Digitisation and institutional repositories 1

  • 7,383 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
7,383
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
47
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Institutional Repositories: Indian & Global Perspectives Surinder Kumar Technical Director National Informatics Centre New Delhi [email_address]
  • 2. Scientific Communication Channel - Conventional Journals
    • Over 20,000 peer-review journals
    • Number of papers published increases by 3.5% per year
    • Journal prices have increased significantly more quickly than inflation over last 20 years.
    • Even the wealthiest institution cannot purchase and access to all the information that all of its researchers require.
    • Many publishers charge extra for online access – so causing more pressure on budgets
  • 3. Scientific Communication: Stake holders
    • Authors
      • Their work is not seen by all their peers
      • they do not get the recognition they desire
      • Despite the fact they often have to pay page charges, colour figure charges, reprint charges, etc.
      • Often the rights they have given up in exchange for publication mean there are things that they cannot do with their own work
  • 4. Scientific Communication..contd
    • Researchers
      • They cannot view all the research literature they need
      • they are less effective
    • Libraries
      • Cannot satisfy the information needs of their users
    • Society
      • We all lose out if the communication channels are not optimal.
  • 5. http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/timeline.htm
  • 6. OA Movement
    • July 4, 1971 . Project Gutenberg launched by Michael Hart.
    • August 16, 1991 . arXiv launched by Paul Ginsparg.
    • June 27, 1994 . Self-archiving first proposed by Stevan Harnad.
    • June 26, 1997 . The National Center for Biotechnology Information launched PubMed . At the same time, Medline content, already online, became free when incorporated into PubMed.
    • May 1998 . African Journals Online (AJOL) launched by the International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publication (INASP).
    • 1999 . The Open Archives Initiative (OAI) is launched. 1999 .
  • 7.
    • July 19, 2000 . BioMed Central published its first free online article.
    • July 1, 2002 . Eprints , the OA archiving software, went open source and affiliated with GNU .
    • June 20, 2003 . The Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing is released.
    • October 13, 2003 . The Public Library of Science launched its first open-access journal, PLoS Biology .
    • February 24, 2004 . The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions ( IFLA ) released the IFLA Statement on Open Access to Scholarly Literature and Research Documentation .
    • June 3, 2004 . Elsevier announced its new policy permitting authors to post the final editions of their full-text Elsevier articles to their personal web sites or institutional repositories.
    • June 15, 2004 . The European Commission launched an inquiry into the system for publishing European research. Among the major topics are rapidly rising journal prices and open access to research findings.
  • 8.
    • July 14, 2004 . The U.S. House Appropriations Committee adopted language proposing that the National Institutes of Health ( NIH ) require open access to NIH-funded research through deposit in the NIH's PubMed Central .
    • July 20, 2004 . The U.K. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee issued a lengthy report based on its inquiry into journal prices and open access. The report recommended that public funding agencies require open access to publicly-funded research through deposit in the authors' institutional repositories.
    • August 26, 2004 . Twenty-five Nobel laureates from the U.S. wrote an open letter to the U.S. Congress in support of the NIH open-access plan .
    • October 5, 2004 . Sage Publications adopted a new policy to allow its authors to deposit their postprints on open-access institutional repositories without case-by-case permission.
  • 9.
    • September 23, 2005 . Participants at the 9th World Congress on Health Information and Libraries, Commitment to Equity (Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, September 20-23, 2005) issued two declarations on access to knowledge. The first, The Declaration of Salvador - Commitment to Equity , asks governments to promote equitable and
    • open access. The second, The Salvador Declaration on Open Access: The Developing World Perspective , asks governments to require open access to publicly-funded research.
    • October 1, 2005 . The Wellcome Trust starts implementing its new open-access mandate for Wellcome-funded research.
    • December 1, 2005 . The Ukrainian Parliament adopted a resolution identifying open access as a national priority ( Ukranian text , English summary ).
    • January 2006 . The European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics (ERCIM) published its Statement on Open Access .
  • 10. November 22, 2006. Participants in a Bangalore conference (November 2-3, 2006) drafted a model National Open Access Policy for Developing Countries .
