Repositories Update (UK)

Repositories Update (UK) Peter Burnhill Director, EDINA National Data Centre, University of Edinburgh, Scotland UK JISC/CNI Conference , Edinburgh, 1 & 2 July2010 Managing Data in Difficult Times

Overview
policies/strategies/technologies/infrastructure to manage research/teaching
Scope
Digital repositories at the level of the institution (for itself), at a level above the campus: for institutions, for UK, for much much more
within the European and wider international context
in support of research, learning & teaching …. and management
Having voice as …
a provider of common services and national infrastructure [EDINA]
a user of repository software [Eprints, DSpace, IntraLibrary]
a member of SONEX and indirectly of COAR and UK-CORR
and focus on repository-related progress in the UK since last JISC/CNI; where is the value, how this is assessed/expressed?
Size of investment in recent times
Cost-effectiveness and ‘impact’ of provision
Effort at institutional & inter/national level and the ‘shared services’ agenda?
Wondering what Dorothea said next …

Managing Data in Difficult Times
Nostalgia for interesting but not difficult times?
JISC Repositories & Preservation Programme - April 2006; March 2009
“ £14m investment in H.E. repository and digital content infrastructure”
This included the JISC RepositoryNet, as four ‘support services’:
Repository Support Project
Repository Research Project
Intute Repository Search
‘ interim repository’ | Prospero | the Depot | OpenDepot
Checking the JISC website today
under the heading of ‘key digital repository activities’ are 21 funding programmes and 216 funded projects.
Including some that are just being awarded … & then there is:
OR10: Open Repositories Conference, 6/9 July 2010, Madrid
RepoFringe2010: Repository Fringe 2/3 September, Edinburgh
and several others

R is for Repository
What are Repositories?
Facility/technology to support at least three basic types of service:
PUT: a service interface that allows one or more use community to deposit/issue digital content (+ metadata on that content)
KEEP: a service that ensures the integrity of that content, for the life of the repository
GET: a service interface that allows one or more use community to search/extract that content
Use community: persons or machines/software; appropriate interface
Digital Repositories Review (R.Heery and S.Anderson, 2005)
Digital repository differs from other digital collections in that:
"content is deposited, whether by content creator, owner or third party
architecture manages content as well as metadata;
repository offers a minimum set of basic services [put, get, search, access control]
must be sustainable & trusted, well-supported & well-managed."
"a university-based institutional repository is a set of services
… for the management and dissemination of digital materials created by the institution and its community members. … an organizational commitment to the stewardship of these digital materials, including long-term preservation where appropriate, as well as organization and access .. ." (C. Lynch, 2003)

R is for Repository
Who has Repositories and why?

R is for Repository
What are Repositories and what are they for?
Allowing deposit of and holding all sorts of digital things/stuff
Metadata + Objects; Metadata + pointers; Metadata only
All sorts of objects: images, datasets, theses, articles, etc etc
Special interest in serving our central task:
ease & continuity of access to scholarly resources

anytime/place convenience authorisation licence to use Ensuring researchers, students and their teachers have ease and continuing access to online scholarly resources projects ‘ ease’ ‘ continuing’ P.Burnhill, Edinburgh 2009 usability open preservation post-cancellation restricted Use case: article–length work published in e-journals but other use cases apply access to content & services reliability well-seamed interoperability functionality who/WAYF authentication

UK funding councils JISC Sub-Committees JISC Collections acting as platform for network-level services & helping to build the JISC Integrated Information Environment research, learning & teaching in UK universities & colleges Research Councils UK National Data Centres

1&2 provider of services & user of software
EDINA-run repositories, with and without JISC
DataShare : for research data (institutional, U of Ed)
Open Data; using DSpace
Jorum : for learning materials [with Mimas]
OER and turnstile (UK); using DSpace & IntraLibrary
OpenDepot (the Depot): for research papers
OA (world); using Eprints
ShareGeo : for geo-spatial data
Open Data and turnstile (UK); using DSpace
OA Repository Junction as shared service tool
using own code and Eprints as an 'escrow' repository during the transfer process.
& maybe others … depending on definition of repository

for learning materials [with Mimas]
OER and turnstile (UK);
using DSpace & IntraLibrary

for research papers
OA (world); using Eprints

ShareGeo: for geo-spatial data
Turnstile (UK) Data & Open Data; using DSpace

3. SONEX
four individuals in JISC-sponsored mini think-tank
from Denmark, Spain & UK
Morgens Sandfaer, Pablo de Castro (Chair) & Jim Downing (Richard Jones) and Peter Burnhill
came out of international workshop Amsterdam, March 2009
charged with looking at how repositories should inter-operate
the focus group given name of ‘repository handshake’
3 other focus groups on citation, identifiers and ‘organisation’
the latter an exit strategy for EU-funded DRIVER project?
focus switched to ‘deposit opportunities’
semi-automatic issue/deposit, under terms of Open Access
concern about risk of ‘hollow ring of repositories’
avoid diktat about standards and techno babble
looking to interoperability via SWORD

