• DARIAH EU
• 2014-2023close
• European Commission close
• EU close
• DARIAH EU close

International audience

The 11th sustainable development goal highlights the importance of making our cities more inclusive. For that, planning processes should become more engaging and empower citizens to actively participate in designing their environments. However, the COVID-19 crisis exposed inequalities and posed challenges to communal activities due to restrictions on face-to-face activities. These constraints brought many researchers and practitioners to rethink the process of co-designing workshops, putting digitalization in the spotlight. The present study consists of a systematic literature review focusing on understanding how digital technologies affect participatory approaches in urban design and how they have evolved since the 1990s. Also, it investigates the correlation between levels of participation and interaction in different types of collaborative design workshops held in communities. We found that many authors have been developing new methodologies and digital tools aiming to digitalize the co-designing experience through mediation. However, there is no evolutionary evidence of tools in the field creating bridges between digitalization, participation, and interaction. We argue that a research agenda is required to produce more sophisticated tools to tackle social barriers and support inclusive design towards sustainable urban development patterns.

Im Rahmen des Horizon-2020-gef��rderten Projekts "Social Sciences & Humanities Open Cloud" (SSHOC), das eine Laufzeit von 2019���2022 hat, wird der SSH Open Marketplace entwickelt, der einen ��berblick nicht nur ��ber digitale Tools und Services bietet, sondern auch ��ber Trainingsmaterialien, Publikationen, Datensets und Workflows. Dabei werden diese miteinander kontextualisiert: Der Eintrag zu einem Tool verlinkt etwa Forschungspaper, die mithilfe dieses Tools entstanden sind, desweiteren passende Trainingseinheiten, zum Beispiel aus dem "Programming Historian", und, falls vorhanden, Forschungsdaten in einem f��r das Tool geeigneten Format. Das flexible Datenmodell und das Exponieren einer offenen API erm��glichen es, das gesammelte Praxiswissen f��r die Digital Humanities nutz- und erforschbar zu machen und eine neue, sich aktiv weiterentwickelnde Datenbasis daf��r zu schaffen. Ein Beitrag zur 8. Tagung des Verbands "Digital Humanities im deutschsprachigen Raum" - DHd 2022 Kulturen des digitalen Ged��chtnisses.

Iako u Zborniku dominiraju radovi koji se bave naučnicama u prošlosti, kao i njihovim radom, saznanjima, nedovoljnom afirmisanosšću njihovog rada, poteškoćama sa kojima su se suočavale, zbornik zaokružuju radovi koji se bave savremenom situacijom, tj. položajem žena u akademskoj zajednici danas i svim teškoćama koje i same akterke katkada teško detektuju i prepoznaju. Patrijarhalni mehanizmi prožimaju društvo u kome živimo na različitim nivoima, a sami principi koji vladaju u akademskom svetu – u kojima sve više važe pravila liberalnog kapitalizma i ideje o „upotrebljivosti“ nauke i merljivosti rezultata – cementiraju i prikrivaju davno odomaćen diskriminatorski odnos prema ženama i prema naučničkom glasu i diskursu koji odudara od dominantne paradigme. Stoga su neophodni neprekidni napori da se ženski glas u nauci čuje, a položaj naučnica stalno unapređuje i popravlja. Зборник радова Етнографског института САНУ 34 / Collection of Papers of Institute of Ethnography SASA 34

This article has been accepted for publication by EUP in the IJHAC: International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing (https://www.euppublishing.com/loi/ijhac); International audience; Since the first ESFRI roadmap in 2006, multiple humanities Research Infrastructures (RIs) have been set up all over the European continent, supporting archaeologists (ARIADNE), linguists (CLARIN-ERIC), Holocaust researchers (EHRI), cultural heritage specialists (IPERION-CH) and others. These examples only scratch the surface of the breadth of research communities that have benefited from close cooperation in the European Research Area.While each field developed discipline-specific services over the years, common themes can also be distinguished. All humanities RIs address, in varying degrees, questions around research data management, the use of standards and the desired interoperability of data across disciplinary boundaries.This article sheds light on how cluster project PARTHENOS developed pooled services and shared solutions for its audience of humanities researchers, RI managers and policymakers. In a time where the convergence of existing infrastructure is becoming ever more important – with the construction of a European Open Science Cloud as an audacious, ultimate goal – we hope that our experiences inform future work and provide inspiration on how to exploit synergies in interdisciplinary, transnational, scientific cooperation.

