Presentation on theme: "Survey of Research Libraries on Aggregation of Digital Content Kathy Sadler, UCL Plenary Board Meeting Bratislava, 8 May 2010."— Presentation transcript:
Survey of Research Libraries on Aggregation of Digital Content Kathy Sadler, UCL Plenary Board Meeting Bratislava, 8 May 2010
Purpose of the survey Designed in association with LIBER to serve 3 purposes: Provide a snapshot of aggregation activity and attitudes across Europe Help inform development and sustainability of the EuropeanaTravel aggregator Help inform the strategies of LIBER and Europeana 12 questions covering these topical areas: Aggregation activity at country level Europeana-feeding aggregators : Participation and Expectations Perceived aggregation needs Attitudes towards paying for aggregation services
Aggregation at country level Survey ed to all LIBER members and results reported December 2009 Report deliverable available from Outcomes area of EuropeanaTravel website 39 responses from 25 countries 62% academic and university libraries 38% national, regional libraries or represent national bodies 22 countries described at national level 14 described countries have a national cultural or cross-domain aggregator 5 countries are aggregating research or journals Material based aggregations eg multimedia, manuscripts
Participation in existing aggregation services
Missing Aggregators 12 respondents suggested aggregators not supplied in the list on the survey 17 aggregators named 5 are national aggregators for country of origin Several scientific and research aggregators named DRIVER and DART-EUROPE suggested several times Influence of research libraries amongst respondents Potential interest in Europeana expanding its cultural heritage remit
Reasons for non contribution to aggregation services
Reasons for non contribution (cont/d) Interest in Europeana from beyond its existing partners An academic library said: Europeana (all flavours): We tried badly to contact them in order to provide our OAI data but nothing happened. A library outside the EU said: We understood that this was only open to participants within the framework of a EU funded project that Swiss institutions could not join. If this is not the case, we would be interested. Decision not to contribute is often a policy decision Someone else may be responsible for feeding the aggregator Alternative routes may be preferred (eg TEL, other aggregators)
What do you see as the main benefits of participation in aggregation for your institution?
If you participate in any aggregators, what additional or improved outcomes would your institution like to see?
Which of the potential benefits of Europeana are most attractive to you?
Proposals for New Aggregations 16 suggestions made by 10 respondents Most common theme is Research Content from academic and research libraries (eg cultural material) Research activity, research data and published results Aggregation from existing portals eg DART-Europe New Europe-wide aggregations proposed in these areas: Art History of technology Social sciences/humanities Existing aggregations suggested to channel into Europeana: Manuscripts Early printed books
Only 1 respondent gave unqualified yes 11 gave an unqualified No 6 already pay TEL, CERL or other memberships and dont want to pay again 5 agree in principle - but not much or not in present economic circumstances Benefits must be demonstrated in advance (increased traffic or resource savings) Digitisation is costly in itself OAI is open and thus aggregation should be free YES NO NO RESPONSE Would your institution be willing in principle to pay to participate in aggregation services?
If you are interested in the development of new aggregation services, how would you envisage that their development and sustained running would be funded?
Conclusion Wide interest in aggregation in general across Europe Respondents appreciate the benefits of wider exposure Enthusiasm for Europeana and its related projects Many potential contributors of digital content Several ideas for new aggregations Research is a common theme Respondents are generally unwilling to pay to support aggregators