    • December 1, 2006 . IFLA and UNESCO released the IFLA/UNESCO Internet Manifesto Guidelines (dated September 2006), recommending open access as one way to implement the 2002 IFLA Internet Manifesto (see August 2002 above).
  • 11. Open Access-definition
    • What Open Access is
      • The Open Access research literature is composed of free, online copies of peer-reviewed journal articles and conference papers as well as technical reports, theses and working papers . In most cases there are no licensing restrictions on their use by readers . They can therefore be used freely for research, teaching and other purposes.
    • What Open Access is not
      • It is not self-publishing, nor a way to bypass peer-review and publication, nor is it a kind of second-class, cut-price publishing route. It is simply a means to make research results freely available online to the whole research community.
        • http:// www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name = pub_openaccess
  • 12. The B’s of Open Access
    • Budapest Open Access Initiative
    • (February 2002)
    • Bethesda Declaration (June 2003)
    • Berlin Declaration (October 2003)
    • Commitment to Equity (Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, September 20-23, 2005) issued two declarations on access to knowledge. The first, The Declaration of Salvador - Commitment to Equity , asks governments to promote equitable and open access. The second, The Salvador Declaration on Open Access: The Developing World Perspective , asks governments to require open access to publicly-funded research.
    • National Open Access Policy for Developing Countries
  • 13. Definition of Open Access
    • The Budapest Initiative
    • There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By ‘open access’, we mean it’s free availability….. The only constraint …authors’control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged.
    • http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shmtl
  • 14. Definition-contd
    • The Bethesda Declaration
    • …let users “copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship…”
  • 15. Definition- contd
    • The Berlin Declaration
    • … let users “copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship…”
    • http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.hmtl
  • 16. Definition-contd.
    • Accoring to Directory of Open Access Journal :
    • We define open access journals as journals that use a funding model that does not charge readers or their institutions for access. From the BOAI definition [1] of "open access" we take the right of users to "read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles" as mandatory for a journal to be included in the directory.
  • 17. The Two Colors of Open Access Budapest Initiatives
    • Gold –Open Access journals
    • Green –Author Self-Archiving
  • 18. Open Access Journals; the Golden Road
    • BioMed Central
    • Public Library of Science
    • European Geosciences Union
    • SciELO
    • ICAAP (International Coalition for the Advancement of Academic Publishing)
    • medKNOW journals
  • 19. Open Archives; the Green Road
    • Centralized, subject archives
    • Institutional repositories (IRs)
  • 20. Centralized, subject archives
    • arXiv.org
    • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics
    • Computing Research Repository (CoRR)
    • NIH PubMed Central
  • 21. Institutional Repository –definition
    • http://www.library.uiuc.edu/scholcomm/glossary.htm “An online, searchable, web-accessible database containing works of research deposited by scholars. Purpose is both increased access to scholarship and long-term preservation. Digital repositories are often built to serve a specific institution's community of users, in which cases they are called institutional repositories . There are also discipline-specific digital repositories, like arXiv.org . Most digital repositories may be searched together via OAIster .”
    • http://www.bl.uk/about/strategic/glossary.html “An organisation that has responsibility for the long-term maintenance of digital resources, as well as for making them available to communities agreed on by the depositor and the repository.”
    • http://www.edtechpost.ca/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GlossaryAnalysis “A collection of digital assets and/or metadata accessible via a network without prior knowledge of the digital repository’s structure. A repository is a network accessible server that can process the 6 OAI-PMH requests in the manner described in this document. A repository is managed by a data provider to expose metadata to harvesters.”
  • 22. Institutional Repository –definition
    • SPARC “An institutional repository is a digital archive of the intellectual product created by the faculty, research staff, and students of an institution and accessible to end users both within and outside of the institution, with few if any barriers to access. In other words, the content of an institutional repository is:
    • Institutionally defined;
    • Scholarly;
    • Cumulative and perpetual; and
    • Open and interoperable.”
    • URL:http://www.arl.org/sparc/IR/ir.html
  • 23. Institutional Repository –definition
    • JISC It is “as a managed storage system with content deposited on a personal, departmental, institutional, national, regional or consortia basis, providing services to designated communities, with content drawn from the range of digital resources that support learning, teaching and research.”