Text, techné and tenure: what remains out of scope of research evaluation in Humanities disciplines and how to change it for the better? (Slides presented at the OAI12 conference: https://oai.events/) Peer review is central scholarly practice that carries fundamental paradoxes from its inception. On the one hand, it is very difficult to open up peer review for the sake of empirical analysis, as it usually happens in closed black boxes of publishing and other gatekeeping workflows that are embedded in a myriad of disciplinary cultures, each of which comes very different, and usually competing notions of excellence. On the other hand, it is a practice that carries an enormous weight in terms of gatekeeping; shaping disciplines, publication patterns and power relations within academia. This central role of peer review alone explains why it is crucial to study to better understand situated evaluation practices, and to continually rethink them to strive for their best, and least imperfect (or reasonably imperfect) instances. How the notion of excellence and other peer review proxies are constructed and (re)negotiated in everyday practices across the SSH disciplines; who are involved in the processes and who remain out; what are the boundaries of peer review in terms of inclusiveness with content types; and how the processes are aligned or misaligned to research realities? What are the underlying reasons behind the persistence of certain proxies in the system and what are emerging trends and future innovations? To gain an in-depth understanding of these questions, as part of the H2020 project OPERAS-P, our task force collected and analysed 32 in-depth interviews with scholars about their motivations, challenges and experiences with novel practices in scholarly writing and in peer-review. The presentation will showcase the results of this study. Focus will be on the conflict between the richness of contemporary scholarship and the prestige economy that defines our current academic evaluation culture. The encoded and pseudonymized interview transcripts that form the basis of our analysis will be shared as open data in a certified data repository together with a rich documentation of the process so that our interpretations, conclusions and the resulting recommendations are clearly delineable from the rich input we had been working with and which are thus openly reusable for other purposes.

AbstractHow can researchers identify suitable research data repositories for the deposit of their research data? Which repository matches best the technical and legal requirements of a specific research project? For this end and with a humanities perspective the Data Deposit Recommendation Service (DDRS) has been developed as a prototype. It not only serves as a functional service for selecting humanities research data repositories but it is particularly a technical demonstrator illustrating the potential of re-using an already existing infrastructure - in this case re3data - and the feasibility to set up this kind of service for other research disciplines. The documentation and the code of this project can be found in the DARIAH GitHub repository: https://dariah-eric.github.io/ddrs/.

This report discusses the scholarly communication issues in Social Sciences and Humanities that are relevant to the future development and functioning of OPERAS. The outcomes collected here can be divided into two groups of innovations regarding 1) the operation of OPERAS, and 2) its activities. The “operational” issues include the ways in which an innovative research infrastructure should be governed (Chapter 1) as well as the business models for open access publications in Social Sciences and Humanities (Chapter 2). The other group of issues is dedicated to strategic areas where OPERAS and its services may play an instrumental role in providing, enabling, or unlocking innovation: FAIR data (Chapter 3), bibliodiversity and multilingualism in scholarly communication (Chapter 4), the future of scholarly writing (Chapter 5), and quality assessment (Chapter 6). Each chapter provides an overview of the main findings and challenges with emphasis on recommendations for OPERAS and other stakeholders like e-infrastructures, publishers, SSH researchers, research performing organisations, policy makers, and funders. Links to data and further publications stemming from work concerning particular tasks are located at the end of each chapter.