The scientific and economic value of research data is enormous. To ensure successful subsequent usage, the scientific community needs efficient access to data, the data has to be reliable and persistent, and the quality of the data has to be proved. One solution to these preconditions is to apply the techniques of today’s scientific publishing to research data. Besides its publication in a data repository together with some metadata, the data should undergo a transparent public peer-review using a publication platform. The presentation discusses two approaches. On the one hand, the data can be the basis for a research article and undergoes a review parallel to the review of the manuscript. The data is then a reviewed supplement to a scientific publication. On the other hand, the data itself can be the subject of a publication whose quality is then assured by peers. The presentation provides practical experience, especially with the latter strategy, realized through an established open access journal.

1. Open Access Publishing Public Peer-Review Two-Stage Publication Process Worldwide Archiving + Indexing

2. Ensuring availability and quality of research data through Open Access and public peer-review Martin Rasmussen | Copernicus Publications OAOD2010 | Cologne, Germany | 13 December 2010

4. Motivation – The Data Problem for Readers Graph taken from Zhang & Savenije (2005) , doi:10.5194/hessd-2-639-2005

7. How can a publisher help realizing access & quality assurance?

8. 1 – Data as a Supplement (in-house) Author Publisher System Problem: Size of the data sets Peer-Review Journal Article with Data Supplement Research Paper with Data Set

9. 1 – Data as a Supplement (in-house)

10. 2 – Data as a Supplement (external) Author Data Repository Publisher System Peer-Review Peer-Review Journal Article Data | Metadata doi Research Paper Data Sets

11. 3 – Data as a Publication Author Publisher System Authors: Scientists & Engineers Data Article Data Repository Data Paper Data Sets Peer-Review doi

14. ESSD’s Public Peer-Review Editor Author Author Comments 5 Scientific Community Short Comments 5 1 st Stage (Discussion Forum) Author 1 1. Submission Referees 2 2. Access Review 3 3. Technical Corrections Discussion Paper 4 4. Publication as D-paper 5 Referee Comments 5. Discussion Comments 6 6. Revision 7 Editor 7. Revised Submission 8 8. Peer-Review Completion 9 Final Revised Paper 2 nd Stage (Journal) 9. Final Revised Publication

17. Thank you very much for your attention! Martin Rasmussen | Copernicus Publications [email_address]