FAIR Implementation Needs Community Engagement 

21 October 2025

On September 25th and 26th, RDM professionals and representatives of infrastructure providers came together in Utrecht to exchange ideas on the implementation of FAIR data management in the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) domain in the Netherlands. The event was designed to kick-start the collaborative writing of an Action Plan, aimed at identifying bottlenecks in FAIR RDM as currently experienced within the SSH-domain, as well as offering recommendations for overcoming those challenges.. The first day featured an intensive session where participants collectively developed draft sections for the Action Plan. The second day was allocated to managerial-level participants, who contributed strategic advice on achieving endorsement and implementation of the Plan’s recommendations.

The event was organised in the framework of the TDCC-SSH Bottleneck project “Untangling FAIR Implementation in the Dutch SSH”. The project encourages the RDM community to reflect on how well current RDM services meet the needs of the Dutch SSH. Because IT systems, policies, and institutional structures have developed in parallel, practices now vary widely between—and even within—Research Performing Organisations (RPO). As a result, bridging international FAIR standards and daily practice remains difficult. The project employs workshops, interviews, a survey, and a community event to assess whether infrastructures and services developed in recent years actually support FAIR data management as envisioned when funding was allocated to DCCs and FAIR became integral to Open Science policy.

“Being a recent member of this community – I started my role of Research Data Steward in 2022 – I have often had conversations with more experienced colleagues who have worked in the domain – in archives, universities, and infrastructure – for longer than ten years, even since before the publication of the FAIR Principles paper. It is a testament to the complexity of the field that the questions that we are asking in this project continue to elude quick and uniform solutions.”

Bora Lushaj, data steward at EUR

Community Writing Sprint

The Untangling FAIR Community Writing Sprint on September 25th began with an inspiring talk by the Amsterdam Time Machine project, which illustrated the impact and engagement possible through FAIR data. Participants then took a first principles approach to reconsider FAIR implementation by addressing four questions.

  • WHO is responsible for FAIR Implementation in an RPO and at which level of the organisation? What are the roles that cut across the data lifecycle both horizontally and vertically, and what organisational priorities do they have? 
  • WHEN are FAIR implementation choices made during the data lifecycle? Are many FAIR implementation choices already made by institutions before the data lifecycle in terms of tooling and other technical choices? What is the role of DMPs, and is the timing adequate?
  • HOW are the FAIR-enabling infrastructures taken up in RPOs in the Netherlands, and to what extent are they suitable to align with domain-wide needs, and which gaps still need filling?
  • WHY are some of us very engaged with FAIR while others are resistant to FAIR Implementation? What are the incentives for engagement and effort across the different stakeholders (e.g., researchers, organizations’ managers, funders, journals)? 

Participants, both online and in-person, worked in small groups to address each question by identifying bottlenecks and recommendations for potential solutions. These bottlenecks and recommendations now form the foundation of the Action Plan for FAIR implementation in the SSH, which is being developed as the primary outcome of the UntanglingFAIR project.

Action Plan Strategy Meeting

On Friday, 26th September, we gathered again in Utrecht for the Action Plan Strategy Meeting. Pedro Hernandez-Serrano, Peter Lugtig, and Marta Teperek, under the moderation of Bora Lushaj, engaged in an insightful panel discussion about the value of FAIR implementation from the perspective of policy at universities, research and funding. Panellists agreed that FAIR implementation is not just a technical exercise—it’s a way to make research more transparent, reusable, and socially valuable. By ensuring that data can be found and reused, FAIR helps return value to society, enables collaboration across disciplines, and supports future generations of researchers. They also noted how researchers need recognition, training, and practical support to implement FAIR effectively. Institutions must move beyond treating data management as an administrative task and instead reward FAIR practices through funding and recognition. Middle management and DCCs play a crucial role in creating the right conditions for sustainable FAIR implementation.

In the second part of the morning, participants were asked to answer four questions using sticky notes on boards and to rate them. The input gathered in this way helps ensure the Action Plan is well aligned with other initiatives and priorities at various institutes, and shapes a strategy to ensure the final document is well received by organisations.

Community Input on FAIR Implementation

Some of the topics that emerged during the panel discussion and discussion boards at the Action Plan Strategy Meeting aligned very well with the bottlenecks (and recommendations) that emerged at the Community Writing Sprint. Some examples, in random order, blending insights from both days:

  • RDM structures (roles, responsibilities) are very different in each RPO, and getting a good overview of each would help identify strengths and weaknesses that can inform future policies.
  • 1-size-fits-all FAIR is problematic: we need to be aware that FAIR principles originate from STEM disciplines, and realise that for some subdisciplines in the SSH, they are difficult to implement. Borrowing concepts such as reflexivity and positionality from qualitative research may help make FAIR more encompassing.
  • The importance of training the next generation of researchers on the FAIR data principles, starting from Bachelor’s and Master’s programmes
  • Incentivise the reuse of secondary data, for instance, with dedicated funding streams, as being a data reuser makes people more aware of the advantages of FAIR data, which they can use when they are data producers; but also, make Open Science and FAIR issues part of the evaluation of grant proposals.
  • We need better recognition of publications of FAIR research materials (e.g., data, software, etc), and not only recognize the publication of papers.
  • The creation of a DMP is experienced as an administrative hurdle to be overcome at the beginning of a research project, rather than as an instrument which may serve throughout a project to better allocate RDM efforts, which invites rethinking the format and process of DMPs.
I want to contribute to the Action Plan!

The input gathered during the 2-day event is used to produce a full draft of the Action Plan. Do you want to provide input, e.g. by adding a recommendation or reviewing the text? You can do so by accessing this document and reading the instructions on the first page. And you are welcome to join one of our co-working sessions online (see dates and link in the document).