Institutional Repositories

Institutional Digital Repositories: in our dreams? in our lifetimes? : 

Institutional Digital Repositories: in our dreams? in our lifetimes? Wallace McLendon, Associate Director Library Services University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Health Sciences Library FITAC January 15, 2003

Libraries : 

Libraries Current journal system for distributing scholarly research is unsustainable Trends in Molecular Science $140 in 2000, $1015 in 2002 (625% increase) Human Molecular Genetics $1030 in 2000, $1450 in 2002 (41% increase) J ournal of the History of Medicine & Allied Sciences $105 in 2000, $240 in 2002 (129% increase)

Present journal system : 

Present journal system Those who bear direct/indirect cost also bear cost of journal subscription Faculty produce research Academic editors + peer reviewers select/validate Libraries purchase, process, house, & distribute journals to end users Libraries preserve

Institutional Repositories : 

Institutional Repositories digital collections – not links to or referrals capture & preserve intellectual output of universities Pre-prints, works-in-progress, peer-reviewed articles, monographs, research, book chapters, enduring teaching materials, data sets, conference papers, theses, dissertations, gray literature

Why now? Convergence : 

Why now? Convergence Distribution capabilities of internet Growth in the volume of research Loss of scholarly research Growing library frustration with monopolistic effects of traditional publishing system Availability of digital networks & publishing technologies Uncertainty of research preservation

Potentials : 

Potentials Expand access to research Reduce monopoly through alternatives University regain control of scholarship Reflect quality of university, demonstrate relevance of university’s research, increase institutions visibility and value Build on grassroots faculty self-posting online Promote institution rather than journal/publisher

Elements of scholarly communication : 

Elements of scholarly communication Certifying research quality Ensuring dissemination and accessibility Preserving research for future use

Certifying research quality : 

Certifying research quality User communities would control input Academic departments, departmental peers Sponsoring community Pre-prints have begun (e.g., http://arxiv.org for physics/math) May evolve to overlay journals Digital aggregators with greater review Eminent editors, qualified reviewers, rigorous standards

Ensuring Access : 

Ensuring Access Institutions deposit research in content repositories IR systems interoperable to accommodate multiple search engines Maintain access & rights management systems

IR Initiatives : 

IR Initiatives

DSPace – MIT & Hewlett-Packard <www.dspace.org> : 

DSPace – MIT & Hewlett-Packard <www.dspace.org> preserves intellectual output of MIT distributes institution's digital works over web through search & retrieval system accommodates variety of digital formats first digital repository to address issues in multi-disciplinary archive customized user portal for each community reflecting community’s practices, terminology designed to support federation of IRs preserve digital works over the long term

California Digital Library e-Scholarship Repository <http://escholarship.cdlib.org> : 

California Digital Library e-Scholarship Repository <http://escholarship.cdlib.org> distributes research & working papers U of Cal faculty web-based dissemination of digitally reformatted publications repository for research, scholarly output including pre-publication scholarship, peer-reviewed content support for presentation and dissemination of interactive publications & teaching materials suite of digital services to store/distribute research supports topical alert service

Biomed Central <www.biomedcentral.com> : 

Biomed Central <www.biomedcentral.com> First commercial publisher (Current Science Group) Launched May 2000 80+ biomed journals (Journal of Biology, Genome Biology, Arthritis Research & Therapy, etc.) “Start a new journal” program 24 editorial groups, 26 more to launch 2002 Online submission, peered reviewed, indexed in PubMed, BIOSIS Average time of publication is 11 weeks Costs – author charged $500 per article – charge waived if institution is member, author retains copyright

PLoS - Public Library of Science (PLoS) <www.publiclibraryofscience.org> : 

PLoS - Public Library of Science (PLoS) <www.publiclibraryofscience.org> $9 million Moore Foundation grant 300,000 signatures from leading scientists – publish in, edit, review only those journals agreeing to grant unrestricted free distribution rights through online public resources within 6 months of initial publication date Authors to pay $1,500 per article (Hughes Med Institute $11 billion endowment cover author’s costs)

BOAI - Budapest Open Access Initiative www.soros.org/openaccess/ : 

BOAI - Budapest Open Access Initiative www.soros.org/openaccess/ $3 million grant from Open Society Institute www.soros.org/osi.html Funds institutions in selected countries to publish in open-access journals Content from 2000 biomedical journals but limited to 100 developing countries

Additional IR Projects : 