    • URL:http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded/digital-repositories-2005.pdf
  • 24. Institutional Repository –definition
    • Clifford Lynch (2003), Executive Director of the Coalition for Networked Information “IR is described as “a set of services that a university offers to the members of its community for the management and dissemination of digital materials created by the institution and its community members.
    • URL:http://www.arl.org/newsltr/226/ir.html
  • 25. Institutional Repository –common features
    • Content is deposited by content creator, owner or by proxy
    • Manages content as well as metadata
    • The repository offers a minimum set of services such as put, get, search, access control
    • The repository must be sustainable and trusted, well supported and well managed
  • 26. Institutional Repositories - benefits
    • • “ Some proponents of the open access movement see the IR or open access archive as the most cost effective and immediate route to providing access to the results of publicly funded research, thereby maximizing the potential research impact of these publications”.
    • • “ Some research libraries see IRs as a means to expand on the amount and diversity of scholarly material that is collected and preserved, thus enhancing teaching, learning and research at the host institution and beyond.”
  • 27. Institutional Repositories - benefits
    • “ Some see IRs as a way to enhance an institution’s prestige or branding by showcasing its faculty’s research output.”
    • “ IRs is considered as an essential infrastructure for the reform of the entire enterprise of scholarly communication and publishing.”
    • “ Remedying the weakness of current local self archiving; running personal or departmental web servers is wasteful of academics’ time and academics frequently lack essential”
  • 28. Institutional Repositories - benefits
    • Widely disseminating academic products and ideas of faculty, and enhancing paper’s cited rate
    • Creating ease of access for peer group, and enhancing possibility of easy searching by adopting OAI-compatible standards
    • Demonstrating to funding bodies the breadth and depth of research output from a university or institute to stake or further a leadership claim in a specific subject areas
  • 29. Institutional Repository-Challenges
    • Social
      • creating a work group or working as a group
      • mobilizing the content
      • feeling of burden of unnecessary work and additional learning of technology.
  • 30. IR-Stakeholders Involved
    • Development of IR is collaborative efforts involved number of stake holders such Scientists, Researchers, IT personnel, computer services and the library.
    • Institutional repository should require a large amount of digital storage, powerful servers, and technical expertise that is likely to be found within a computer services division.
  • 31. Setting Up Institutional Repository
    • Challenges
      • Technical
        • selection of hardware,
        • communication bandwidth
        • suitable software
        • operational problems like loading Software uploading, uploading data, set-up test server, manage process, maintenance and preservation.
  • 32. IR-Stakeholders Involved
    • a centralized computer services have already a large digital storage system in which IR can be integrated, as well as firewalls and authentication.
    • IT training department is another important wing in which IR can be integrated so that training to further development can be organized.
    • library has to offers as much as computer services and IT training division. The library needs to be involved in an IR project because of the following reasons:
      • The core functions of the IRs such as metadata submission, metadata application, discovery mechanism, preservation etc are identical with the core functions of the libraries.
      • The libraries have the existing relationship with the researchers
      • The level of trust that researchers have for the libraries
  • 33. IR-Stakeholders Involved
    • Ideally, it should have the following persons in the establishment of a trusted and successful IRs.
      • Participation of persons in expertise in metadata and preservation
      • Persons with good graphic and visual design
      • Persons with network abilities as it requires a lot of work in authentication, firewalls
      • Parsons with a good knowledge of database and data storage, backup facilities
      • Persons with marketing and personal relationship as it is required for making aware IRs usefulness
      • Parsons with good knowledge of copyright law
      • Moreover, support from users group
    • Top-down support must be required for implementing the IRs project.
  • 34. IR-Users of IRs
    • Developers of IRs should aware of the potential user of IRs.
    • It could be ascertain by adopting informal survey of the researchers.
