How to open repositories

1. HOW TO Setting up a repository Policies and Legal Issues Expanding Content & Increasing Usage Iryna Kuchma, eIFL Open Access program manager, eIFL.net Presented at the Regional Technical Training Meeting Open Access and Dissemination of Scientific Information in Central America and the Caribbean, Montego Bay, Jamaica, 12 - 14 May 2010

2. Overview 1. Making a Case: Explaining the need for a repository & the expected benefits; Strategic Planning and Business Cases; Defining Scope and Planning Checklists. 2. Marketing and Advocacy. 3. Repository policies. 4. Open access policies & mandates. 6. Legal issues. 7. COAR – Working together.

3. eIFL.net

4. eIFL.net (2) Our mission: enabling access to knowledge through libraries in developing and transition countries to contribute to sustainable economic and social development

5. eIFL.net (3) Our approach: eIFL.net’s unique approach is to partner with libraries organised in national library consortia Library consortia can speak with one voice to stakeholders and policy makers, share resources

6. 4 000 libraries in 48 countries

7. core initiatives A. Access to Knowledge for Education, Learning and Research: Negotiations and licensing of commercial e-resources (eIFL-Licensing); Open access (eIFL-OA); Copyright for libraries (eIFL-IP); Free and open source software for libraries (eIFL-FOSS). B. Access to Knowledge for Sustainable Livelihoods: Public Library Innovation Program (eIFL-PLIP).

8. eIFL Open Access Enabling free and unrestricted access to the research materials for students and scholars, doctors and lawyers and general public; Maximising access and increasing the visibility of research outputs; Removing barriers that prevent knowledge from being shared.

9. eIFL Open Access (2) We advocate for the adoption of open access policies and mandates by research funding agencies, universities and research organizations nationally and internationally. We build capacities to launch open access repositories, and to ensure their long-term sustainability.

10. eIFL Open Access (3) 32 awareness raising, advocacy and capacity building events in 2008 – 2009 in 23 countries with participants from over 45 countries; 234 open repositories in 36 countries; 15 open access mandates in China, Ghana, Moldova, Poland, Russia, South Africa and Ukraine; 2,041 open access journals published in eIFL network

11. eIFL Open Access (4) Evaluation of Institutional Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries – a cooperative program between eIFL.net, the University of Kansas Libraries, the DRIVER project and Key Perspectives Ltd Case studies on institutional repositories from eIFL countries A report on the implementation of open content licenses in developing and transition countries

12. eIFL Open Access (5) Key objectives in 2010 Coordinating open access policies; Encouraging networking and knowledge sharing; Outreach campaigns to the research community and students;

13. eIFL Open Access (6) Key objectives in 2010 cont. Incubating demonstrations: awards to the projects that demonstrated outstanding achievements; Sharing the best practice in open access publishing; Watching briefs on open access to data and open educational resources.

14. http://www.openaccessweek.org/

15. How to start Making a Case: Explaining the need for a repository and the expected benefits Strategic Planning and Business Cases Defining Scope and Planning Checklists

16. How to start (2) A repository Steering Group (or Project Board, Management Committee, Working Group, etc.) undertakes the high level management of a repository on behalf of the Institution Involve key stakeholders senior management and policy makers; academic staff, library staff, technical support staff, other support staff

17. Assumptions 1-3 1. Management has approved the implementation of an institutional repository (IR) (Proposal) 2. A server is in place to host the IR 3. An IR Manager (project leader) has been identified to manage the project – and will have to do most of the work initially (Proposed checklist for the implementation of an Institutional Repository Developed by the Department of Library Services in the University of Pretoria, South Africa)

18. Activity 1  Assign a project leader (IR Manager), and identify members to form part of the implementation team (e.g. external consultant, copyright officer, metadata specialist/ head cataloguer, digitization specialist, 2-3 subject librarians, IT etc.)

