Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Objects in Motion The Institutional Repositories Landscape

868 views

Published on

Talk prepared for the University of Surrey repository launch in May 2007, though undelivered personally due to ill health.

Published in: Education, Business
  • Be the first to comment

Objects in Motion The Institutional Repositories Landscape

  1. 1. Objects in Motion The Institutional Repositories Landscape University of Surrey, May 2007 Gareth J Johnson SHERPA Repository Development Officer SHERPA, University of Nottingham [email_address]
  2. 2. Introduction <ul><li>Who are SHERPA? </li></ul><ul><li>The Open Access landscape </li></ul><ul><li>Institutional Repositories </li></ul><ul><li>Services & support for authors </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusions </li></ul><ul><li>Slides online at: </li></ul><ul><li>SHERPA Homepage | Presentations </li></ul>
  3. 3. Who are SHERPA? <ul><li>SHERPA Project (2002-2005) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Securing a Hybrid Environment for Research Preservation and Access </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Setting up IRs with partners institutions (7 rising to 23) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>SHERPA (2006-) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Now ongoing project based team </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Broader portfolio of projects </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Funded by JISC, CURL, OSI, SPARK Europe, Wellcome </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Work activities include </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Assisting in set up & develop of institutional repositories </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Investigating related issues, disseminating experience & advice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>All projects relate to scholarly publishing & Open Access </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. Exeter (Affiliate)
  5. 5. SHERPA Today <ul><li>Respected voice in OA development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>International reputation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>SparcEurope 2007 Award for Outstanding Achievements in Scholarly Communication </li></ul><ul><li>Focus for bids and proposals for new work </li></ul><ul><li>Requests for collaboration & source of information and advice </li></ul><ul><li>Provides services seen as “ vital to OA infrastructure ” </li></ul>
  6. 6. Open Access Landscape <ul><li>Open Access </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Open Access Journals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Open Access Repositories </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data Providers and Service Providers </li></ul><ul><li>Repository networks </li></ul><ul><li>Funders mandates </li></ul><ul><li>Publisher activities </li></ul><ul><li>Less of a niche activity </li></ul>
  7. 7. Traditional Publication <ul><li>Personal academic effort lost </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No tangible reward for research publication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Loss of IPR to institution through copyright gifting </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Publicly funded research not publicly accessible </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Demands for accountability for public investment </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Potential readership limited by economics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Journal prices rise as budgets fall </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Research becomes inaccessible </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Untimely communication </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Publishing & indexing timescales </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Authors are willing to use repositories </li></ul><ul><ul><li>79% would deposit willingly if required to do so </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Researcher Benefits <ul><li>Global readership & research use </li></ul><ul><li>Speed of research dissemination </li></ul><ul><li>Conducive to improved citation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>- Lawrence (2001), Antelman (2004) & Harnad & Brodie (2004) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Personal professional standing </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Departmental Institutional significance & funding opportunities </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Preservation & long term accessibility </li></ul><ul><li>Ease of access </li></ul><ul><li>Potential for value added services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Personalised publications lists, hit rates & citation analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Plagiarism risk </li></ul>
  9. 9. Broader Benefits <ul><li>Institution </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Facilitates use & re-use of information assets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Raises profile and prestige of institution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Potential long-term cost savings </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Research community </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Frees up the communication process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Avoids unnecessary duplication </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Society benefits </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Publicly-funded research publicly available </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Aids in public understanding of research </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Institutional Repositories <ul><li>Digital collections that preserve and provide access to the intellectual output of an institution. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Raym Crow The case for institutional repositories: a SPARC position paper . 2002 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Contents freely available to all </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No subscription or restrictions to readership </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Encourage wider use of open access information assets </li></ul><ul><li>May contain a variety of digital objects </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e-prints, theses, e-learning objects, datasets etc </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Publishing & Repositories Author writes paper Submits to journal Paper refereed Revised by author Author submits final version Published in journal Research Deposit in open access repository Preprint Postprint Conference papers Learning Objects Theses Data, images, information etc Postprint
  12. 12. Why Institutional? <ul><li>The OAI-PMH allows a single gateway to search and access many repositories </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Subject-based portals or views </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subject-based classification and search </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Institutional storage and support </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Practical reasons </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Use institutional infrastructure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Integration into work-flows and systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Support is close to academic users and contributors </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Longevity concerns over some SRs </li></ul></ul>