      • How many researchers are keeping their research papers in their websites
      • How many times they are sending e-mails to their colleagues by sending their papers
      • Ask them whether they have ready reference to their papers
      • Where are they currently store their papers
  • 35. IR-Type of contents
    • Research Communities along with the developer of IRs have to decide what kind of collections have to deposit in the IRs. type of contents found in the IRs is described below:
    • EPrints – Preprints/Postprint
    • Working Papers and Reports
    • Conference papers & Proceedings
    • Electronic Thesis and Dissertations
    • DataSets
    • Supplementary Materials
    • Online and overlay journals
    • Books
    • Learning Objects
    • Multimedia Collections
    • Electronic Portfolios
  • 36. IR- Types of Services
    • IRs can offer its members a number of services to enhance more number of deposit in the repositories]. These are:
      • Digitization
      • Metadata Enhancement
      • Batch Import facility
      • Proxy services (for some members initially)
      • User Support & Training
  • 37. IR: Enabling Technology
    • The leading open source as well Proprietor IR software available to choose among the best.
    • The Open Source IR Software:
    • Archimede
    • CDSware
    • DSpace
    • EPrints
    • Fedora
    • Greenstone
  • 38. Archimede
    • URL:http://www1.bibl.ulaval.ca/archimede/index.en.html
    • Description: Developed at Laval University Library, Archimede is open source software for building institutional repositories. It has been developedwith a “multilingual perspective,” offering English, French and Spanish interfaces.
    • Availability
    • Free, open source software, delivered under the GNU general public licence.
    • Download Archimede software from SourceForge:
    • http://sourceforge.net/projects/archimede
  • 39. Archimede..contd
    • Features
    • Using communities and collections of content.
    • The search engine is based on open source Lucene, using LIUS(Lucene Index Update and Search), a customized framework developed.
    • Technical support: http://sourceforge.net/projects/archimede/
    • Example site
    • Laval University Library
  • 40. CDSware (CERN Document Server Software)
    • URL: http://cdsware.cern.ch
    • Description: Developed by CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, based in Geneva, CDSware is designed to run an electronic preprint server, online library catalogue, or a document system on the web.
    • Availability
    • Free, open source software distributed under the GNU General Public Licence
    • Download location: http://cdsware.cern.ch/download/
    • Features
    • OAI compliant
    • MARC 21 metadata standard
    • Full text search
    • Database: MySQL
    • Powerful search engine with Google -like syntax
    • User personalization, including document baskets and email alerts
  • 41.
    • CDSware (CERN Document Server Software)
    • URL: http://cdsware.cern.ch
    • Description: Developed by CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear
    • Research, based in Geneva, CDSware is designed to run an electronic
    • preprint server, online library catalogue, or a document system on the web.
    • Availability
    • Free, open source software distributed under the GNU General Public
    • Licence
    • Latest version: CDSware v0.3.3
    • Download location: http://cdsware.cern.ch/download/
    • Features
    • OAI compliant
    • MARC 21 metadata standard
    • Full text search
    • Database: MySQL
    • Extensibility: API available
    • Powerful search engine with Google -like syntax
    • User personalization, including document baskets a nd email
    • notification alerts
  • 42. CDSware (CERN Document Server Software)
    • Technical support
    • Free email support at cds.support@cern.ch or through mailing list:project-cdsware-users@cern.ch
    • Paid technical support is also available.
    • Example site
    • CERN document server: http://cdsweb.cern.ch/
    • At CERN, CDSware manages over 400 collections of data, consistingof over 600,000 bibliographic records, including more than 250,000 full text documents.
  • 43. DSpace URL: http://www.dspace.org
    • Description: DSpace is a digital library system designed to capture, store, index, preserve, and redistribute the intellectual output of a university’s research faculty in digital formats. Developed jointly by HP Labs and MIT Libraries.
    • Availability
    • Free, open source software jointly developed by MIT and Hewlett Packard Labs.