19. Activity 2  Identify 1 to 4 champions to work with initially. Involve them in your meetings and make them part of the implementation team

20. Activity 3  Conduct a needs analysis & compile a needs analysis report University of Pretoria Digital Institutional Research Repository Needs Assessment Example only http://ir.sun.ac.za/wiki /files/needs_assessment.doc

21. Activity 4 - 5  Evaluate available software and decide on which software to use Join existing mailing lists

22. Activity 4 – 5 (2)  Proposal Document Using DSpace Open Source Software to implement a Digital Repository at the University of Pretoria http://ir.sun.ac.za/wiki/ files/proposal.doc

23. Activity 6 - 9  Start thinking of a name for the IR Decide on how communities and collections will be structured within the IR Define the workflows Discuss licensing & copyright issues with the legal department

24. http://www.rsp.ac.uk/pubs/briefingpapers-docs/repoadmin-metadata.pdf

25. The planning checklist 1. What is an institutional repository and what does it mean to you? 2. Have you outlined and documented the purpose and drivers for institutional repository establishment in your institution? 3. Have you defined your vision and initial goals? (adaptation from the Repository Support Project, the UK: http://www.rsp.ac.uk/)

26. The planning checklist (2) 4. Have you decided how to position your institutional repository within your wider information environment? 5. What is the target content of the repository? 6. Do you have an institution wide intellectual property rights policy? (adaptation from the Repository Support Project, the UK: http://www.rsp.ac.uk/)

27. The planning checklist (3) 7. Do any of your Departments already have other digital stores of publications? How will you manage duplication, transfer of resources and metadata, etc.? 8. Does your institution have an information management strategy? (adaptation from the Repository Support Project, the UK: http://www.rsp.ac.uk/)

28. The planning checklist (4) 9. Have you defined roles and responsibilities for your institutional repository development? 10. What sort of statistics and management reports will you want from your institutional repository? (adaptation from the Repository Support Project, the UK: http://www.rsp.ac.uk/)

29. The most important motivations 83% to increase the visibility of the institution's research output; 66% to provide free access to the institution's research output; 62% to preserve the institution's research output (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

30. Important motivations 35% the repository was set up to help evaluate researchers and departments; 34% the repository was set up in response to requests from faculty. (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

31. Other important motivations “A repository that contains high quality content could be used as a 'shop window' or marketing tool to entice staff, students and funding.” “To promote open access to social sciences research results in Latin America and the Caribbean.” “It's library initiative.” “To provide a central archive of the university’s research and intellectual outputs.” “To set a best practice for the other institutes of Academy of Sciences to promote the development of institutional repository network.” “To increase the availability of faculty and researchers publications in the library.” “As a part of the solution to serials crises.” (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

32. Activity 10  Compile a business plan & present to management University of Pretoria Digital Institutional Research Repository Business Plan Example Only http://ir.sun.ac.za/wiki/ files/business_plan.doc

33. Activity 11  Register project with IT & establish a service level agreement For Services (The IT guy) http://ir.sun.ac.za/wiki/ index.php/Main_Page

34. Activity 12 - 13  Incorporate IR as part of role description for cataloguers & subject librarians Start working on IR policy, and continue to document all important decisions taken. Also address service definition, open access, copyright, preservation, metadata standards, digitization, selection criteria etc

35. The planning checklists (5) Have you decided if and how you will collect usage and item download statistics for your repository? Will you use a tool built into your chosen repository, or an external tool or repository add-on? http://ir.sun.ac.za/wiki/index. php/Web_Analytics

36. Activity 14 - 15  Identify members which will participate in the evaluation, and present a training session on how to use the software IT deploys software on developmental server, implementation team and other role players evaluate quality assurance server production server

37. Activity 16  Create Communities & Collections for champions and populate in order to demonstrate to library staff and community

38. Activity 17  Register IR with international harvesters, search engines, have it listed on web pages etc http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/ infokits/repositories /technical-framework/ registering; http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/ infokits/repositories /technical-framework/

39. Activity 18  Start developing a marketing presentation (which can be customized for specific subject areas), marketing leaflets, training material, online help e.g. copyright clearance process http://ir.sun.ac.za/wiki/ files/marketing.pdf

40. Activity 19 –20  Introduce IR to library management, to library Steering Committee to library staff Provide training to subject librarians (Collection Administrators) to Submitters (researchers, appoint students etc) to cataloguers (Metadata Editors)

41. Activity 21  Establish the following (will replace initial implementation team): IR Steering Committee IR Policy Advisory Group IR User Group

42. Activity 22  Introduce IR to rest of community e.g. departments, individuals, etc. Host open sessions over lunch hour, use organisational newsletters, present at meetings & conferences Negotiate for submitters

