grant Agreement.

This note updates the information on the uptake of the pilot with new data for 1 August 2015 to 1 August 2016, complementing a previous dataset from March 2014 to June 2015.[3]

2. State of play

2.1. Overall participation rate, opt-outs and opt-ins

This overview encompasses the 2016 dataset of proposals and finalised grant agreements obtained from CORDA between 1 August 2015 and 1 August 2016.[4] For these calls, 64,26% of the funded projects in the core areas participate[5] in the ORD. Correspondingly, the average opt-out rate in signed grant agreements is 35,74%. Outside the core areas, 17,05% of projects make use of the voluntaryopt-in possibility.

Table 1 below provides an overview of the 2015 and 2016 data and calculates the overall participation, opt-outs and opt-in rates in Horizon 2020 so far. As can be seen, for participation rate (opt-outs) the figures for August 2015 to August 2016 closely follow the figures for the previous sample, with only minor deviations (a minor decrease of 1,14 percentage points in participation). For opt ins an increase of 5,15 percentage points can be observed as compared to last year’s sample.

Table 1: opt-out and opt-in rates and average for Horizon 2020 so far in %

Category / 2014-2015
(previous dataset) / 2015-2016 (new dataset) / Average 2014-2016
Participation rate (core areas)[6] / 65,4% / 64,26% / 64,83%
Opt-outs (core areas)[7] / 34,6% / 35,74% / 35,17%
Opt-ins (all other areas of H2020)[8] / 11,9% / 17,05% / 14,47%

2.2. Reasons for opting out

In 2015-2016 dataset the reasons for opt-outing out at proposal stage[9] are (i) IPR concerns (57,82%), privacy concerns (23,42%), no research data generated (23,36%), other legitimate reasons (15,06%), main project objective jeopardised (11,74%) and national security related confidentiality (7,53%). It should be noted that projects could tick more than one box and the resulting total percentage is thus greater than 100.

Graphic 1 puts these results in perspective with the previous sample and provides the total average. Compared to last year's sample the table shows a marked increase for IPR concerns. Privacy concerns remain the second most important reasons for opting out, followed by "no research data generated".

Graphic 1: reasons for opting out

2.3. Call specificities concerning opt-outs and opt-ins[10]

Coming back to the 2015-2016 dataset, within the core areas for calls with over 10 projects funded, the lowest opt-out rates can be observed in the following calls:

  • Europe as a global actor (11 projects funded, 100% participation)
  • E-infrastructures 2015 (17 projects funded, 88% participation),
  • FET open (46 projects funded, 86% participation) and
  • Water 2015 two stage (16 projects funded, 81% participation).

For calls with more than 10 projects funded the highest number of opt-outs were related to

  • a sub call of specific challenge 5 (Growing a Low Carbon, Resource Efficient Economy with a Sustainable Supply of Raw Materials: 18 projects funded, 61% opt-out) and
  • a high performance computing call (21 projects funded, 42% opt-outs).

As for the voluntary participation in calls not covered by the pilot, the highest numbers of opt-ins was observed in the following calls:

  • Blue Growth:Unlocking the potential of Seas and Oceans (5 projects funded, 80% opt-in)
  • Earth Observation-2015-LEIT SPACE (10 projects funded, 50% opt-in).
  • Energy efficient buildings (9 projects funded, 40% opt-in)

Conversely, the lowest number of voluntary opt-ins was observed in the following calls:

  • European Researchers' Night (40 projects funded, 2,5% opt-in)
  • Industry 2020 in the Circular Economy (26 projects funded 3,8% opt-in)
  • Twinning (67 projects funded, 4% opt-in)

It should be noted that in some calls – such as the European Researchers' Night an opt-out is practically unavoidable, since the action itself is not concerned with generating research data.[11] In other words, a 100% participation rate of all calls in all core areas cannot be achieved and would not even be desirable.

In absolute numbers (rather than percentages), the call with the most participants in the 2015-2016 dataset is the Marie Curie Individual Fellowship with 328 projects participating.