    • Distributed through the BSD open source licence
    • Download at http://sourceforge.net/projects/dspace/
  • 44. DSpace URL: http://www.dspace.org...contd
    • Features
    • All content types accepted
    • Dublin Core metadata standard
    • Customisable web interface
    • OAI compliant
    • Workflow process for content submission
    • Import/export capabilities
    • Decentralised submission process
    • Extensible through Java API
    • Full text search using Lucene or Google
    • Database: PostgreSQL, Oracle
  • 45. DSpace URL: http://www.dspace.org...contd
    • Technical support
    • DSpace-Tech mailing list for technical questions, discussions:
    • http://www.dspace.org/feedback/mailing.html
    • Example sites
    • Cambridge University
    • Cranfield University
    • Drexel University
    • Duke University
    • University of Edinburgh
    • Erasmus University of Rotterdam
    • Glasgow University
    • Hong Kong University of Science & Technology Library
    • Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    • Université de Montréal (Erudit)
    • University of Oregon
  • 46. EPrints URL: http://software.eprints.org
    • Description: GNU EPrints is free, open source software developed at the University of Southampton. It is designed to create a pre-print institutional repository for scholarly research, but can be used for other purposes.
    • Availability
    • Distributed under the GNU general public licence Download software at http://software.eprints.org/download.php
    • Demo server: http://software.eprints.org/demo.php
  • 47. EPrints URL: http://software.eprints.org
    • Any content type accepted
    • Web-based interface
    • Workflow features: content goes through “moderation process” for approval, rejection, or return to author for amendment.
    • MySQL database
    • Extensible through API using Perl programming language.
    • Full text searching
    • RSS output
  • 48. EPrints URL: http://software.eprints.org
    • Technical support
    • EPrints-tech mailing list: http://software.eprints.org/maillist.php
    • General announcements and “underground” discussion list also
    • Available at http://software.eprints.org/maillist.php.
    • EPrints wiki: http://wiki.eprints.org/w/
  • 49. EPrints URL: http://software.eprints.org
    • Example sites
    • California Institute of Technology
    • CogPrints Cognitive Science Eprint Archive
    • Digitale Publikationen der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
    • Glasgow ePrints Service
    • Institut Jean Nicod - Paris
    • National University of Ireland (NUI) Maynooth Eprint Archive
    • Oxford EPrints
    • Psycoloquy
    • University of Bath
    • University of Durham
    • University of Southampton
  • 50. Fedora URL: http://www.fedora.info/index.shtml
    • Description: Jointly developed by University of Virginia and CornellUniversity, Fedora (Flexible Extensible Digital Object Repository) serves as a foundation for building interoperable web-based digital libraries, institutional repositories, and other information management systems.
    • Availability
    • Free, open source, Distributed under the Mozilla open source licence, Download at http://www.fedora.info/
  • 51. Fedora URL: http://www.fedora.info/index.shtml
    • Features
    • Any content type accepted, Dublin Core metadata
    • OAI compliant, XML submission and storage
    • Extensibility: APIs for management, access, web services
    • Content versioning
    • Migration utility
    • Technical support
    • Free online support through mailing list:
    • https://comm.nsdlib.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-users
    • Fedora WIKI: http://www.fedora.info/wiki/bin/view/Fedora/WebHome
  • 52. Fedora URL: http://www.fedora.info/index.shtml
    • Example sites
    • Indiana University
    • Kings College, London
    • New York University
    • Northwestern University
    • Oxford University
    • Rutgers University
    • Tufts University
    • University of Virginia
    • Yale University
  • 53. Greenstone URL: http://www.greenstone.org/cgi-bin/library
    • Description: Developed by the New Zealand Digital Library Project at the University of Waikato, It is a suite of software for building digital library collections and developed and distributed in cooperation UNESCO and the Human Info NGO .
    • Availability
    • Free multi-lingual, open source software, Distributed under the GNU General Public Licence, Download at
    • http://www.greenstone.org/cgi-bin/library?e=p-enhome-utfZz-8&a=p&p=download
  • 54. Greenstone URL: http://www.greenstone.org/cgi-bin/library
    • Features
    • Multilingual: Four core languages are English,French, Spanish and Russian. Over 25 additional language interfaces available Includes a pre-built demonstration collection
    • Offers an “Export to CDROM” feature
    • Technical support General user discussion list:
    • https://list.scms.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/greenstone-users
    • Commercial support is available for a fee.
