Digital Science, a renowned technology company embedded within the global research ecosystem, has unveiled a comprehensive report titled the Australian National Persistent Identifier (PID) Benchmarking Toolkit. This unprecedented undertaking marks a pivotal moment in the evolution of Australia’s research infrastructure, as it is the first national benchmarking effort assessing the implementation of persistent identifiers (PIDs) within the country. Backed by the Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC), this report offers a detailed evaluation of the nation’s PID landscape, highlighting both successes and areas ripe for enhancement to future-proof research quality, provenance, and impact.
At the core of this initiative lies the concept of persistent identifiers — unique, stable digital tags assigned to researchers, research outputs, grants, and institutions. PIDs such as ORCID iDs (Open Researcher and Contributor ID), DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers), and RORs (Research Organization Registry IDs) are instrumental in transforming the digital research environment. They facilitate unambiguous linking of researchers to their outputs, enable seamless citation and discovery, and support complex data interoperability in an increasingly data-driven scholarly ecosystem. By benchmarking Australia’s progress against international standards, the report offers a blueprint for scalable adoption of these critical digital tools.
Digital Science’s VP of Research Futures, Simon Porter, who led the report’s development, emphasized that Australia has made remarkable strides in adopting ORCID for scholarly publications. Notably, Australia ranks third globally in linking DOIs with doctoral dissertations hosted in institutional repositories, a feat signaling strong organizational commitment to research transparency and accessibility. These successes chart a path toward enhanced integration of digital identifiers to create a robust research identity infrastructure that benefits researchers, institutions, and funders alike.
However, the benchmarking analysis uncovered a “mixed scorecard” revealing pockets of underperformance, especially concerning the use of PIDs beyond traditional publication formats. Data citation activity, for example, remains comparatively weak despite Australian researchers demonstrating higher engagement than the global average. This gap, juxtaposed with the significant uptake of PIDs for publications, underlines an uneven deployment of persistent identifiers—highlighting an urgent need to extend PID usage to non-traditional research outputs (NTROs), such as reports, datasets, and software.
The report critiques Australian research institutions for not uniformly applying the best practices prevalent among publishers, including ensuring every contributor has an ORCID and that affiliates are linked via ROR IDs. Given the prolific production of NTROs at universities and research centers, these entities bear responsibility to adopt publisher-grade metadata rigor, thereby improving discoverability, provenance tracking, and credit attribution for diverse research products. Leveraging PIDs systematically could revolutionize how research contributions are formally recognized and rewarded.
Another urgent recommendation is the mandatory integration of ORCID iDs across all institutional research information management systems. Mandating ORCID registration would create a unified identity framework enabling more reliable aggregation, disambiguation, and impact analysis of researcher outputs. This policy shift, aligned with international trends, would also assist in streamlining workflows between institutions, publishers, and funders, promoting a more efficient and FAIR-compliant research infrastructure.
Furthermore, the report advocates for Australia to intensify international collaboration efforts to pressure global publishers to incorporate ORCID in their metadata systems and to refrain from engaging with those who do not support ORCID workflows. This approach would ensure that Australians benefit from improved interoperability and metadata quality, reinforcing the country’s competitive position within the global research landscape while aligning with best practice standards.
A particularly innovative suggestion involves national policy reforms promoting the systematic assignment of DOIs to dissertations deposited in institutional repositories. Formalizing the use of ORCID for both authors and supervisors further embeds accountability and ensures the traceability of research outputs from inception to supervision and publication. This move would standardize metadata records and enhance the visibility of emerging researchers’ contributions to the academic community.
Additionally, the benchmarking toolkit underscores the critical need to incorporate closed-access material in ongoing PID analytics. Ignoring such outputs, which represent a significant proportion of Australia’s research output (estimated at about 35% in 2024), would create misleading data gaps and undermine the accuracy of national research assessments. The tool thus provides methodologies to capture and benchmark PIDs in both open and closed domains, fostering a comprehensive view of research productivity and impact.
From the funding perspective, the report highlights the necessity for grants funding agencies to generate Research Activity Identifiers (RAiDs) immediately at the award’s inception. Early creation of RAiDs with complete metadata facilitates timely visibility and traceability of funded projects, allowing stakeholders to monitor research progress and outcomes more effectively. Such granularity supports enhanced strategic decision-making and accountability in research investment.
Simon Porter noted that beyond Australia, this PID benchmarking toolkit offers a valuable framework for other nations striving to build resilient, interoperable research ecosystems. The report not only delineates Australia’s current state but establishes a replicable methodology for continuous PID monitoring and enhancement, signaling a step change in research infrastructure development worldwide.
Reflecting on the broader implications, Natasha Simons, Director of National Coordination at ARDC, praised the report’s contributions, underscoring the Australian Persistent Identifier Strategy’s role in reinforcing the nation’s digital information ecosystem. She stressed that a robust benchmarking framework is indispensable for systematically tracking progress, guiding policy, and ensuring that Australia’s research community remains competitive and impactful on the global stage.
In the evolving data-centric world of research, persistent identifiers are foundational to increasing the FAIRness—findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability—of scholarly outputs. Their strategic deployment enhances not only citation and impact analysis but also fosters transparency and reproducibility, pillars upon which modern science is built. The extensive recommendations in this report serve as a clarion call for nation-wide adoption of PID best practices to future-proof Australia’s research infrastructure.
Digital Science’s commitment, through its suite of innovative research tools and platforms, aligns with this vision of an interconnected, data-rich scholarly landscape. By leveraging advanced technologies, they aim to address some of the most complex research challenges, enabling researchers, institutions, and funders to navigate and contribute to the global knowledge economy more effectively.
As Australia prepares to host pivotal discussions at International Data Week and the eResearch Australasia Conference in Brisbane later this year, the findings and recommendations from the Australian National Persistent Identifier Benchmarking Toolkit will be at the forefront of national conversations. These forums will serve as invaluable platforms for stakeholders to engage with the report’s insights, collaborate on implementation strategies, and further strengthen Australia’s standing in the international research community.
Persistent identifiers are not merely digital tags; they are the connective tissue weaving the fabric of modern research ecosystems. With the Australian National PID Benchmarking Toolkit, Australia takes a decisive leap towards harnessing this potential—ensuring that future research is built on trustworthy, transparent, and accessible foundations that accelerate discovery and innovation for decades to come.
Subject of Research: Not applicable
Article Title: Australian National Persistent Identifier (PID) Benchmarking Toolkit
News Publication Date: 9 October 2025
Web References:
- Australian National Persistent Identifier (PID) Benchmarking Toolkit – Figshare
- Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC)
- International Data Week
- eResearch Australasia Conference
- ORCID
References:
Lead author Simon Porter (VP of Research Futures, Digital Science) declares that he is also a member of the ORCID Board.
Image Credits: Digital Science
Keywords: Research management, Science administration, Science policy, Scientific community, Authorship, Scientific publishing, Academic publishing
