A socio-technical framework for cyberinfrastructure design

As the concept of cyberinfrastructure (CI) matures people question whether it is something that can be designed or built. These doubts may stem from considering design as a time-limited process or the lack of a framework in which to view, integrate, and compare knowledge relevant to e-Science applications. This paper addresses these issues by identifying the components of a preliminary framework for CI design where design is viewed as an ongoing and long-term process. The framework is necessarily a socio-technical one because CIs interact with people, technologies, and other infrastructures. While there has been a commendable focus on science drivers and user needs in many CI efforts, more than this is needed if CIs are to adequately balance the needs of all users and other stakeholders. I argue that a framework for CI design should consider the following elements: maturity and complexity of the CI; users' capabilities, expectations, and perceived need for CI; research problems and their relation to computing; hardware, software, and associated technologies produced by others; the role and influence of all stakeholders; and mechanisms for coordination and feedback. This paper has two purposes: to introduce the framework and to communicate a new way to consider CI design.

[1]  Daniel Atkins,et al.  Revolutionizing Science and Engineering Through Cyberinfrastructure: Report of the National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure , 2003 .

[2]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[3]  Paul Dourish,et al.  The human infrastructure of cyberinfrastructure , 2006, CSCW '06.

[4]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  Whither or whether HCI: requirements analysis for multi-sited, multi-user cyberinfrastructures , 2006, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[5]  Christine Hine,et al.  New Infrastructures for Knowledge Production: Understanding E-science , 2006 .

[6]  Katherine A. Lawrence Walking the Tightrope: The Balancing Acts of a Large e-Research Project , 2006, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[7]  C. Lynch Research Libraries Engage the Digital World: A US-UK Comparative Examination of Recent History and Future Prospects , 2006 .

[8]  Thomas A. Finholt,et al.  Tensions across the scales: planning infrastructure for the long-term , 2007, GROUP.

[9]  K. Baker,et al.  Modes of Social Science Engagement in Community Infrastructure Design , 2007 .

[10]  Thomas A. Finholt,et al.  Growing an infrastructure: the role of gateway organizations in cultivating new communities of users , 2007, GROUP.

[11]  Geoffrey C. Bowker,et al.  Understanding infrastructure: History, heuristics and cyberinfrastructure policy , 2007, First Monday.

[12]  Peter Freeman Is 'designing' cyberinfrastructure -or even, definining it- possible? , 2007, First Monday.