DOCSLIB.ORG

Beyond the Paywall - Resource Sharing in a Disruptive Ecosystem Held at the National Library of Technology in Prague, Czech Republic, October 9-11, 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Beyond the Paywall - Resource Sharing in a Disruptive Ecosystem Held at the National Library of Technology in Prague, Czech Republic, October 9-11, 2019 Proceedings of the 16th IFLA ILDS conference: Beyond the paywall - Resource sharing in a disruptive ecosystem held at the National Library of Technology in Prague, Czech Republic, October 9-11, 2019 Editors: Peter D. Collins, Stephanie Krueger, and Sasha Skenderija National Library of Technology, 2019 Conference website: https://ilds2019.org These proceedings are licensed under the Creative Commons licence: CC BY-NC-ND (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Suggested citation: Collins, P.D., Krueger, S., & Skenderija, S. (Eds.). (2019). Proceedings of the 16th IFLA ILDS conference: Beyond the paywall - Resource sharing in a disruptive ecosystem. Prague, Czech Republic: National Library of Technology. Retrieved from http://invenio.nusl.cz/record/407836?ln=en Keywords: resource sharing; document delivery services; interlibrary loan; interlibrary circulation services; information sources; document supply; libraries; library cooperation; 2 networking; open access; digital divide, web services; academic libraries; researchers; electronic books; license agreements; research data; research data management; user behaviour; user experience; IFLA DDRS Publisher: National Library of Technology, Technická 6/2710, Prague, Czech Republic On behalf of the IFLA Document Delivery and Resource Sharing Section’s Standing Committee ISBN: 978-80-86504-40-7 Collins, P.D., Krueger, S., & Skenderija, S. (Eds.). (2019). Proceedings of the 16th IFLA ILDS conference: Beyond the paywall - Resource sharing in a disruptive ecosystem. Prague, Czech Republic: National Library of Technology in Prague. IFLA DDRS Standing Committee Officers Chair: Peter D. Collins Director, Public Services Van Pelt-Dietrich Library, University of Pennsylvania United States Secretary: Ertuğrul Çimen Library Director MEF University Turkey Information Coordinator: Stephanie Krueger Senior Consultant, Specialized Academic Services National Library of Technology (NTK) Czech Republic 2019 IFLA ILDS Program Subcommittee Seangill Peter Bae Assistant University Librarian for Scholarly Collections Services 3 Princeton University Library United States Faten BaRayyan Reference and Instruction Coordinator King Abdullah University for Science and Technology Saudi Arabia Tainá Batista de Assis Community Service Coordinator Brazilian Institute of Information on Science and Technology (IBICT) Brazil Nicole Clasen Head of User Services and Document Delivery Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Germany Cecilia Ericson Coordinator for interlibrary loans Kungliga Biblioteket / The National Library of Sweden Sweden Collins, P.D., Krueger, S., & Skenderija, S. (Eds.). (2019). Proceedings of the 16th IFLA ILDS conference: Beyond the paywall - Resource sharing in a disruptive ecosystem. Prague, Czech Republic: National Library of Technology in Prague. Joe Lenkart International Reference Librarian University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign United States Sasha Skenderija Strategist, Office for Academic Services Development National Library of Technology (NTK) Czech Republic National Library of Technology Organizing Committee Martin Svoboda Library Director Jitka Heřmanová Conference Manager Alena Chodounská Peer Support Manager Michaela Pánková Logistics 4 Filip Čížek Graphic Design Reviewers of papers Seangill Peter Bae Peter D. Collins Stephanie Krueger Joe Lenkart Clare MacKeigan Jarmo Saarti Sasha Skenderija Candice Townsend Collins, P.D., Krueger, S., & Skenderija, S. (Eds.). (2019). Proceedings of the 16th IFLA ILDS conference: Beyond the paywall - Resource sharing in a disruptive ecosystem. Prague, Czech Republic: National Library of Technology in Prague. Index of Authors Andy Appleyard (pp. 116-132) Dale Askey (pp. 9-16) Veranika Babaryka-Amelchanka (pp. 48-55) Tina Baich (pp. 234-249) Brittany Brannon (pp. 134-146) Collence Chisita (pp. 28-47) Ertuğrul Çimen (pp. 147-171) Nicole Clasen (pp. 92-100) Lynn Silipigni Connaway (pp. 134-146) Sami Çuhadar (pp. 147-171) Chris Cyr (pp. 134-146) CJ de Jong (pp. 9-16) Nora Dethloff (pp. 260-268) 5 Melissa Eighmy-Brown (pp. 208-232) Madeleine Fombad (pp. 28-47) Peggy Gallagher (pp. 134-146) Berthold Gillitzer (pp. 201-207) Astrid Grossgarten (pp. 86-91) Li Han (pp. 250-259) Erin M. Hood (pp. 134-146) Ian Ibbotson (pp. 260-268) Denise Koufogiannakis (pp. 9-16) Ling Leng (pp. 18-27) Gary Maixner III (pp. 234-249) Joseph McArthur (pp. 234-249) Kurt Munson (pp. 172-199) Ryma Muravitskaya (pp. 48-55) Xiaofei Niu (pp. 250-259) Collins, P.D., Krueger, S., & Skenderija, S. (Eds.). (2019). Proceedings of the 16th IFLA ILDS conference: Beyond the paywall - Resource sharing in a disruptive ecosystem. Prague, Czech Republic: National Library of Technology in Prague. Mike Paxton (pp. 234-249) Jan Pokorný (pp. 269-274) Kristina Rose (pp. 260-268) Jarmo Saarti (pp. 57-68) Natallia Shakura (pp. 48-55) Austin Smith (pp. 208-232) Hilary H. Thompson (pp. 172-199 & 208-232) Sydney Thompson (pp. 260-268) Daniel Tschirren (pp. 86-91) Kimmo Tuominen (pp. 57-68) Abdullah Turan (pp. 147-171) Zhao Xing (pp. 101-115) Huifang Xu (pp. 69-84) Xiaomu Xu (pp. 18-27) Ling Zhang (pp. 250-259) 6 Collins, P.D., Krueger, S., & Skenderija, S. (Eds.). (2019). Proceedings of the 16th IFLA ILDS conference: Beyond the paywall - Resource sharing in a disruptive ecosystem. Prague, Czech Republic: National Library of Technology in Prague. Table of Contents IFLA DDRS Standing Committee Officers .................................................................................................. 