43. Activity 23-24  Invite all to register new collections. Communicate procedure on e.g. IR home page Frequently communicate e.g. via e-mail, monthly newsletter, etc Frequently communicate statistics

44. Activity 25  Launch IR when ready … Invite administration, heads of faculties & departments, other key-players, etc.

45. Activity 26  Budget each year and plan for the following year Keep monitoring server capacity, stay updated through mailing lists & reading articles, attending conferences etc

46. http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/documents/Staff_and_Skills_Set_2009.pdf Repository Manager - who manages the ‘human’ side of the repository including content policies, advocacy, user training and a liaison with a wide range of institutional departments and external contacts Repository Administrator - who manages the technical implementation, customisation and management of repository software, manages metadata fields and quality, creates usage reports and tracks the preservation issues http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/documents/GenericTech

47. http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/documents/Staff_and_Skills_Set_2009.pdf

52. Sustainability 1. Have you properly and fully specified the requirements of your repository? 2. What is the anticipated growth of your repository? 3. Are you running a pilot project or a production service? If the former, who, when, if and how will it transfer to a production service?

53. Sustainability (2) 4. Who will answer support/help desk queries relating to the repository? 5. Have you considered how your repository may grow over the next year, 3 years, 5 years, 10 years? 6. Which digital formats can the repository commit to preserve in the longer-term? Is the repository collecting author source formats? Is there a viable action plan for monitoring the formats stored in the repository and the preservation risks associated with those formats? Do you know which tools are available to do this? (Resourcing repositories for sustainability, adaptation from the Repository Support Project, the UK: http://www.rsp.ac.uk/)

54. Marketing Open repository for researchers Long term preservation and back-up Usage statistics Web-presences – personal profiles, actual CVs, publication lists Opportunities Citations Collaborative projects Financing

55. Marketing (2) Open repository for managers Information management & Research management Quality assurance: statistics, web metrics, etc Web-presences – personal profiles Marketing Competitiveness Print-on-demand Virtual learning environment Opportunities Collaborative projects Financing Good students

56. Advocacy Options Top-down Explore institutional requirement for deposit (mandates) Obtain supporting statements from the very highest level of the institution Invite stakeholders to join repository steering groups to assist in exploring unique institutional challenges; influencing the strategic position of the repository Keep the Pro-VC for research (or similar) and key committees informed of developments and successes. This ensures the repository is embedded in the organisation (The Digital Repositories infoKit: http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/infokits /repositories/management-framework/options)

57. Advocacy Options Bottom-up Locate repository champions. Enthusiastic early adopters can act as change agents, taking your messages out on a peer-to-peer basis Demonstrate how new researchers can contribute, and gain a flying start to their careers. Repository usage statistics can provide powerful encouragement Engage students, especially graduates, by promoting the use of open access research material. In turn they will influence their peers and mentors Inform and involve support staff, ensuring they understand the importance of the repository to the institution's strategy (The Digital Repositories infoKit: http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/infokits/repositories/management-framework/options)

58. Advocacy Options Targeted Identify so-called 'green' publishers - those who allow self-archiving in any form - and then asking the academics who have published in those journals for permission to deposit those papers in the institution's institutional repository. To check the list of publisher copyright policies on self-archiving, visit RoMEO. Work with departments most likely to benefit from the repository, such as: those reviewing research management/reporting processes; subject areas with Funder Mandates; those who's academics publish in wide range of journal publications; subject areas with Open Access services such as PubMed Central and Arxiv (The Digital Repositories infoKit: http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/infokits/repositories/management-framework/options)

59. Stimulants Increased visibility and citations for the publications of the academics in our institution (57%); Simple and user-friendly depositing process (32%); Institutional policy of mandatory depositing (32%); Awareness-raising efforts among the academics in our institution (32%); (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

60. Stimulants (2) Interest from the decision makers within institution (27%); The requirements of research-funding organisations in our country regarding depositing research output in Open Access repositories (16%); Policy to safeguard the long-term preservation of the deposited material (14%); Institutional policy of accountability (11%); (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

