OA
Open Access Coordination Council

National Coordination Mechanism

Annex B: National Persistent Identifiers

← Back to TOR

B1. Purpose of this Annex

This Annex sets out the initial framing, principles, and issues to guide the work of a National Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) Working Group, to be coordinated under the auspices of the Council.

This Annex does not constitute a final or binding national PID policy. It provides a structured basis for coordination, consultation, and evidence-based decision-making.

B2. Context and Rationale

Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) are foundational to Open Access Publishing and digital scholarship, supporting:

  1. long-term persistence and citability,
  2. discovery and interoperability,
  3. research assessment and reporting,
  4. trust in the national scholarly record.

Nigeria currently operates in a plural and uneven PID environment, with inconsistent adoption across books, journals, research data, repositories, and institutions. Without coordination, this risks:

  • unnecessary duplication of costs,
  • dependency on single vendors,
  • inconsistent persistence guarantees,
  • weak alignment with public infrastructure investment.

B3. Scope of the National PID Coordination Exercise

The PID Working Group shall consider identifiers for:

  1. researchers,
  2. institutions,
  3. publications and research outputs (books, journals, data, software),
  4. repositories and national discovery systems.

The scope includes policy, governance, sustainability, interoperability, and trust, in addition to technical implementation.

B4. Initial Principles to Guide Deliberation

The following principles are proposed as a starting point for national discussion:

  • Persistence as a public responsibility, particularly for publicly funded research outputs.
  • Institutional stewardship, ensuring local governance and long-term durability.
  • Cost proportionality, avoiding per-object charging where scalable alternatives exist.
  • Interoperability, ensuring compatibility with global discovery and assessment systems.
  • Plurality, recognising that no single PID system meets all use cases.

These principles are subject to refinement through consultation.

B5. Identifier Landscape for Consideration

Without prescribing outcomes, the Working Group shall consider the distinct roles played by existing identifier systems, including:

  1. researcher identifiers (e.g. ORCID),
  2. institutional identifiers (e.g. ROR),
  3. publication identifiers (e.g. DOIs),
  4. repository- and preservation-oriented identifiers (e.g. ARKs, Handles).

Particular attention should be given to institutionally governed identifier models that support national sustainability, autonomy, and scale, alongside globally recognised identifiers used for indexing and citation.

B6. Strategic Questions for the PID Working Group

The Working Group shall address, inter alia:

  • Which PID types should be mandatory, recommended, or context-dependent for different scholarly outputs?
  • How can PID costs be aligned with infrastructure funding rather than individual authors?
  • What governance arrangements best ensure long-term persistence?
  • How should national platforms and repositories issue and manage identifiers?
  • How should PID practices align with accreditation, funding, and research assessment?

B7. Expected Outputs

The PID Working Group is expected to produce:

  • a National PID Framework aligned with Open Access Publishing and Open Science policy;
  • implementation guidance for institutions and platforms;
  • recommendations on governance, sustainability, and funding alignment.

These outputs shall be submitted to the Council for validation and onward coordination.

B8. Relationship Between Persistent Identifiers and Trusted Digital Identity (eduID)

Persistent Identifiers require trusted governance and accountable stewardship to remain reliable over time. In the Nigerian context, this trust layer is supported by eduID, which provides verified digital identity and institutional affiliation across the research and education ecosystem.

eduID does not function as a persistent identifier for scholarly outputs, nor does it replace ORCID, DOIs, ARKs, or institutional identifiers such as ROR. Rather, eduID operates as a national trust and control layer that supports PID governance by enabling:

  1. authentication of individuals acting within scholarly publishing systems;
  2. verification of institutional affiliation and delegated roles (e.g. author, editor, librarian, repository manager);
  3. controlled and auditable assignment and management of PIDs on behalf of institutions;
  4. continuity of stewardship beyond individual staff members.

In this way, eduID complements existing PID systems by ensuring that PID-related actions are carried out by authenticated individuals acting under verified institutional authority.

The PID Working Group shall therefore consider how trusted digital identity and affiliation services, including eduID, can support institutionally governed, sustainable, and auditable PID practices, without introducing unnecessary duplication or barriers to participation.

B9. Status of this Annex

This Annex is deliberative and preparatory. Final national positions on Persistent Identifiers, including governance and implementation arrangements, shall be adopted following the PID Working Group’s process and appropriate institutional endorsement.