One of the problems with such a proposal is that while international agreements can help set broad standards, all countries have their own legal systems. This means that the flow of data and samples across a number of countries will be subject to many different legal systems and different policies and standards. The concept of an international data diversion body is theoretically good, but in reality it would probably add an additional bureaucratic burden for researchers, who would be forced to respect the international level of authorisations and comply with national rules. There are other mechanisms that allow researchers to obtain appropriate accreditation for early release of data. Two of these avenues, strongly encouraged by iBOL members, are: Project Description and Data Release Publications. These objectives are multiple: a) provide information for the accreditation of data collectors, so that these researchers can be cited, b) to the iBOL team and to the largest population of research and advertising The ability to provide inputs and new data that can be used to refine and improve interim data; (c) provide opportunities for information exchange that could lead to new partnerships and funding. , and (d) the establishment of a forum for a “statement of intent” to allow researchers to outline their intended use of the data under the terms of the Fort Lauderdale Agreement, to prevent other researchers from being “drained” of the data for the same purpose. Others were also proposed as conventional paternity10.10 In one approach, the data set would be recognized in publication according to an established system. This would recognize the use of the dataset and indirectly reward the contributions of those who played an important role in the development of the resource, without having to mention any contribution to the creation of the data set. Recognition in a publication is essential, but data creation must be established as an activity in its own right, based on expertise.
It is therefore important that the efforts of data generators are appreciated by the scientific community, and the creation of a resource for other researchers is seen by institutions as valuable know-how. In addition, there must be indicators that can also be included in national assessment systems, such as the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) in the United Kingdom, which ranks institutions according to their research excellence. At the meeting, it was agreed that the requirements for data publication should be clarified prior to publication, when funding opportunities are first announced, and that a proactive commitment from funders to a project would be beneficial, such as the experience of numerous genome sequencing efforts, the International HapMap project, the ENCODE project. , the 1000 Genomes project and, more recently, the International Cancer Genome Consortium, the Human Microbiome project and the MetaHIT project.