repositories overview: policies and implementation: alma swan key perspectives ltd truro, uk

Repositories overview: Policies and implementation:

Alma Swan

Key Perspectives Ltd

Truro, UK

Some statistics Awareness of Open Access is

increasing amongst scholars in all disciplines

The number of repositories has increased at an average of 1 per day over the last year

The rate of increase is rising


A few more statistics

There are circa 800 repositories globally

There are 32 documented policies

There are 10 mandates


Here’s the problem…

Only 15% of research articles are spontaneously self-archived

The average number of postprints self-archived in institutional repositories is 297


Policies, mandates

There is a difference Both are being developed at

institutional, national and even international level

One is sometimes effective, the other always is


Third component: advocacy

Sometimes in the absence of either a policy or mandate; sometimes alongside these

Advocacy – sustained and organised

Advocacy - opportunistic


Policies

An almost-mandate from the DFG, Germany An almost-mandate from the FWF, Austria Dutch policy for the universities in the DARE

network Exhortations and encouragements from public

research funders in Finland, USA National policy being developed in Sweden (?) Developments in Australia, Canada, etc


Mandates

Proposed mandates: public funders (Canada, Australia, S.Africa, Ukraine, USA and EU)

Real mandates: Wellcome Trust RCUK (Research Councils UK)


USA

NIH: Strengthening now very likely

Require not request CURES: 6-month delay to provide OA

permitted but deposit must be at acceptance

FRPAA: Mandatory deposit: all research funded by the largest

agencies


UK

Wellcome Trust ($750m) Research Councils UK

4 out of 8 have a mandate and 1 has a strong encouragement


Funder / institutional policies and mandates

Policies Mandates

Funders 8 4

Institutional repositories

24 6


Author readiness to comply with a mandate

0 20 40 60 80 100

% respondents

Would complywillingly

Would complyreluctantly

Would notcomply

81%

14%

5%


Case study I: ECS, Southampton School of Electronics &

Computer Science, University of Southampton

Mandate early 2003 Sanctioned in the sense

that assessment is based upon repository content

It works


Case study II: QUT QUT, Brisbane Mandate introduced by

DVC Tom Cochrane at the beginning of 2004

Not sanctioned, but supported by vigorous and sympathetic library advocacy


University of Tasmania

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700Ju

n-0

4

Jul-0

4

Au

g-0

4

Se

p-0

4

Oct

-04

No

v-0

4

De

c-0

4

Jan

-05

Fe

b-0

5

Ma

r-0

5

Ap

r-0

5

Ma

y-0

5

Jun

-05

Actualdocuments

DESTpublications

Data courtesy of Arthur Sale Key Perspectives Ltd

University of Queensland

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

03/0

2/20

04

03/0

3/20

04

03/0

4/20

04

03/0

5/20

04

03/0

6/20

04

03/0

7/20

04

03/0

8/20

04

03/0

9/20

04

03/1

0/20

04

03/1

1/20

04

03/1

2/20

04

03/0

1/20

05

03/0

2/20

05

03/0

3/20

05

03/0

4/20

05

03/0

5/20

05

03/0

6/20

05

03/0

7/20

05

03/0

8/20

05

03/0

9/20

05

03/1

0/20

05

Do

cum

ents

Documents

DEST


Queensland University of Technology

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

24/0

5/20

04

24/0

6/20

04

24/0

7/20

04

24/0

8/20

04

24/0

9/20

04

24/1

0/20

04

24/1

1/20

04

24/1

2/20

04

24/0

1/20

05

24/0

2/20

05

24/0

3/20

05

24/0

4/20

05

24/0

5/20

05

24/0

6/20

05

24/0

7/20

05

24/0

8/20

05

24/0

9/20

05

Do

cum

ents


Case study III: Minho University

Minho University, Braga, Portugal

Repository established 2003 Mandate introduced 2005

when self-archiving rate dropped off

Mandate backed by financial incentives paid to departments


Minho University repository

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Dec-04

Dec-05

Jun-06

Mandate introduced

(Data courtesy of Eloy Rodrigues) Key Perspectives Ltd

Why Open Access

Greater impact from scientific endeavour More rapid and more efficient progress of

science Better assessment, better monitoring,

better management of science Novel information-creation using new and

advanced technologies


Mandate when?

At acceptance for publication: the author’s final version

Mandate the deposit at that point Mandate OA to full-text unless there is a

compelling reason against this If there is a compelling reason, mandate OA to

metadata Mandate opening of full-text at 6 months The publisher’s PDF can be added, or linked

to, later


Mandate what?

The author’s final version In the native format Because text-mining and data-

mining tools need to work on OA articles

They work best on XML


What about PDF?

John Wilbanks (Science Commons):

“Scraping is the right word, because having to work with PDF is really scraping the

bottom of the barrel.”Key Perspectives Ltd

What about PDF?

Clifford Lynch (CNI):

“PDF is evil”


What about PDF?

Peter Murray-Rust (Cambridge):

“Getting to XML from PDF is like starting with the burger and trying to get back to the cow.”


Summary

Policies nice but largely ineffectual Mandates work and so increasing Deposit at acceptance:

Open metadata immediately Open full-text later if necessary

Deposit author’s final version; add published version later if desired


Thank you for listening

[email protected]

www.keyperspectives.co.uk


mailto:[email protected]

http://www.keyperspectives.co.uk/

repositories overview: policies and implementation: alma swan key perspectives ltd truro, uk

Documents

mandates key perspectives

later key perspectives

xml key perspectives

evil key perspectives

departments key perspectives

desired key perspectives

alma swan key perspectives

mandate oa