3 2019 IFLA ILDS Program Subcommittee ................................................................................................... 3 National Library of Technology Organizing Committee ............................................................................ 4 Reviewers of papers .................................................................................................................................... 4 Index of Authors ............................................................................................................................................... 5 Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................. 7 SESSION 01 - Perspectives: Reducing Barriers ...................................................................................8 A Progressive Approach to Reducing Barriers to Resource Sharing: A Canadian Example ........................ 9 SESSION 02 - Perspectives: Digital Divide, Open Access, Collaborative Networks ....................... 17 Narrowing the Gap of the Digital Divide: How NSTL Contributes .............................................................. 18 The conundrum of resource sharing in Zimbabwe: Case of academic libraries ...................................... 28 Aside from payment: the experience of acquisition and mutual use of resources in the Belarus Agricultural Library ........................................................................................................................................ 48 SESSION 03 - Perspectives: The Needs of Scholars ........................................................................ 56 From interlending to resource sharing between scholars? – An analysis of recent developments ....... 57 Challenges and Opportunities for Research Data Management in the Chinese Library Community ...... 69 SESSION 04 - Perspectives: Sharing, Copyright ............................................................................... 85 7 Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland (CSLS): Sharing of content and resources - providing quick and modern services ............................................................................................................................................ 86 Digital possibilities in international interlibrary lending - with or despite German copyright law............. 92 Opportunities and Challenges: The Current Situation of Copyright Protection for Document Supply in China……………. .............................................................................................................................................. 101 UKRR – a collaborative collection management strategy ........................................................................ 116 SESSION 05 - Perspectives: Users, Service Evaluation .................................................................. 133 Meeting Users in Their Spaces: Key Findings on Discovery to Delivery .................................................. 134 In-transit Practices among Multi-campus University Libraries in Turkey ................................................ 147 International Interlibrary Loan in a Changing Environment: Results from the 2019 RUSA STARS International ILL Survey .............................................................................................................................. 172 SESSION 06 - Perspectives: ILL, Format Types .............................................................................. 200 ILL for e-books: Four years of experience – learning to walk ................................................................... 201 When there’s only one: resource sharing and the predicament of the dissertation request .................. 208 SESSION 07 - Perspectives: ILL Tools and Technologies.............................................................. 233 Engineering a Powerfully Simple Interlibrary Loan Experience with InstantILL ...................................... 234 Analysis
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Executive Director's Report
