Unique digital identifiers for citation and credit

Promote, and require as appropriate, the use of unique digital identifiers for individual researchers, and research-relevant digital objects to facilitate and improve citation and provision of due credit to authors and contributors.

To promote the use of unique digital identifiers (PIDs) for researchers and research-relevant digital objects, the following implementation options can be considered:

• Mandate Open Scholarly Publishing: Require that research outputs from publicly funded projects be disseminated via open access platforms, including journals, books, or public repositories, with mandatory assignment of DOIs to enhance citation and visibility.

• Adopt Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID): Ensure all researchers register for an ORCID, providing a standardised identifier for attribution and recognition across platforms.

• Integrate Persisdent Identifiers (PIDs) into FAIR Repositories: Require repositories claiming FAIR compliance to offer persistent ID assignment for all digital objects, including datasets, software, and physical objects where feasible.

• Data Management Plans (DMPs) Obligations: Make the inclusion and use of PIDs a requirement inDMPs to embed identifier practices in research workflows.

• Increase Funding for PID Systems: Support the development and integration of PIDs in repositories, Currnet Research Information System (CRIS) systems, and publishing platforms to ensure accessibility and interoperability.

Implementing the use of unique Persisdent Identifiers (PIDs) faces several hurdles.

• National privacy legislation, may restrict the use of PIDs hosted on foreign servers, complicating international data sharing and alignment with FAIR principles. 

• Institutional autonomy over rewards and incentives also challenges efforts to standardise PID adoption without coordinated national or international policies.

• The lack of uniform rules across institutions and countries further hinders consistent implementation, particularly as disciplines vary in their norms and practices. 

• Research assessment systems primarily focused on traditional publications and journal impact factors marginalise the importance of data sharing, requiring a shift to frameworks that recognise and reward data as a legitimate research output.

• Technical challenges include ensuring persistent identifiers for software and URLs, which often rely on commercial platforms like GitHub, risking long-term reliability. 

• Developing robust metrics for measuring the impact of data sharing requires international consensus, adding further complexity to implementation.