3. SONEX
focus switched to ‘deposit opportunities’
Initial categorisation of repositories into which authors deposit
Looking to onward interworking/interoperability (SWORD)
Not just technical interoperability but workflow
Role of repository managers
But also recognition of other network- attached ‘systems’:
Authoring tools
Desktop software
Bibliography tools
Non-Author-based workflows
CRIS
REF

SONEX: Scholarly Output Notification & EXchange
Re-branded ourselves as SONEX, to signal …
‘ scholarly output’, not just research publications
‘ notification’ using metadata only
‘ exchange’ as two-way interoperability/negotiation
push metadata; pull content; exploit always-on Internet
SONEX use case: multi-person & multi-institutional
SONEX activities:
Identify/analyse deposit opportunities (use cases) for ingest into the repository space.
Identify/promote projects tackling deposit use cases
Gap analysis
machine (third party systems) as user (PUT & GET)
http://sonexworkgroup.blogspot.com

SONEX Use Case Actors
Use case Actor 1: Individual author/researcher [person]
author of multi-authored article, other author(s) at other institution(s) sole author with entire career at a single institution [exception]
Variant: author making deposit is the PI of funded research project(compliance with mandate from funder to deposit)
Variant: author making deposit is not the PI of funded research project but work is associated with one or more funded research projects (PI)
Use case Actors 2&3: Depositor is not author (Mediated deposit)
Variant: support staff in research group
Variant : Library’s own resources and document collections
Variant: Institutional Research Support Systems (CRIS systems) [machine]
Use case Actor 4: Repository Manager (RM) of an IR
wishing to be notified & obtain copy from a subject (SR) or another IR
Use case Actor 5: Publisher (which work is published) [machine]
deposit under OA of the author's final copy (OA-RJ & PEER projects)
OA of published copy
Pointer supply to published copy
Other Actors: Vendor of authoring or repository software

SONEX Use Case Scenarios
Gven opportunity, and motivation, to deposit content into the ‘repository space’, for onward notification and exchange:
PI(s) as co-author
with felt obligation to notify grant funders of OA deposit
via web-based or desktop environment
Publisher(s)
assisting their author(s) in supply of full-text into appropriate repositories
CRIS, a campus research information system ,
managed support for researchers, including note of publications for the Project/Grant
‘ Bibliography’
web-based publications lists
as maintained by individual researchers, Research Groups, Departments, etc.
including RAE/REF driven institutional actions

OA Repository Junction Project
m2m broker supports:
Discovery of user & content type
Get /ingest package of data (metadata + digital object)
Deduce /parse data object & deduce target repository(s)
Pass /deposit package into repository targets
Notify /send alert to appropriate 3 rd party(s) eg repository managers
Working with ‘Publisher’ and ‘Subject Repository via Broker Service
Theo Andrew & Ian Stuart (EDINA)

Part 2: Showcase

O is for Open
OA (for publications) not the only ‘open’ policy:
OER: Open Educational Resources
UKOER: Jorum and other subject/institutional repositories
Open CourseWare – as open webpages
Open Data
Both repository and open databases; Linked Open Data
Open Source Software
Open Access
the regime used for Subject Repositories
seemed to be motive for creation of Institutional Repositories
‘ Green OA’ self-archiving by authors: Creative Commons
Is this how we should judge success of Repositories?
OA now becoming mainstream, including uptake by publishers
"One fifth of 2008's research papers now open access" The Great Beyond, Nature blog, June 25, 2010
Are Repositories the only way to support OA?
Repositories to align themselves with, and support funder-mandates for open access if they are to be successful

Informal discussion with JISC programme managers
“ Dealing with institutional processes now, rather than repository technology. Depending on type of content, the projects would fit much more closely in:
managing research data programme
research information programme
open educational resources programme
as they have much more in common with those projects than they do with each other.”

