Open Access to Research Data: Strategic Delay and the Ambiguous Welfare Effects of Mandatory Data Disclosure

Mueller-Langer, Frank und Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick (20. June 2014): Open Access to Research Data: Strategic Delay and the Ambiguous Welfare Effects of Mandatory Data Disclosure. Discussion Papers in Economics 2014-32

Abstract

Mandatory data disclosure is an essential feature for credible empirical work but comes at a cost: First, authors might invest less in data generation if they are not the full residual claimants of their data after their first publication. Second, authors might "strategically delay" the time of submission of papers in order to fully exploit their data in subsequent research. We analyze a three-stage model of publication and data disclosure. We derive exact conditions for positive welfare effects of mandatory data disclosure. However, we find that the transition to mandatory data disclosure has negative welfare properties if authors delay strategically.

• Item Type: Paper
• Keywords: Data disclosure policy, strategic delay, welfare effects
• Faculties: Economics; Economics > Munich Discussion Papers in Economics
• Subjects: 300 Social sciences > 330 Economics
• JEL Classification: B40, C80, L59
• Language: English

References

[1] Allan, R., 2012. Editorial: Geoscience data. Geoscience Data Journal. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gdj.3/full (6 June 2014).

[2] Altman, M. and G. King (2007), A proposed standard for the scholarly citation of quantitative data, D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 13, No. 3/4.

[3] Anderson, R.G., W.H. Greene, B.D. McCullough and H.D. Vinod (2008), The role of data/code archives in the future of economic research, Journal of Economic Methodology, 15, 99-119.

[4] Andreoli Versbach, P. and F. Mueller-Langer, Open access to data: An ideal professed but not practised, Research Policy, forthcoming.

[5] Angrist, J.D. and J.-S. Pischke (2010), The credibility revolution in empirical economics: how better research design is taking the con out of econometrics, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2), 3-30.

[6] Bernanke, B.S. (2004). Editorial statement, American Economic Review, 94, 404.

[7] Buckheit, J.B. and D.L. Donoho (1995), WaveLab and reproducible research in wavelets in statistics, eds.: A. Antoniadis and G. Oppenheim, New York: Springer-Verlag, 55-82.

[8] Coase, R. H. (1960), The problem of social cost, Journal of Law and Economics, 3, 1-44.

[9] Coupé, T., V. Smeets and F. Warzynski (2006), Incentives, sorting and productivity along the career: Evidence from a sample of top economists, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 22(1), 137-167.

[10] Costello, M.J. (2009), Motivating online publication of data, BioScience, 59(5), 418-427.

[11] Dasgupta, P. and P.A. David (1994), Toward a new economics of science, Research Policy, 23(5), 487-521.

[12] Dewald, W.G., J. Thursby and R.G. Anderson (1986), Replication in empirical economics: The Journal of Money, Credit and Banking Project, American Economic Review, 76, 587-603.

[13] Economic and Social Research Council, 2010. ESRC research data policy. Retrieved from http://www.esrc.ac.uk/about-esrc/information/data-policy.aspx (5 March 2014).

[14] European Commission, 2012. Towards better access to scientific information: Boosting the benefits of public investments in research. European Commission: Brussels.

[15] Feigenbaum, S. and D.M. Levy (1993), The market for (ir)reproducible econometrics, Social Epistemology, 7(3), 215-232.

[16] Fienberg, S.E., M.E. Martin and M.L. Straf (1985), Sharing research data, National Academy Press: Washington, DC.

[17] Fudenberg, D., R. Gilbert, J. Stiglitz and J. Tirole (1983), Preemption, leapfrogging and competition in patent races, European Economic Review 22, 3-31.

[18] Gans, S.J. and S. Stern (2010), Is there a market for ideas?, Industrial and Corporate Change, 19 (3), 805-837.

[19] Glenn, D. (2008), Dispute over the economics of .le sharing intensi.es, The Chronicle of Higher Education, July 17, 2008, available at: http://chronicle.com/article/Dispute-Over- the-Economics-/989/.

[20] Haeussler, C. (2011), Information-sharing in academia and the industry: A comparative study, Research Policy, 40(1), 105-122.

[21] Haeussler, C., L. Jiang, J.G. Thursby and M. Thursby, 2014. Specific and general information sharing among competing academic researchers, Research Policy, 43(3), 465-475.

[22] Hall, R.E., 2009. Managing your career as an economist after tenure. CSWEP Newsletter, Winter 2009. 4-5.

[23] Hamermesh, D.S. (1997), Some thoughts on replications and reviews, Labour Economics, 4(2), 107-109.

[24] Kim, Y. and J.M. Stanton (2012), Institutional and individual influences on scientists’ data sharing practices, Journal of Computational Science Education, 3(1), 47-56.

[25] Lacetera, N. and L. Zirulia (2011), The economics of scientific misconduct, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 27(3), 568-603.

[26] McCullough, B.D. (2009), Open access economics journals and the market for reproducible economic research, Economic Analysis & Policy, 39(1), 118-126.

[27] McCullough, B.D. and H.D. Vinod (2003), Verifying the solution from a nonlinear solver: a case study, American Economic Review, 93, 873-892.

[28] McCullough, B.D., K.A. McGeary and T. Harrison (2006), Lessons from the JMCB Archive, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 38(4), 1093-1107.

[29] McCullough, B.D., K.A. McGeary and T.D. Harrison (2008), Do economics journal archives promote replicable research?, Canadian Journal of Economics, 41, 1406-1420.

[30] Mirowski, P. and S. Sklivas (1991), Why econometricians don.t replicate (although they do reproduce), Review of Political Economy, 3(2), 146-163.

[31] Moffitt, R.A. (2007), Research data integrity in economics and other social sciences, Presentation to National Academies Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Committee on Assuring the Integrity of Research Data, April, 2007.

[32] Moffitt, R.A. (2011), Report of the Editor: American Economic Review (with Appendix by P. J. Glandon), American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 101(3), 684-93.

[33] Mukherjee, A. and S. Stern (2009), Disclosure or secrecy? The dynamics of open science, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 27(3), 449-462.

[34] National Institutes of Health, 2003. NIH data sharing policy. Retrieved from http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/policy/data_sharing/ (5 March 2014).

[35] National Science Foundation, 2011. NSF grant proposal guide. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf11001/gpg_2.jsp#dmp (5 March 2014).

[36] Nature, 2013. Editorial announcement: Launch of an online data journal. Nature, 502(7470), 142.

[37] Nelson, B. (2009), Empty archives, Nature, 461, 160-163.

[38] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2007. OECD principles and guidelines for access to research data from public funding. OECD: Paris.

[39] Perrino, T. et al. (2013), Advancing science through collaborative data sharing and synthesis, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 433-444.

[40] Siegfried, J.J. and K.J White (1973), Financial rewards to research and teaching: A case study of academic economists, American Economic Review, 63(2), 309-315.

[41] Stephan, P.E. (1996), The economics of science, Journal of Economic Literature, 34(3), 1199-1235.

[42] Tuckman, H.P. and J. Leahey (1973), What is an article worth?, Journal of Political Economy, 83(5), 951-968.

[43] US House of Representatives, 2007. America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science Act, 110th Congress, 1st Session. H.R. 2272, Section 1009, Release of scientific research results, Government Printing Office: Washington.

[44] Vlaeminck, S. and G.G. Wagner, 2014. On the role of research data centres in the management of publication-related research data, LIBER Quarterly, 23(4), 336-357.

[45] Wellcome Trust, 2007. Policy on data management and sharing. Re- trieved from http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Policy/Policy-and-position- statements/WTX035043.htm (5 March 2014).