Peiling Wang, PhD Associate Professor Institutional Repositories and Open Access Βιβλιοθήκη Αλεξάνδρειου Τεχνολογικού Εκπαιδευτικού Ιδρύματος Thessaloniki, Greece September 13 – 14,

Timeline: Access to Information library automation 1980s electronic library online library 1990s2000s digital libraries virtual libraries digital repositories & open access e-journals Cost Open-access new jn Price Individual subscription Continued access permanent access

Institutional Repositories (IR) Digital archives Open archives Digital preservation Digital academic repository E-archiving Self archiving Knowledge repository Dark archives Clustered related terms or Synonyms ?

Defining IR university-based (organization, national) services (committed) to its community management/stewardship of digital materials: long-term preservation organization access Distribution "Institutional Repositories: Essential Infrastructure for Scholarship in the Digital Age""Institutional Repositories: Essential Infrastructure for Scholarship in the Digital Age" ARL, no. 226 (February 2003): 1-7.

Defining Open Access (OA) e-science movement for sharing scholarly information and research data/outputs Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002) Berlin Declaration (2003) open and unrestricted access to published research literature and databases users are licensed to download, print, copy, redistribute, and use free or partial free

IR and OA: Twins OA is the front-end for users: maximizing accessibility to digital content IR is the back-end for intellectual assets: content, preservation, metadata together to increase access and to reduce cost

OCLC adaptation of Liz Lyon, UKOLN JISC/CNI 6th International Meeting July 6-7m 2006

Growth of IR

IR—Needs Identified Research outputs (pre- post-print) Learning objects (re-use) Primary data (re-analysis) Scholarly communication (e-Science movement!) Personal digital collections (preservation and access)

Author’s Concerns Willingness to deposit—disciplinary diff My intellectual property/copyrights How are my works used (stats)? Tenure/promotion Where to deposit? How much effort? Working papers vs. peer-reviewed publications

Institutional View We see our IR as a key tool for the stewardship of the University’s digital research assets. It will provide greater access to our research, as well as offering a valuable mechanism for reporting and recording it. Paul Curran, Deputy Vice Chancellor U. of Southampton Press Release 15 Dec 2004

End-user’s Expectations Free of charge Convenience in discovering Easy access to digital objects Google, Yahoo! What is DL? Managing personal digital space

Publisher’s Perspectives Peer-review New business model library- or reader-pays (subscription) author-pays pay-per-download Impact Factor (IF) quickly increases with OA Longer economic break-even point (7 years or more?)

Brody et al., 2004

Funder’s Perspectives Measuring outcomes of funded research outputs Public access to funded research publications New policy to require self-archiving in IR UK Welcome Trust CERN NIH (PubMed Central) SURF (DARE, Netherland)

Library’s Perspectives New models Change of roles Cost Collaboration consortia coalition Managerial & Technical challenges

Repository Services PubMed Central (NIH, Welcome Trust) OCLC Digital Archive ProQuest Digital Commons BioMed Central DARE (Digital Academic Repositories)

15 Institutions 207 authors (187 male, 20 female) records = 195/author (from 3 to 1224) full text = 58.7% (from 19% to 96% per institute) 15% only metadata available at the moment Some figures from DARE

Research & Development CNI completed the first international survey, 2005 CIBER international survey, 2005 EC Study on economic and technical evolution of the scientific publication markets in Europe, 06 Numerous IR and OA initiatives and projects OCLC Systems & Services: a special issue on IR, 2007 Conferences

International survey of IR

IR Conferences Open Scholarship 2006: New Challenges For Open Access Repositories, an inaugural conference at the University of Glasgow, Scotland, UK, October Moving towards open access: A JISC conference for research funders, authors, publishers and librarians, Keble College, Oxford, September JISC/CNI 6th International Meeting on Envisioning future challenges in networked information Park Inn York, 6-7 July CNI/JISC/SURF Conference: Making the strategic case for institutional repositories, Amsterdam, Netherlands, May 10-11, 2005 ASIST DASER Summit (2003, 2005) WebWise (IMLS & OCLC) DL conferences JCDL; ICDL; ICADL; ECDL

Models discipline based associations and learned societies community based (land-grant universities) stakeholders institution based university or organization publisher based (BioMed Central) national (DARE) International/regional across nations

Successful Initiatives ETD across disciplines: IR duplicate copies OAI-PMH union catalog in OCLC and others OA across countries: SciELO (Brazil, Chili...) BioLine International

Challenges—Managerial cost policy at national level NIH mandate deposit UK mandate deposit ( knowledge/information lifecycle distributed vs. centralized model (overlapping and gaps) certified or trusted repository institutions for communities

Challenges—Technical data diversity format obsolete storage degrade long term preservation metadata ephemeral longevity sustainability scalability

Success factors Infrastructure to ensure integration and seamless management Workflow—lifecycle of research, learning Technical standards: OAIS; METS; OAI-PMH Tools Terminology Collaboration

Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (ISO)

METSHeader Administrative metadata File Inventory Structure map Descriptive metadata Behavioral metadata optional required optional METS: Metadata Encoding & Transmission Standard

Open Source Software D-Space: somewhat limited to text-based materials and still in early development. FEDORA: more extensible, but still embryonic ARROW: a robust, well architected underlying platform, persistent identifier granularity (VTLS as development partner) Greenstone: DAITSS: focusing on the preservation repository function.

Selected Pioneer’s Sites BioMed Central: (countries involved: US, UK, Germany, Canada, India, Italy,France, Australia, Japan, Sweden) PubMed Central: Health Education Assets Library California Digital Library ETD at Virginia Tech: DAITSS: FCLA Digital Archive: LOCKSS : Initiative (trusted dark archive) eBank UK DARE (

Organizations Coalition for Networked Information Joint Information Systems Committee UK Research Councils UK SURF Netherlands Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations: ( Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) OCA ( )

Organizations Coalition for Networked Information Joint Information Systems Committee UK Research Councils UK SURF Netherlands Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations: ( Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) OCA ( )

BREAKOUT session Scenario 1 You are writing a proposal for support to establish policy for IR or to get fund for an IR initiative outline What do you want to do Justify Why is it important/significant for the institute Detail Who, How, Where, When (timeline) [User studies as basis for what you proposal]

BREAKOUT session Scenario 2 You are developing strategies for your role as a change agent How would you advocate the idea of self-archiving and deposit? What would you offer to ease scholars/faculty stress & burden Plan for measuring outcomes of your IR and OA

BREAKOUT session Scenario 3 You are designing or evaluating an IR system Identify Functionalities – needs (usefulness to be measured) Usability factors – interaction (usable by the target users)

BREAKOUT session Scenario 4 Designing a user interface for registering users (subsystem) Rationalize The purposes of user registration Elements of the subsystem E.g., User ID handling Diagram elements as in interaction flowchart