  13. 15. Repository Contents <ul><li>Preprints </li></ul><ul><li>Postprints </li></ul><ul><li>Datasets </li></ul><ul><li>Learning objects </li></ul><ul><li>Videos </li></ul><ul><li>Sound files </li></ul><ul><li>Theses </li></ul><ul><li>Dissertations </li></ul><ul><li>Royalty publications </li></ul><ul><li>Conference papers </li></ul><ul><li>Technical reports </li></ul><ul><li>Grey literature </li></ul>Linkage between these objects
  14. 16. Practical Concerns <ul><li>Author concerns </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What about quality assurance & peer review? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If its freely available, what about plagiarism? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What about commercially or sensitivity material? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subject base more natural? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Threat to journals? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Repository administrator concerns </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IPR & Copyright </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Technical & software issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Policies & workflow </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Isolation & support </li></ul></ul>
  15. 17. Supporting Services <ul><li>OpenDOAR </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Quality assured survey & service </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Search for repositories & browse by criteria </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Variety of output formats </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Information on repositories includes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>OAI-PMH URLs for m2m use </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contact emails, address and tel of administrators </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Descriptive reviews of each site </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Standardised policies for 5 key aspects </li></ul></ul>
  16. 19. Search Tools <ul><li>OpenDOAR search </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Powered by Google Custom Search Engine </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Unlocks research in repositories </li></ul></ul><ul><li>BASE </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Bielefeld Academic Search engine </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OAIster </li></ul><ul><li>Google </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Google Scholar </li></ul></ul>
  17. 20. Supporting Services <ul><li>Based on work at Loughborough (2003) </li></ul><ul><li>SHERPA/RoMEO </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Author retained rights in plain English </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quality assured by publishers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Incorporating specific journal variations (soon) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Controlled descriptive vocabulary </li></ul></ul><ul><li>International reuse of data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Site available in regional languages </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A lobbying tool locally, nationally & globally </li></ul></ul>
  18. 22. SHERPA/RoMEO <ul><li>Highlights publisher’s archiving policies </li></ul><ul><ul><li>294 currently listed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Quality assured by contacting publishers </li></ul><ul><li>Prohibitive restrictions reduce colour level </li></ul>Figures accurate as of May 2007 White (28%) Archiving not formally supported Yellow (11%) Can archive pre-print only Blue (25%) Can archive post-print only Green (36%) Can archive both pre & post-prints
  19. 23. Mandates & Copyrights <ul><li>Funders Mandates </li></ul><ul><ul><li>OA an increasing condition of research grants </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>OA or hybrid journal publishing </li></ul></ul><ul><li>S/JULIET for Implications of funding mandates </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Highlights 3 key areas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>22 current funders listed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Quality assured through links with funders </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Uses controlled vocabulary </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Links to full policies wherever possible </li></ul></ul><ul><li>S/RoMEO links to JULIET data </li></ul>
  20. 25. Practicalities, Services & Support <ul><li>SHERPA Website </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Partner generated materials </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Guidance for authors & repository administrators </li></ul></ul><ul><li>DRIVER Support & RSP sites </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Also offering & developing reusable materials </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Repositories Support Project </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Providing training, mentoring, advice & enquiry resolution </li></ul></ul><ul><li>UKCoRR </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Professional society for repository workers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Focus on practical issues and real solutions </li></ul></ul>
  21. 26. Long Term Preservation <ul><li>Number of Projects working on sustainable access </li></ul><ul><li>SHERPA DP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Looking at digital preservation models </li></ul></ul><ul><li>VERSIONS project </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Life cycle of documents & repositories </li></ul></ul><ul><li>LOCKSS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Software developers for maintaining access to local content </li></ul></ul>
  22. 27. In 10 Years…? <ul><li>Who knows? But whatever happens - </li></ul><ul><ul><li>If definitive versions are of value to research work (and they are) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If journals are of value to research work (and they are) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If publishers are of value to research work (and they are) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If learned societies are of value to research work (and they are) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If repositories of work are of value to research work (and they are) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Then they will be used </li></ul>
  23. 28. Conclusion <ul><li>There are many concerns for repository administrators </li></ul><ul><li>The global scholarly communication debate is not an easy one to engage in isolation </li></ul><ul><li>SHERPA services and projects exist to support the OA movement in the UK </li></ul>
  24. 29. Gareth J Johnson SHERPA Repository Development Officer SHERPA, University of Nottingham [email_address] 0115-84-67544
  25. 30. Sites of Interest <ul><li>www.sherpa.ac.uk/ </li></ul><ul><li>opendoar.org/ </li></ul><ul><li>www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/ </li></ul><ul><li>www.sherpa.ac.uk/juliet / </li></ul><ul><li>base.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/index_english.html </li></ul><ul><li>www.sherpa.ac.uk /update/ </li></ul>

×