  • 55. Greenstone URL: http://www.greenstone.org/cgi-bin/library
    • Example sites
    • Books from the Past/ Llyfrau o'r Gorffennol
    • Gresham College Archive
    • Peking University Digital Library
    • Project Gutenberg at Ibiblio
    • Texas A&M University: Center for the Study of Digital Libraries
    • University of Applied Sciences, Stuttgart, Germany
  • 56. CONTENTdm™ URL: http://contentdm.com/
    • Example sites
    • Full list of organisations using CONTENTdm at
    • http://contentdm.com/customers/customer-list.html including:
    • § University of Arizona
    • § University of Iowa
    • § University of Oregon
    • § University of Washington Libraries
    • § Oregon State University
    • § Colorado State University Libraries
    • § Brigham Young University
  • 57. Open Repository URL: http://www.openrepository.com/default.asp
    • Features
    • Accepts wide variety of content formats
    • Conversion utility to create PDFs
    • OAI-based metadata
    • Feature list available at
    • http://www.openrepository.com/Open.Rep.Sales.Flyer.pdf
    • Technical support
    • Full technical support available
  • 58. Understanding Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) for Institutional Repositories
    • Copyright offers protection to content creators to control how their materialcan be used and distributed.
    • Institutional repositories deal with copyright issues on two fronts: in collecting content from scholars, by which they must secure the rights to distribute and preserve the content, and in distributing content to end users, by which they must balance the tenets of open access with copyright protection.
  • 59. Understanding Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) for Institutional Repositories…contd
    • As you work with faculty who want to submit their content to an institutionalrepository, you might want to encourage them to retain copyright to their work or at least retain rights to publish their work electronically when they publish their papers.
  • 60. Content Licences
    • An institutional repository might have these two licences:
    • Deposit licence: An agreement between the creator (or copyright holder) and the institution giving the repository the right to distributeand preserve the work.
    • Distribution licence: An agreement between the author or creator or copyright holder and the end user governing the uses that can be
    • made of the work.
  • 61. Creative Commons Licence
    • The Creative Commons Licences offer content creators and distributors a variety of licences, letting the content creator stipulate conditions for using the licenced content. See the Creative Commons site at
    • http://creativecommons.org/ for information on the licences offered and tools
    • For content creators/distributors.
    • The Creative Commons site also offers excellent background information onthe legal concepts of fundamental intellectual property concepts:
    • http://creativecommons.org/learn/legal/.
  • 62. Copyright Guidelines for Scholars
    • Scholars who place their research in institutional repositories may need additional information on copyright issues. Several organisations provide excellent information and guides to understanding copyright for scholarly research.
  • 63. ..contd
    • The Creative Commons group offers important information on content licensing for faculty, researchers, and authors
    • (http://creativecommons.org/learn/licenses/).
    • Publishers usually will agree to an author’s request to retain rights to postcontent to a website or institutional repository. Faculty should be encouraged to retain these rights before and after publishing their work so they can contribute their content to online repositories.
  • 64. ..contd
    • Project RoMEO offers excellent guidance for scholars interested in selfarchiving. Their website provides valuable information on negotiating content agreements with publishers, with a guide to how publishers commonly licence content from faculty.
    • www.sherpa.ac.uk/ romeo .php
  • 65. … contd
    • ROMEO colourArchiving policy
    • green can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/PDF
    • blue can archive post-print (ie final draft post-refereeing) or publisher's version/PDF
    • yellow can archive pre-print (ie pre-refereeing)
    • white archiving not formally supported
  • 66. IPR..contd
    • The EPrints project publishes extensive information and guidance on self archivingand open archives, as well as a glossary of terms in this area
    • (http://www.eprints.org/glossary/) and links to the most important sites for research http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/.
  • 67. Rights Management
    • For institutional repositories,
    • Rights Management generally refers to how content is distributed in accordance with copyright rules and to indicate whoowns the copyright for the content. Institutional repositories usually aim foropen access. However, there may be instances where access needs to berestricted, such as information related to patentable materials.
  • 68. Policy Guidelines for Institutional Repositories
    • Creating Policy Guidelines
    • Forming a Policy Advisory Group
    • Issues to Consider
    • Technology Implications
  • 69. Creating Policy Guidelines
    • 1. Policies that your project team can resolve internally – for example, a list of supported formats.
