Decentralized but Globally Coordinated Biodiversity Data
Centralized biodiversity data aggregation is too often failing societal needs due to pervasive and systemic data quality deficiencies. We argue for a novel approach that embodies the spirit of the Web (“small pieces loosely joined”) through the decentralized coordination of data across scientific la...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020-10-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Big Data |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fdata.2020.519133/full |
id |
doaj-f50d9bd39749436fae36f25ff7f843ca |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-f50d9bd39749436fae36f25ff7f843ca2020-12-18T13:22:30ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Big Data2624-909X2020-10-01310.3389/fdata.2020.519133519133Decentralized but Globally Coordinated Biodiversity DataBeckett W. SternerEdward E. GilbertNico M. FranzCentralized biodiversity data aggregation is too often failing societal needs due to pervasive and systemic data quality deficiencies. We argue for a novel approach that embodies the spirit of the Web (“small pieces loosely joined”) through the decentralized coordination of data across scientific languages and communities. The upfront cost of decentralization can be offset by the long-term benefit of achieving sustained expert engagement, higher-quality data products, and ultimately more societal impact for biodiversity data. Our decentralized approach encourages the emergence and evolution of multiple self-identifying communities of practice that are regionally, taxonomically, or institutionally localized. Each community is empowered to control the social and informational design and versioning of their local data infrastructures and signals. With no single aggregator to exert centralized control over biodiversity data, decentralization generates loosely connected networks of mid-level aggregators. Global coordination is nevertheless feasible through automatable data sharing agreements that enable efficient propagation and translation of biodiversity data across communities. The decentralized model also poses novel integration challenges, among which the explicit and continuous articulation of conflicting systematic classifications and phylogenies remain the most challenging. We discuss the development of available solutions, challenges, and outline next steps: the global effort of coordination should focus on developing shared languages for data signal translation, as opposed to homogenizing the data signal itself.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fdata.2020.519133/fulldata aggregationontology alignmentbiodiversity datacommunities of practicedata intelligencedecentralization |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Beckett W. Sterner Edward E. Gilbert Nico M. Franz |
spellingShingle |
Beckett W. Sterner Edward E. Gilbert Nico M. Franz Decentralized but Globally Coordinated Biodiversity Data Frontiers in Big Data data aggregation ontology alignment biodiversity data communities of practice data intelligence decentralization |
author_facet |
Beckett W. Sterner Edward E. Gilbert Nico M. Franz |
author_sort |
Beckett W. Sterner |
title |
Decentralized but Globally Coordinated Biodiversity Data |
title_short |
Decentralized but Globally Coordinated Biodiversity Data |
title_full |
Decentralized but Globally Coordinated Biodiversity Data |
title_fullStr |
Decentralized but Globally Coordinated Biodiversity Data |
title_full_unstemmed |
Decentralized but Globally Coordinated Biodiversity Data |
title_sort |
decentralized but globally coordinated biodiversity data |
publisher |
Frontiers Media S.A. |
series |
Frontiers in Big Data |
issn |
2624-909X |
publishDate |
2020-10-01 |
description |
Centralized biodiversity data aggregation is too often failing societal needs due to pervasive and systemic data quality deficiencies. We argue for a novel approach that embodies the spirit of the Web (“small pieces loosely joined”) through the decentralized coordination of data across scientific languages and communities. The upfront cost of decentralization can be offset by the long-term benefit of achieving sustained expert engagement, higher-quality data products, and ultimately more societal impact for biodiversity data. Our decentralized approach encourages the emergence and evolution of multiple self-identifying communities of practice that are regionally, taxonomically, or institutionally localized. Each community is empowered to control the social and informational design and versioning of their local data infrastructures and signals. With no single aggregator to exert centralized control over biodiversity data, decentralization generates loosely connected networks of mid-level aggregators. Global coordination is nevertheless feasible through automatable data sharing agreements that enable efficient propagation and translation of biodiversity data across communities. The decentralized model also poses novel integration challenges, among which the explicit and continuous articulation of conflicting systematic classifications and phylogenies remain the most challenging. We discuss the development of available solutions, challenges, and outline next steps: the global effort of coordination should focus on developing shared languages for data signal translation, as opposed to homogenizing the data signal itself. |
topic |
data aggregation ontology alignment biodiversity data communities of practice data intelligence decentralization |
url |
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fdata.2020.519133/full |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT beckettwsterner decentralizedbutgloballycoordinatedbiodiversitydata AT edwardegilbert decentralizedbutgloballycoordinatedbiodiversitydata AT nicomfranz decentralizedbutgloballycoordinatedbiodiversitydata |
_version_ |
1724378495581159424 |