61. Stimulants (3) Integration/linking of the digital repository with other systems in our institution (11%); The situation with regard to copyright of (to be) published materials and the knowledge about this among academics in our institution (7%); Crowdsourcing (7%); Clear guidelines for selection of material for inclusion (5%); (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

62. Stimulants (4) Financial support from a national funding programme for the digital repository in our institution (5%); Coordination of a national body for digital repositories (5%); Search services as provided by national and international gateways (5%). (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

63. Inhibitors Lack of an institutional policy of mandatory depositing (49%); Lack of requirements of research funding organisations in our country regarding depositing research output in Open Access repositories (40%); Lack of interest from the decision makers within our institution (33%); (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

64. Inhibitors (2) The situation with regard to copyright of (to be) published materials and the knowledge about this among academics in our institution (33%); Lack of an institutional policy of accountability (30%); Lack of awareness-raising efforts among the academics in our institution (30%); Lack of coordination of a national body for digital repositories (21%); (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

65. Inhibitors (3) Lack of integration/linking of the digital repository with other systems in our institution (9%); Lack of a simple and user-friendly depositing process (9%); Lack of financial support from a national funding programme for the digital repository in our institution (7%); Lack of search services as provided by national and international gateways (5%); (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

66. Inhibitors (4) Lack of support for increased visibility and citations for the publications of the academics in our institution (5%); Lack of clear guidelines for selection of material for inclusion (2%); Lack of financial support from foreign funding agencies (2%). (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

67. Challenges Major challenge: Content recruitment (42%) Challenges: Engendering faculty awareness and engagement (50%); Securing adequate funding and other resources (46%); Copyright issues (42%); Communicating with faculty about the repository (41%); Integrating the repository into workflow and other existing structures (35%); Staffing issues (31%). (Evaluation of Open Repository Development in Developing and Transition Countries)

68. Repository policies

69. Repository policies (2)

84. Open access policies

85. Open access policies (2) The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), implemented a policy requiring that its grant recipients make articles resulting from NIH funding publicly available within twelve months of publication in a peer-reviewed journal This policy, passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by the President, went into effect in April 2008 The OA mandate at the NIH was made permanent by a bill passed by both houses of Congress signed by President Obama

86. Berlin Declaration ‘Our mission of disseminating knowledge is only half complete if the information is not made widely and readily available to society.’ Signatories should promote open access by encouraging researchers/grant recipients to publish in open access. encouraging the holders of cultural heritage to support open access by providing their resources on the Internet. http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html

87. Berlin Declaration (2) ‘Open access contributions must satisfy two conditions: 1. The author(s) and right holder(s) of such contributions grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, worldwide, right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship (community standards, will continue to provide the mechanism for enforcement of proper attribution and responsible use of the published work, as they do now), as well as the right to make small numbers of printed copies for their personal use. http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html

88. Berlin Declaration (3) 2. A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials, including a copy of the permission as stated above, in an appropriate standard electronic format is deposited … in … online repository using suitable technical standards (such as the Open Archive definitions) that is supported and maintained by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or other well-established organization that seeks to enable open access, unrestricted distribution, interoperability, and long-term archiving. http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html

89. OA policy options for funding agencies and universities (Based on The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #130 and The SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #127, by Peter Suber: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos /newsletter/02-02-09.htm and http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/11-02-08.htm)

90. Request or require? Recommendation: If you're serious about achieving open access for the research you fund, you must require it.

91. Green or gold? Recommendation: If you decide to request and encourage open access, rather than a mandate it, then you can encourage submission to an open access journal and encourage deposit in an open access repository as well, especially when researchers publish in a toll access journal.

92. Green or gold? (2) Recommendation: But if you decide to mandate open access, then you should require deposit in an open access repository, and not require submission to an open access journal, even if you also encourage submission to an open access journal.

93. Deposit what? Recommendation: Require the deposit of the final version of the author's peer-reviewed manuscript, not the published version. Require the deposit of data generated by the funded research project. In medicine and the social sciences, where privacy is an issue, open access data should be anonymised. A peer-reviewed manuscript in an open access repository should include a citation and link to the published edition.

