Purpose - As national legislation, federated national services, institutional policies and institutional research service organizations may differ, data stewardship transpires differently in higher education institutions across the world. This work seeks to elaborate the picture of different data stewardship programs running in different institutional arrangements and research environments. Design/methodology/approach - Drawing from autoethnography and case study methods, this study described three distinct data stewardship programs from Purdue University (United States), Delft Technical University (Netherlands) and Aalto University (Finland). In addition, this work investigated the institutional arrangements and national research environments of the programs. The focus was on initiatives led by academic libraries or similar services. Findings - This work demonstrates that data stewardship may be understood differently within different national and institutional contexts. The data stewardship programs differed in terms of roles, organization and funding structures. Moreover, the mesh of policies and legislation, organizational structures, and national infrastructures differed. Originality - This work broadens the current literature on data stewardship by not only providing detailed descriptions of three distinct data stewardship programs, but also highlighting how research environments may affect their organization. We argue that the knowledge of institutional and national arrangements is a transversal requirement of data stewardship. Research limitations/implications - The data stewardship programs and their contexts develop, and the descriptions presented in this work should be considered as snapshots. Although individual researchers and research groups may undertake data stewardship activities, this study only investigated formalized services.

翻译：目的——由于国家立法、联邦级国家服务、机构政策及机构研究服务组织可能存在差异，全球高等教育机构中的数据管理实践也因此呈现不同面貌。本研究旨在深入解析在多样化的机构架构与研究环境中运行的不同数据管理项目。设计/方法/途径——借助自我民族志与案例研究方法，本研究详细描述了来自普渡大学（美国）、代尔夫特理工大学（荷兰）及阿尔托大学（芬兰）的三个特色数据管理项目。同时，探究了这些项目所处的机构架构与国家研究环境，重点关注由学术图书馆或类似服务机构主导的倡议。研究发现——本研究表明，数据管理在不同国家与机构语境中可能被赋予不同理解。这些数据管理项目在角色定位、组织模式及资金结构方面存在差异，且政策法规体系、组织结构与国家基础设施的衔接方式亦不相同。独创性——本研究不仅通过详述三个特色数据管理项目拓宽了现有数据管理文献，更揭示了研究环境如何影响其组织架构。我们认为，对机构与国家层面制度安排的认知是数据管理领域的一项跨领域基本要求。研究局限/启示——数据管理项目及其所处环境持续演变，本研究描述的情形应视为阶段性快照。尽管个体研究者与研究团队可能开展数据管理活动，但本研究仅考察了正式化的服务项目。