    • 2. Policies related to library policies – such as collections or access to collections.
    • 3. Policy decisions related to the institute’s policies – user authentication and identification, privacy policies, theses, etc.
  • 70. Forming a Policy Advisory Group
    • Most successful institutional repository projects form a Policy Group to adviseon all policy decisions. The Policy Group can help to determine your institutional repository’s policies on content submission and distribution, privacy and licensing issues, and other policy guidelines.
  • 71. Policy Issues to Consider
    • Content – formats, kinds of content you’ll collect, etc.
    • Collections – what constitutes a collection, how collections are managed and administered, if you’re organising your content by department or clusters, etc.
    • Copyright – intellectual property agreements and rights issues.
  • 72. Policy Issues to Consider
    • Preservation formats . Which formats are supported, and to what
    • degree?
    • Withdrawal of items . Can items ever be deleted, or only hidden?
    • Metadata . Who is authorised to enter metadata? Only library staff or
    • faculty and contributors?
  • 73. Technology Implications of Policy Decisions
    • Build your service flexibly to accommodate policy shifts where feasible.
  • 74. Cost Modelling for Institutional Repositories
    • No Easy Answers
    • there are no shortcuts or “turn key solutions” to building an institutional repository. You still need to design aservice, apply the proper technology platform, create policies, recruit content communities, enlist faculty participation, and market the service to your users.
  • 75. Institutional Repositories..contd
    • Separation of content and service components
    • Content layer [data providers]
      • Registration, certification, archiving
      • Examples: Over 1,000 data providers today
    • Service layer [service providers]
      • Cross-archive searching (OAI metadata std./ harvesting)
      • Citation linking, alerting services, overlay journals, etc.
      • Examples: ARC, OAIster, CiteBase
  • 76. IR-Indian Scenario
    • At present, the University of Southampton’s worldwide registry of OAI compliant open access repositories lists more than 1000 repositories. Number of IRs produced by India is around 50. To make it available as single virtual archive and also means of providing seamless search, it is becoming essential to form a network of connected research repositories and resource discovery services to form National digital repository system. Examples are CARL, ARROW, DRIVER etc
  • 77.
    • Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR) lists 52 repositories have been registered, however, this number may be higher as certain repositories have yet not been registered with ROAR.
    • Analysis of IRs in India
    • Out of 52, 13 were not functional at the time of writing paper
    • Number of them have not been updating
    • To look further, it is not reaching the critical mass
  • 78.
    • As per survey conduced by Webometrics 2010 for latest ranking of World’s open access repositories for visibilities, quality and available items[18], there are seven repositories listed from India out of 400 IRs surveyed and their details as given in the following table.
  • 79. 3164 9-11-2004 National Aerospace Laboratories Institutional Repository 278 6 3731 19-04-2005 Raman Research Institute Digital Library 278 6 3528 06-04-2010 National Institute of Oceanography Digital library 245 5 2468 11-11-2004 Indian Institute of Astrophysics 218 4 188 17-01-2004 Indian Statistical Institute digital Library 180 3 2645 22-03-2005 OpenMed, National Informatics Centre 148 2 21472 05-04-2004 Indian Institute of Science 82 1 No of records Year of establishment Name of IR Rank Sr No.
  • 80. Barriers to IRs
    • Scholars as authors have concerns
      • peer review (or lack of it)
      • Cost: Authors have to pay
      • Prestige
      • Archiving (not proven)
      • Information overload
    • Copyright issues: Trend for publishers to accept articles that are not posted prior to publication
    • Not everyone has access to the web –especially in developing countries
    • It merely shifts the costs from libraries to the funding agencies or employers
  • 81. Conclusion
    • Librarians have to play a major role not only in establishing IR but also help in populating IRs by forming a bridge between faculty and IR.
    • Conduct regular seminar
    • Invite expert to clear the doubt of faculty
    • Continuous Awareness is needed
    • Librarians keep themselves upto date with the development of IR
  • 82.  
  • 83.  
  • 84.  
  • 85. http://www.insa.ac.in/
  • 86.  
  • 87.  
  • 88. Thanks