94. Deposit what? (2) Recommendation: Allow the deposit of unrefereed preprints, previous journal articles, conference presentations (slides, text, audio, video), book manuscripts, book metadata (especially when the author cannot or will not deposit the full-text), and the contents of journals edited or published on campus. The university itself could consider other categories as well, such as open courseware, administrative records, and digitization projects from the library, theses and dissertations

95. Scope of policy? Recommendation: For simplicity and enforceability, follow the example of most funding agencies: apply your open access policy to research you fund "in whole or in part"

96. What embargo? Recommendation: No more than six months. Any embargo is a compromise with the public interest; even when they are justified compromises, the shorter they are, the better.

97. What exceptions? Recommendation: Exempt private notes and records not intended for publication. Exempt classified research. Either exempt patentable discoveries or allow an embargo long enough for the researcher to apply for a patent. (This could be a special embargo not allowed to other research.) And unless you fund research, which often results in royalty-producing books, exempt royalty-producing books.

98. http://www.openoasis.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=148&Itemid=340

99. Copyright management Author – Publisher: License to publish Author – Repository: License to deposit Author - Users: License to use

100. Permissions

101. Copyright Management (2) Ensuring that your IR team liaising with the author is informed and up-to-date on self-archiving and related publisher policies Utilising and monitoring tools such as Sherpa/RoMEO to support you in your information. Liaising with publishers on a case by case basis if time and resources allow From Proudman, V. (2007) The population of repositories. In Eds. K. Weenink, L.Waaijers and K. van Godtsenhoven, A DRIVER's Guide to European Repositories (pp.49 - 101)

102. http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo

103. License Agreement A comprehensive deposit and end user’s license Depositor’s declaration Repositories’ Rights and Responsibilities The end-user’s terms and conditions

104. Depositor’s Declaration The main function of the depositors declaration is to ensure that the depositor is the copyright owner, or has the permission of author/copyright holder (if by proxy) to deposit

105. Depositor’s Declaration (2) The second function is for the author and any other rights holders, to grant permission to the host institution to distribute copies of the paper via the internet

106. Depositor’s Declaration (3) Equally important is the notion that the author has sought and gained permission to include any subsidiary material owned by third party copyright holders

107. Repositories’ Rights and Responsibilities The agreement between an institution and author to authorise the library to carry out some of the following acts including to store, organise, manage, access, make a paper available via the internet and provide digital preservation

108. Repositories’ Rights and Responsibilities (2) The agreement between an institution and author to authorise the library to carry out some of the following acts including to store, organise, manage, access, make a paper available via the internet and provide digital preservation the copyright ownership is unaffected the author granting the repository the nonexclusive right to carry out the additional acts

109. http://wikieducator.org/Otago_Polytechnic/Intellectual_property

110. research communication Cameron Neylon: The future of research communication is aggregation http://cameronneylon.net/blog/the-future-of-research-communication-is-aggregation/ Cameron Neylon: Biochemist, Open Science, Open Access, and bringing more experimental techniques to the biosciences, work at the Science and Technology Facilities Council, the UK’s major provider and supporter of large scale academic research facilities, including synchrotrons, neutron sources, and high powered lasers

111. Cameron Neylon http://www.flickr.com/photos /24801682@N08/4506964677/sizes/l/

112. Useful reading IR Wiki: http://ir.sun.ac.za/wiki/index.php/Main_Page The Digital Repositories infoKit: http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/infokits /repositories/index_html Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook by Alma Swan and Leslie Chan: http://www.openoasis.org SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide: www.arl.org/sparc/bm~doc/IR_Guide_&_Checklist_v1.pdf Creating an Institutional Repository: LEADIRS Workbook: http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/26698 A Guide to Developing Open Access Through Your Digital Repository by Kylie Pappalardo and Dr Anne Fitzgerald with the assistance of Professor Brian Fitzgerald, Scott Kiel- Chisholm, Damien O’Brien and Anthony Austin, Open Access to Knowledge Law Project: http://www.oaklaw.qut.edu .au/node/32

113. Thank you! Questions? Iryna Kuchma iryna.kuchma[at]eifl.net; www.eifl.net The presentation is licensed with Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License

How to open repositories

Esté a ler uma amostra.

Confira estes a seguir

How to open repositories

Mais Conteúdo rRelacionado

Diapositivos para si (20)

Quem viu também gostou (9)

Semelhante a How to open repositories (20)

Mais de Iryna Kuchma (20)

Mais recentes (20)