3. Conclusions & next steps

  • The 2015-2016 dataset corroborates the earlier evidence of the 2014-2015 dataset, in particular as concerns the opt-out and opt-in rates. It can be considered further evidence that that an opt-out approach is more effective than an opt-in approach and therefore confirms the validity of the decision to extend the ORD pilot to all thematic areas of Horizon 2020 on an opt-out basis, as of the 2017 Work Programme.
  • The data compiled will provide useful input into the Commission's monitoring activities.The Commission will continue to monitor the ORD take up.

4.Contact

For questions please contact:

Annex: Thematic coverage ('core areas') of the Open Research Data Pilot in the Horizon 2020 2016 Work Programme

The main characteristics of the pilot (opt-out/opt-in approach) have been retained in the Work Programme 2016. As regards the thematic coverage of the pilot, the core areas have been updated and slightly expanded based on the feedback from the thematic directorates and units. The table below presents the updated list of the core areas, as presented in the general introduction of the work programme. As can be seen, the pilot has been extended in three areas (marked 'yes') in the table.

N.B. As of the Work Programme 2017 theORD pilot scope is extended to cover all thematic areas of Horizon 2020 so as to make open research data the default, but retaining opt-out possibilities.

Table : Core areas of the ORD Pilot in the Work Programme 2016 – updated thematic coverage

Work Programme 2016 / Extended coverage compared to WP 2014-15? / Comment
Future and Emerging Technologies / No / WP already completely covered
Research infrastructures (including e-Infrastructures) / Yes / in WP 2014-2015, only the e-infrastructure part was covered, now the whole WP is covered
Leadership in enabling and industrial technologies – Information and Communication Technologies / No / WP already completely covered
Nanotechnologies, Advanced Materials, Advanced Manufacturing and Processing, and Biotechnology: ‘nanosafety’ and ‘modelling’ topics. / Yes / New in WP 2016/17 – note that only nanosafety’ and ‘modelling’ topics participate, not the whole WP
Societal Challenge: Food security, sustainable agriculture and forestry, marine and maritime and inland water research and the bioeconomy - selected topics in the calls H2020-SFS-2016/2017, H2020-BG-2016/2017, H2020-RUR-2016/2017 and H2020-BB-2016/2017, as specified in the work programme / Yes / New in WP 2016/17 – note that only selected calls participate, not the whole WP
Societal Challenge: Climate Action, Environment, Resource Efficiency and Raw materials – except raw materials / No / WP already covered, except for raw materials
Societal Challenge: Europe in a changing world – inclusive, innovative and reflective Societies / No / WP already completely covered
Science with and for Society / No / WP already completely covered
Cross-cutting activities - focus areas – part Smart and Sustainable Cities / N/A / No change in content coverage. However, Smart and Sustainable Cities was listed under the Secure, Clean and Efficient Energy WP in 2014-2015, now it is listed as a cross cutting activity

1

[1]'Research data' refers to information, in particular facts or numbers, collected to be examined and considered as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation. In a research context, examples of data include statistics, results of experiments, measurements, observations resulting from fieldwork, survey results, interview recordings and images. The focus is on research data that is available in digital form.

[2]See annex 1 for the areas covered by 2016.

[3] 2014-2015 datasetavailable at

[4]As in the previous 2014-2015 sample the following instruments are excluded: SME instrument, cofund, and prizes. ERC grants are also not included.

[5] Participating projects are those that have included article 29.3. in their Model Grant Agreement.

[6] Sample size 2014-2015: 431 signed grant agreements. Sample size 2015-2016: 512 signed grant agreements. Total sample size: 934 signed grant agreements.

[7] Sample size: same as for the previous footnote.

[8] Sample size 2014-2015: 3268 signed grant agreements, 2015-2016: 3959 signed grant agreements. Total sample size: 7227 signed grant agreements.

[9] While proposals can opt-out at any stage, the specific reasons for opt-outs are systematically captured by the IT system at proposal stage. Sample size: 1526 proposals.

[10] For details of all calls covered see the excel file on the pilot uptake.

[11]Hoever, some coordination and support actions do generate data, so the instrument was not excluded from the pilot per se.