4.7 Article

Barriers to the exchange of hydrometeorological data in Europe Results from a survey and implications for data policy

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 394, 期 1-2, 页码 63-77

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.03.023

关键词

Data exchange; Data policy; Hydrometeorological institutions

资金

  1. European Community [GOCE 037024]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A survey has been conducted to understand what are the perceived barriers to the free exchange of hydrometeorological data in Europe A total of 127 questionnaires were received of which 61 were completed by data providers and 66 by data users in 32 Europe in countries with a total 631 entries (i e assessments of barriers affecting one data type) in the questionnaires The responses have been analysed in terms of what barriers are perceived to exist whether there ire differences between research industry and administration between the West and East of Europe and between different data types The responses suggest that the most important barriers are of economic nature The majority of the data users think there exist economic barriers to the free exchange of the data (significant at the 0 01% level) while the data providers give mixed results Out of the types of institutions the research institutions give the most significant response of the existence of economic barriers followed by Industry and administration For the East European countries economic barriers are considered a much more serious problem than for the West Out of the data types surveyed precipitation and get spatial data are considered to be the most critical in terms of costs The differences between the perceptions of data providers and data users depend strongly on the type of barrier The differences are smallest for legal barriers (such as licensing of data) followed by the economic barriers and are largest for the practical barriers Conflict of Interest is another potential barrier examined in the survey Suggestions are given on how to address the economic barriers in a European context (C) 2010 Elsevier B V All rights reserved

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据