    #EBD 12.35 ALA Executive Director’s Report to ALA Executive Board Prepared by Tracie D. Hall April 5, 2021 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ASSOCIATION UPDATES AND HIGHLIGHTS • ALA Leads Charge on Library Inclusion in American Rescue Plan Act • Membership Committee and Member Relationship Services Propose Membership Retention Strategy • ASGCLA Transition Update • National Library Week • First Widescale Study of Race and LIS workforce Retention • Select Division Events this Quarter • Human Resources/Staffing Update • Financial Update • Pivot Strategy Update • Draft Cross Functional Teams REPORTS OF ALA OFFICES AND UNITS • Chapter Relations Office • Communications And Marketing Office • Conference Services • Development • Governance Office • Information Technology (IT) • International Relations Office • Member Relations & Services • Office for Accreditation • Office for Diversity, Literacy And Outreach Services • Office for Intellectual Freedom • Public Policy and Advocacy • Public Programs Office • Publishing REPORT OF ALA DIVISIONS • American Association of School Librarians • Association of College And Research Libraries • Association For Library Service to Children • Core • Public Library Association • Reference And User Services Association • United for Libraries • Young Adult Library Services Association ASSOCIATION UPDATE The third quarter of FY21 finds the American Library Association busy launching key new programs designed to support libraries nationally that have been adversely impacted by reductions in funding even as their communities turn to them for increasingly urgent information access and digital connectivity needs; and unveiling new initiatives to ensure that the library workers who run them have expanded access to the educational resources, practitioner networks, data and tends analysis, and opportunities to apply for grants and individual financial support needed to ensure that their libraries and careers remain productive and impactful.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Comments and Implementation of the Nih Public Access Policy 2008
    ANALYSIS OF COMMENTS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NIH PUBLIC ACCESS POLICY 2008 Executive Summary BACKGROUND The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy requires investigators funded by the NIH to submit, or have submitted for them, an electronic version of their final, peer‐reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication to the National Library of Medicine’s digital archive, PubMed Central, to be posted publicly within 12 months after the official date of publication. Congress required the NIH to implement this funding limitation in Division G, Title II, Section 218 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (“Section 218”). The Policy is intended to advance science, provide public access to the published results of NIH‐funded research, and improve human health. The current Public Access Policy is the culmination of years of effort and community interaction. Prior to passage of Section 218, NIH undertook extraordinary public outreach concerning the issue of public access to the published results of NIH‐funded research. These outreach efforts included a review of over six thousand public comments and the establishment of an independent advisory group to review NIH’s implementation of a voluntary Public Access Policy. Additionally, as part of the process to implement Section 218 in a transparent and participatory manner, NIH formally sought public input through an open meeting and a Request for Information (RFI) seeking public comment. This open meeting occurred on March 20, 2008 and was designed to ensure that a discussion of stakeholder issues could occur. The feedback from the open meeting helped define questions for an RFI, which was published on the NIH web site on March 28, 2008 and in the Federal Register on March 31, 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling Research Through Open Access Policies
    THE SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING & ACADEMIC RESOURCES COALITION 21 Dupont Circle NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 296-2296 www.arl.org/sparc Enabling Research through Open Access Policies Heather Joseph, Executive Director SPARC Washington, DC USA The Issue • Funders invest in research with the expectation that it will result in improvements to the public good. • They increasingly recognize that dissemination is an essential component of the research process. • Research is cumulative - it advances through sharing results. The value of an investment in research is maximized only through use of its findings. www.arl.org/sparc 2 The Issue • Too often, the research results (either publicly or privately funded ) are simply not widely available to the community of potential users. • Internet provides new opportunity to bring information broader audience at virtually no marginal cost, and use it new, innovative ways. Result: Call for new framework designed to allow research results to be more easily accessed and used. www.arl.org/sparc 3 Without Open Access But Article Isn’t Available….. Usability is Key “By open access, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software or use them for any other lawful purpose…” - The Budapest Open Access Initiative www.arl.org/sparc 6 Greater Access is a Policy Concern “Governments would boost innovation and get a better return on their investment in publicly funded research by making research findings more widely available….