Informal discussion with JISC programme managers
“ Dealing with institutional processes now, rather than repository technology. Depending on type of content, the projects would fit much more closely in:
managing research data programme
research information programme
open educational resources programme
as they have much more in common with those projects than they do with each other.”
“ repositories have found their core business proposition via the REF and making sure Universities list research outputs to obtain research ratings
- have not succeeded in making the business case that IRs should be doing the job of archiving, a core library platform, or the job of an institutional demonstrator/poster space.
Repositories fit in the ‘University Enterprise Stack’ by virtue of being a system that delivers a business solution to a real financial problem.”

UK-CORR: UK Council of Research Repositories
individual rather than institutional, [email_address] UK has ‘rich heterogeneous repository landscape’ (C.Awre); lurk following comment from Dorothea Salo

UK-CORR: UK Council of Research Repositories
individual rather than institutional, [email_address] UK has ‘rich heterogeneous repository landscape’ (C.Awre); lurk following comment from Dorothea Salo: US mainly about OA full texts; UK mainly about … serving research assessment!
Is there more to IRs than the REF: lots of bibliographic records & little full text?
Should IRs only accept full text, not metadata only?
in absence of a CRIS, our IR had to do REF (Lancaster & Northampton)
was OA but then RAE2008, but should aim to include all (OU)
motive for IR was digital preservation, with different REF system; funder mandate compliance for OA; visibility via OA (Oxford/Bodleian)
RAE/REF is opportunity to engage institution-wide (Warwick)
Advent of CRIS (which don’t manage outputs well) may be opportunity for IRs to have role, including use of ‘metadata only’ as lever to obtain full text (Hull)
REF & research management information allows IRs to be embedded as platform for OA (Southampton)
RAE/REF has different goals to OA and IRs with low % of full text may undermine OA movement (Nottingham)

COAR: Confederation of Open Access Repositories
New: 1 st General Assembly in Madrid in March 2010
48 members drawn largely from Europe, but including both JISC & CNI, and also EDINA (University of Edinburgh)
Work Plan for 2010/12, including
Advocacy on behalf of OA and repositories (Rs) [both together?]
Populating (OA) Rs
Best practice documents
Facilitate and ensure data interoperability of (across?) Rs
interoperability with other systems (such as CRIS systems)
Support national helpdesks
Guidance on how Rs will form essential elements for global e-infrastructure
Promote R manager profession
Provide advice & guidance on suitable R infrastructure technologies
Global (meta)data store
Strategic partner other infrastructure-related initiatives worldwide

Managing Data in Difficult [Interesting] Times
End of an era? End of the R word? Embedded in domain-specific processes?
Moving from technology to policy & practice: some domain-specific, some common to repositories
Collection management: active curation & Linked relationships
versions, data|article|learning material
Collections, ‘see also’
First point of public issue (availability); Take-down regimes
Institutional stewardship responsibility for its born-digital [and digitised] content
"a university-based institutional repository [supports] a set of services … for the management and dissemination of digital materials created by the institution and its community members. … an organizational commitment to the stewardship of these digital materials, including long-term preservation where appropriate, as well as organization and access .. ." (C. Lynch, 2003)
What of the (new) shared services imperative?
Who does what, at what level/scale?

Theoretical basis for digital library?
Mix of document tradition & computation tradition
“ considerable simplification, … helpful to think … of two traditions, or mentalities, even cultures, co-exist in area of Information Science
“ Approaches based on a concern with documents, with signifying records: archives, bibliography, documentation, librarianship, records management, and the like
“ approaches based on uses for formal techniques, whether mechanical (such as punch cards and data-processing equipment) or mathematical (as in algorithmic procedures).”
Michael Buckland, UC Berkeley, 1998
http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~buckland/asis62.html

Time for me to stop
Hoping that I have left some space/place for questions
Thank you
Acknowledgements
Theo Andrew, Pablo de Castro & Robin Rice, Dave Flanders & Andy McGregor

Multimedia resources: candidate for repository?
platform for search and download of film, video and audio
wide range of subject coverage, including documentary film
Llicensed for use in learning, teaching and research
Being re-worked as the Digital Media Hub, combining
Film & Sound Online
initial 600 hours of film, digitised for downloading
NewsFilm Online
3000 hours of material from ITN & Reuters
Over 4TBs of clips to download
Release of product from JISC Digitisation programmes
Plus Education Image Gallery of still photography
Visual and Sound Materials Portal project
Discovering all sorts of audio-visual material
Special interest for social science as record on non-print record of 20 th Century: the first A-V century
With new forms of research material to use and to master

Repositories Update (UK)

by EDINA, University of Edinburgh

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

Repositories Update (UK) Presentation Transcript