What’s next for persistent identifiers in research?
Persistent identifiers are now an established part of the research landscape, but realising their full value will depend on how effectively they are integrated across the research ecosystem.
Author
Verena Weigert
Product and portfolio manager (research and innovation strategy)
The case for persistent identifiers (PIDs) in research has been made in many areas of the sector, with growing recognition of their ability to improve the quality, interoperability and reuse of research information while helping to reduce administrative burden. Yet, important challenges remain.
Adoption is uneven across different identifier types, implementation varies between organisations, and there is still a need to communicate more clearly the benefits that persistent identifiers can deliver for researchers, institutions and funders.
Our recent workshop bringing together research stakeholders focused on how to realise the value of persistent identifiers at scale, through better integration, coordination and use of data across the system.
This is particularly relevant in the context of the Independent Review of Research Bureaucracy and the work of our digital working group, which formed part of the Bureaucracy Review Reform and Implementation Network (BRRIN). Together, they have highlighted the role that data and digital infrastructure can play in reducing burden and improving the flow of information across the research landscape.
Strong foundations for progress
There are strong foundations to build on. The sector has seen increasing adoption of persistent identifiers, the development of established identifier infrastructures such as ORCID and Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs), and growing interoperability between systems.
Alongside this, there is an increasing volume of research information that can be linked and reused. Years of collaboration between funders, institutions, publishers and infrastructure providers have helped build trust, establish shared governance models and demonstrate the benefits that identifiers can deliver.
Looking back, this progress has been enabled by several factors: sustained community engagement, strong advocacy from funders and infrastructure providers, and a clear value proposition centred on reducing duplication and improving data quality. A coherent, sector-wide message particularly around ORCID has helped build alignment, while collective approaches to governance have fostered trust and a sense of shared ownership.
However, maturity across the PID landscape remains uneven. While ORCID iDs for researchers and DOIs for publications are now well established, organisational identifiers (ROR) and grant DOIs also have high levels of adoption. Project identifiers such as RAiD, by contrast, remain at an earlier stage of adoption and integration. These differences create gaps in the ability to consistently link information across the research lifecycle, limiting the full system-wide value that PIDs could enable.
Years of collaboration between funders, institutions, publishers and infrastructure providers have helped build trust, establish shared governance models and demonstrate the benefits that identifiers can deliver.
Why this matters now
The Independent Review of Research Bureaucracy highlighted the role that persistent identifiers can play in improving the accuracy, interoperability and reusability of research data while reducing unnecessary burden on researchers and institutions.
At the same time, international initiatives such as the Barcelona Declaration and the European Open Science Cloud reflect a broader shift towards open, connected and PID-enabled research information.
Closer to home, the planned move away from Researchfish has prompted important discussions about what comes next and how future approaches to research reporting and information exchange can be built on open, interoperable foundations from the outset.
Recent landscape work on open data about research management also continues to highlight a familiar challenge: data relating to research management remains fragmented across multiple systems. Information is often entered repeatedly, managed separately and linked retrospectively, limiting opportunities for reuse and creating inefficiencies across the sector.
Recent landscape work also continues to highlight a familiar challenge: data relating to research management remains fragmented across multiple systems.
From adoption to implementation
One area attracting particular interest is the use of DOIs for grants. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) is actively considering how grant DOIs could strengthen links between funding, researchers and research outputs. Assigning persistent identifiers to grants has the potential to support reporting, evaluation and impact assessment while further improving connections between different elements of the research lifecycle.
More broadly, the workshop highlighted the growing maturity of the PID ecosystem and the opportunities this creates for greater integration and reuse. Identifiers such as ORCID iDs and DOIs increasingly support the long-standing ambition of “enter once, use many times”, reducing duplication and improving the flow of information between systems.
Progress has been made in demonstrating the benefits of persistent identifiers, but challenges remain in realising their full potential. Variations in adoption, differences in data quality and inconsistent implementation continue to limit the value that identifiers can deliver across the research ecosystem. Participants highlighted that greater benefits are likely to be achieved when identifiers are embedded at the point information is created, rather than retrospectively linking records later.
Areas of emerging focus
Several themes are emerging as important areas for future discussion around PID adoption and implementation:
- Advancing the use of grant DOIs to strengthen links between funding, people, outputs and impact
- Developing maturity models that help organisations assess and improve their use of persistent identifiers
- Sharing practical use cases that demonstrate value and support informed decision-making
- Building communities of practice that enable knowledge exchange and collaboration
- Better understanding how messages about PIDs resonate with different stakeholder groups across the research ecosystem
These themes all point towards the importance of coordination across funders, publishers, institutions and infrastructure providers. Questions around governance, sustainability, implementation approaches and community engagement will continue to shape how the PID landscape evolves.
Questions around governance, sustainability, implementation approaches and community engagement will continue to shape how the PID landscape evolves.
Keeping researchers at the centre
As adoption increases, it remains important to focus on researcher benefit.
The most successful implementations are often those that reduce administrative burden, simplify processes and operate largely behind the scenes. Researchers should experience the benefits of connected information without being expected to manage additional complexity.
Trust will also remain an important consideration. Confidence in how identifiers and associated data are used will be critical to encouraging broader adoption and supporting the long-term effectiveness of PID-enabled workflows.
An important opportunity for the sector
Important foundations are in place, and coordinated implementation will be an important part of delivering measurable benefits across the research system. With mature identifier infrastructure, growing policy interest and increasing interoperability between systems, there is a significant opportunity to create a more connected, efficient and trustworthy research ecosystem.
Next steps
Contact your relationship manager to explore procurement, framework and consultancy options for research management systems.
Continue reading
Sign up to Headlines
Stay at the forefront of technology in education and research with our tailored fortnightly newsletter.