Presentation on theme: "SHERPA: institutional repositories Bill Hubbard SHERPA Project Manager University of Nottingham."— Presentation transcript:
SHERPA: institutional repositories Bill Hubbard SHERPA Project Manager University of Nottingham
SHERPA - Securing a Hybrid Environment for Research Preservation and Access development partners –Nottingham (lead), Edinburgh, Glasgow, Oxford, Sheffield, Leeds, York, British Library and AHDS funding: JISC (FAIR programme) and CURL duration: 3 years, November 2002 – November 2005
Institutional repositories of e-prints institutional - rather than subject based repositories - rather than archives e-prints - rather than e-resources ... linked through OAI-PMH
‘e-prints’ ‘e-prints’ are electronic versions of research papers and other similar output ‘pre-prints’ (pre-referred papers) ‘post-prints’ (post-refereed papers) other material –conference papers, book chapters, reports, etc. key is subject’s quality control – particularly peer review
Benefits 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
Why “institutional”? institutions have centralised resources: –to subsidise repository start up –to support repositories with technical / organisational infrastructures –to deal effectively with preservation issues over the long term an interest in disseminating content work across subject boundaries to share solutions natural part of institution’s function ... needs testing in practice...
Benefits for the institution raising profile and prestige of institution managing institutional information assets accreditation / performance management e.g. RAE long-term cost savings encourages an institutional sense of identity in intellectual output
Issues collection policy preservation IPR cultural differences and changes
Collection policy document type –pre-prints v. post-prints; authors: staff, students, others? document format –HTML, PDF, Postscript, RTF, ASCII, etc. submission procedures –mediated / DIY; file formats metadata quality standards –self-created metadata
Research preservation issues selection and retention criteria preservation metadata preferred formats life-cycle management cost models ... one view is that it can all be set aside for now...
IPR author permission and licensing terms copyright and copying compliance with publisher copyright terms
Cultural differences and changes different subject cultures –pre-print culture e.g. Physics –pre-print averse e.g. Medicine –Require: different policies or different archives? changing the status quo –advocacy and support
SHERPA project aims to construct a series of institutional OAI-compliant repositories to investigate key issues in populating and maintaining e-print collections to work with service providers to achieve acceptable standards for metadata and the dissemination of the content to investigate standards-based digital preservation to provide advice for e-print data providers to disseminate learning outcomes and advocacy materials
Key points initial installation of an OAI-compliant e-print repository is relatively straightforward repositories need collection policies repositories need to address preservation cultural change is the biggest challenge institutions have the resources and position to help - the library can lead