Transcript Opening Access to Research or what the institutional repository can do for you Bill Hubbard SHERPA Manager University of Nottingham.

Opening Access to Research
or
what the institutional repository can do for you
Bill Hubbard
SHERPA Manager
University of Nottingham
Open Access
 Budapest Open Access Initiative
 “An old tradition and a new technology have
converged to make possible an unprecedented public
good . . .”
http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml
Open Access Repositories
 Part of wider open access movement
– open access journals, pictures, catalogues, collections . . .
 Complementary to current practice
– works with journals, with peer review
 World-wide support
– programmes in India, China, Australia, Netherlands,
Germany, Nordic countries, USA
 SHERPA, RSP and DRIVER
Institutional repositories
 “Digital collections that preserve and provide access
to the intellectual output of an institution.”*
 Encouraging wider use of open access information
assets
 May contain a variety of digital objects
–
–
–
–
e-prints,
theses,
e-learning objects,
datasets
* Raym Crow The case for institutional repositories: a SPARC position paper. 2002
.
Why institutional?
 The OAI-PMH allows a single gateway to search and
access many repositories
– subject-based portals or views
– subject-based classification and search
– institutional storage and support
 Practical reasons
– use institutional infrastructure
– integration into work-flows and systems
– support is close to academic users and contributors
Putting stuff in, getting stuff out
 Deposit
–
–
–
–
create a description of the eprint
attach a copy
put into a Sussex Research Online
takes about 10 minutes
 Discovery
– use search engines
– subject-based portals
– find similar material within your subject
Open Access for the researcher
 Wide dissemination
– papers more visible
– cited more




Rapid dissemination
Ease of access
Cross-searchable
Value added services
– hit counts on papers
– personalised publications lists
– citation analyses
publication & deposition
Author writes paper
pre-print
Submits to journal
Deposits in e-print
repository
Paper refereed
Revised by author
post-print
Author submits final version
Published in journal
published
version
Other benefits
 For the institution
–
–
–
–
facilitates use and re-use of the information assets
raises profile and prestige of institution
manages institutional information assets - RAE
long-term cost savings
 For the research community
– ‘frees up’ the communication process
– avoids unnecessary duplication
Benefits for society in general





Publicly-funded research publicly available
Public understanding of science
Knowledge transfer
Health and social services
Culture
Repository content






Preprints
Postprints
Datasets
Learning objects
Videos
Sound files






 linkage between these objects
Theses
Dissertations
Royalty publications
Conference papers
Technical reports
Grey literature
Repository use







Access to material
Citation analysis
Overlay journals
Review projects
Evidence based work
Data-mining
Cross-institutional research
group virtual research
environments
 . . . Services built on top
 RAE-like submissions,
activities and
management
 Archival storage
 “Shop-windows”
 Facilitate industrial links
 Career-long personalised
work spaces
Russell & 1994 Groups













University of Bath
Birkbeck
University of Birmingham
University of Bristol
University of Cambridge
Cardiff University
University of Durham
University of East Anglia
University of Edinburgh
University of Essex
University of Exeter
University of Glasgow
Goldsmiths













Imperial College
King's College London
Lancaster University
University of Leeds
University of Leicester
University of Liverpool
Loughborough University
LSE
University of Manchester
University of Newcastle
University of Nottingham
University of Oxford
Queen Mary











University of Reading
Royal Holloway
University of St Andrews
University of Sheffield
SOAS
University of Southampton
University of Surrey
University of Sussex
University of Warwick
UCL
University of York
Services
 RoMEO
– www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo
 JULIET
– www.sherpa.ac.uk/juliet
 OpenDOAR
– www.opendoar.org and www.opendoar.org/search
 BASE
– digital.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/index.php
Issues
 Copyright restrictions
– approx.. 93% (of Nottingham’s) journals allow their authors
to archive
 Embargoes
– defines relationship of publisher to research
 Cultural change
– like email
 Deposition policies from funders
Academic concerns
 Subject base more natural ?
– institutional infrastructure, view by subject
 Quality control ?
– peer-review clearly labelled
 Plagiarism
– old problem - and easier to detect
 “I already have my papers on my website . . . “
– unstructured for RAE, access, search, preservation
 Threat to journals?
– evidence shows co-existence possible - but in the future . . . ?
Future themes
 Journals - what is happening now and what will
develop in the future?
– subscriptions, commercial pressures, staffing . . .
 Academics & IT - what will people expect from IT?
– access, speed, integration . . .
 Research funding and processes - how is research
changing?
– what stakeholders are involved and what do they want? . . .
 How will this effect current publishing models?
 How will this effect open access and repositories?
Repositories are spreading because . . .








Give easy access
Give rapid access
Give long-term access
Increase readership and use of material
They offer advantages to academics
They offer advantages to institutions
They offer advantages to research funders
They offer new ways for information to be linked and
used
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk
http://www.opendoar.org
[email protected]