March 16, 2009 1 Comment
Must read this when I get a chance…
Implementing an Institutional Repository for Leeds Metropolitan University
February 17, 2009 Leave a comment
I have found that one of the characteristics of repository development and, well, life in general for that matter (repository development is like the travails of life in microcosm – discuss) is that, though you may be aware of the full gamut of issues (or think you are) they only become actually real when they are actually present; until then, 9/10ths of their misshapen form is concealed from view. So it has been that throughout our start-up that I have blithely referred folk to SHERPA/RoMEO whenever the tip of the copyright iceberg appeared on the horizon, busying myself with carefully steering the good ship repository through the icefloe of overall functionality and metadata pack(age) ice. Ok, I’ll kill this metaphor now before it really gets out of hand – it’s just that I’m taking a break from writing up the final project report!
However, now that we finally have a functional infrastructure to support Open Access to research I am naturally keen to populate the repository with full text material (as well as citations I’m afraid, for any OA purists out there). Given the university’s recent success in the RAE along with its inherent high profile and implicit quality I have been focussing on this material and recently liaised with the University Research Office to email, en masse, those academics whose work was submitted to the RAE, drawing their attention to citation information for their work in the repository and requesting author produced copies of the full text. I tried to make the copyright issue as clear as possible and included links to SHERPA/RoMEO while emphasising that I would undertake all necessary copyright investigations. The response has been reasonably positive but includes:
Add to this my own work load associated with the task of looking up individual journals/academic publishers on SHERPA/RoMEO and the fact that RoMEO, though a truly indispensible resource, is not, by any means comprehensive and I’m really beginning to get a sense of the iceberg’s sub-marine mass as I hesitantly trace its contours.
One academic who expressed his willingness to include his RAE submission in the repository happens to be published by John Wiley & Son so I duly visited SHERPA/RoMEO to discover that they are a RoMEO ‘green’ which I naively assumed meant that I would be able to archive an author produced version in the repository…until I read the conditions which explicitely state “Not allowed on institutional repository”. As many of my fellow repository managers around the country are considerably more experienced than me and further on with developing and populating their IRs I decided to post to JISC-REPOSITORIES in the hope of some clarification.
I’m now even more confused – which is absolutely no reflection on my colleagues on the list who responded with their usual enthusiasm and expertise – its just that the issue is inherently complex and, as the Open Access publishing paradigm continues to evolve, we, the repository community are necessarily reliant on (interpretation) of individual Publishers’ copyright policies which vary in both their restrictiveness and their clarity.
I’m hoping that, like many things in repository development (and life) problems that seem difficult and confusing today appear clearer tomorrow, next week or next year…
April 22, 2008 1 Comment
This is a question that was raised at the recent CRI seminar and as promised I’ve done a bit of digging. Well, anyway, I emailed the fellow at SHERPA so thank you to Bill Hubbard who I paraphrase/quote here.
First of all there are 386 academic publishers accounted for in the SHERPA RoMEO database but it is very difficult to establish what proportion of the worlds’ publishers this figure actually represents. Moreover, having Elsevier in the database is obviously more significant than some obscure specialist publisher that may only publish a single title a year; such publishers, of course, come and go all the time.
It is similarly difficult to give a meaningful figure for the actual number of acedemic journals published by those 330+ publishers and estimates vary (wildly!) between 14,000-28,000 but many of those will be extremely limited circulation specific to a country etc.
It is currently estimated that there are 8-9,000 journals covered by RoMEO although this does vary. It is based on a combination of British Library holdings and publishers outputs. And of course publishers acquire new titles, take over other companies, sell off titles, new ones start, etc every week.
So what, then, is Bill’s conclusion?
“I don’t think you can get better than saying the majority – and the vast majority of titles that are of interest to UK researchers.”