Additional IR Projects Ohio State University Knowledge Bank http://www.lib.ohio-state.edu/Lib_Info/scholarcom/KBproposal.html Coordinated by Distance Learning, Continuing Education Committee, University Library, CIO’s office, OCLC & Chemical Chemical Abstracts Caltech Library Systems Digital Collection http://library.caltech.edu/digital PubMed Central www.pubmedcentral.gov Sponsored by National Institutes, hosted by NLM ARNO – Academic Research, Netherlands Online Los Alamos e-print archive http://arxiv.Cornell.edu (physics & math pre-prints)

Impact on libraries : 

Impact on libraries Libraries services will shift to support faculty in open access publishing activities Facilitate self-publishing – forms, templates, self-indexing, self key wording, no intermediary Metadata tagging, authority controls, increase usability of data Increase visibility of library Library will work more closely with faculty

Impact on faculty : 

Impact on faculty Changing patterns of professional recognition, career advancement Faculty perceptions may vary depending on discipline Pre-print disciplines will be early adopters

Impact on publishers : 

Impact on publishers Revenue threatened? Deconstructs that each article & journal is a monopoly A probable co-existence, a better balance

Costs – more procedural and managerial than technical (Crow p. 28) : 

Costs – more procedural and managerial than technical (Crow p. 28) Content access policies Metadata storage & presentation Digital document identifiers (DOIs) Author permission & licensing agreements Long-term archiving guidelines Content submission training for staff and authors Marketing the IR to prospective authors

Software : 

Software Eprints <www.eprints.org>– free software from U of Southhampton, to help create archives of online research papers Open archives <www.openarchives.org> metadata codes to attach to research papers so that search engines can access desired information

SPARC - Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition <www.arl.org/sparc> : 

SPARC - Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition <www.arl.org/sparc> Duke, NC State, NC Central, and UNC-CH (TRLN) major sponsor International alliance 200+ college & research libraries constructive response to market dysfunctions in scholarly communication system…[which has] reduced dissemination of scholarship & crippled libraries… serves as a catalyst for action

Slide 30: 

Best white paper on institutional repositories - wm

Observations : 

Observations IR seems to work best when discipline specific We are losing scholarly information that doesn’t fit into books and peer-reviewed print containers Librarians have been interested in books and journals because those are the containers that researchers and scholars have placed content in -- this “interest” among librarians is changing If data sets are as valuable a record of scholarly research as a printed, peer-reviewed journal article, libraries & universities need to rethink what is saved, accessible, & preserved Concerns : sustainability – who will pay for storage, staff, & technology; inertia of publishing system + inertia of tenure system

First readings : 

First readings Crow, Raym. “The Case for Institutional Repositories: A SPARC Position Paper.” Washington, DC: The Scholarly Publishing & Academic Resources Coalition. http://www.arl.org/sparc/core/index.asp?page=f60 Fletcher, Gordon. Averting the Crisis in Medical Publishing – Open Access Journals. He@lth Information on the Internet, December 2002. Gibbons, Susan, “Seeking a System for Community-driven Digital Collections at the University of Rochester,” SPARC E-News (February-March, 2002). http://www.arl.org/sparc/core/index.asp?page=g23#5 Harmon, Amy. “New Premise in Science: Get the Word out Quickly, Online.” New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/science/17JOUR.html?ei=1&en=1d9bd31d8e720395&ex=1041079105&pagewanted=print&position=top National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP) http://ww.digitalpreservation.gov/ndiipp/

First readings (continued) : 

First readings (continued) OSU Knowledge Bank Planning Committee, “A Proposal for Development of an OSU Knowledge Bank: Final Report Submitted to the OSU Distance Learning/Continuing Education Committee, June 21, 2002,” by OSU Knowledge Bank Planning Committee, Joseph J. Branin, Director of Libraries, Chair. http://www.lib.ohio-state.edu/Lib_Info/scholarcom/Kbproposal.html Peters, Thomas. “Digital Repositories: Individual, Discipline-based, Institutional, Consortial, or National?” The Journal of Academic Librarianship, v.28, no. 6 pages 414-417. Pinfield, Stephen, Mike Gardner, & John MacColl, “Setting up an Institutional Eprint Archive,” Ariadne 31 (2002). http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue31/epring-archives/ Schulenburger, David. “Moving with Dispatch to Resolve the Scholarly Communication Crisis: from here to NEAR.” ARL 202 (February 199: pp. 2-3. Van Bentum, Maarten, Renze Brandsma, Thomas Place, & Hans Roes, “Reclaiming Academic Output through University Archive Servers.” New Review of Information Networking (August 2001). http://cwis.kupnl/1P5dbi/users/roes/articles/arno_art.htm