|
The development of GBIF needs to take part of the great amount of information and collections stored and developed during centuries of taxonomic, distributional and ecological work, developed both by scientists and amateurs. However, two main issues must be taken into account, by ENBI and other networks and data providers, in relation with this matter.
One the one hand, to be useful, biodiversity data needs a quality control process to assess the correctness of taxonomic identification and the accuracy of the spatial reference. How to assess and communicate "quality indicators" on data is still an open question.
On the other hand, restrictions may be applied to the information provided in order to i) protect both endangered species or habitats, ii) Prevent doubtful data from being accessed and then misused, or iii) protect IP rights.
This e-conference is scheduled around 2 topics. The moderator will introduce the topic and will invite contributions from subscribers to the e-conference. The topics will have seven days each to run intensively. The two last days, before the closure date of the conference, will be dedicated to discuss about the most relevant topics arisen in the previous sessions.
Opening statement and moderation by Dr Nicolas Bailly
Topic 1: Data validation (9 - 15 March 2004).
a.How to validate taxonomic identification and spatial accuracy of GBIF specimen data?
b.Is it important to add fields accounting for the last taxonomic review of the specimen and/or collection, and the checklist or monograph used for it?
c.How to validate observational data?
d.Does ENBI and/or GBIF need a higher investment in taxonomy? Must we claim for it clearly in the EU?
Topic 2: Restrictions to data access (16 - 22 March 2004)
a.How to distinguish and filter data inside of GBIF? (e.g. observational vs. collection, protected species, etc.).
b.Should we restrict certain information (e.g. protected species distributions) to the general public, and how?
c.Regarding to the conservation of biodiversity, is it possible to make compatible both free information and access restrictions?
d.How could GBIF decide which data is reliable enough to be publicly accessible?
e.Is it possible to include also a field accounting for the accuracy of the taxonomic identification? Should it be based in the determination responsible and the monograph or checklist used?
f.How to protect IP rights? Should we include a moratorium for the use of data provided by a given scientist, in order to allow he/she to analyze and publish it? If this is so, how much time?
g.Different access for different users? Do we need a user registry system?
General discussion about the most relevant topics arisen in the previous sessions (23 - 24 March 2004) |