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Library Media Programs in Louisiana Schools
    GUIDELINES FOR LIBRARY MEDIA PROGRAMS IN LOUISIANA SCHOOLS May 2020 CONTENTS Guidelines for Library Media Programs in Louisiana Schools ............................................................1 Recommended Staffing Guidelines .......................10 Louisiana Student Library Guidelines ...................11 Acknowledgments ....................................................... 30 Resources for Further Information ........................ 31 GUIDELINES FOR LIBRARY MEDIA PROGRAMS IN LOUISIANA SCHOOLS Research studies provide strong evidence that student achievement is significantly higher in schools where a strong library program exists.1 According to the American Association of School Librarians (AASL),2 the best measure of effectiveness of a school library program is the extent of its impact on student learning. Scholastic released the 2016 edition of School Libraries Work! A Compendium of Research Supporting the Effectiveness of School Libraries. In this document it is stated, “The major themes supported by the research highlighted in this report confirm that: a credentialed school librarian, collaboration and co-teaching, technology access, and collection size all elevate student learning.”3 Therefore, comprehensive school library programs have a positive impact on student learning when: 1. Staffed with certified school librarians. 2. The librarian co-teaches and collaborates with other teachers. 3. Library patrons are able to access up-to-date technology. 4. The level of library expenditures provides a quality collection of books and electronic information resources selected to support the school’s curricula. 5. The library collection is expansive, diverse, and easily accessed by library patrons. The purpose of this document is to set forth guidelines of excellence for school library programs in Louisiana by focusing on the role of the school librarian as an active partner in the teaching and learning process.
    [Show full text]
  • Pirated Economics
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive Pirated Economics Babutsidze, Zakaria SKEMA Business School, OFCE Sciences Po 2 June 2016 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/72621/ MPRA Paper No. 72621, posted 20 Jul 2016 07:48 UTC Pirated Economics Zakaria Babutsidze SKEMA Business School & OFCE Sciences Po Abstract: I argue that the impact of piracy engines for scholarly content on science depends on the nature of the research. Social sciences are more likely to reap benefits from such engines without inflicting much damage to r journal publishe revenues. To validate , the claim I examine the data from illegal downloads of economics content from Sci-­‐Hub over -­‐ five month period. I conclude that: (a) the extent of piracy in economics is not pervasive; (b) as downloads are coming mostly -­‐ from under developed countries; (c) users pirate even the content freely available online. As a result, publishers are not losing much revenues, while the exposure to generated knowledge is being extended. JEL Code: A1 1. Introduction The idea of open science has challenged -­‐ many stake holders in science and publishing for years. Many have argued that pricing practices by mainstream scientific journal publishers have built walls around the knowledge precluding a large part of researchers and public from accessing public good. Some have even compared this “paywall” to the wall dividing east and west Berlin during the cold war (Oxenham 2016). This has become particularly problematic when it comes to the knowledge generated by publicly funded research. Some reckon that eliminating scientific journal publishing from the knowledge creation process will save $9.8bln of public money annually (Brembs 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Do Authors Deposit on Time? Tracking Open Access Policy Compliance
    Do Authors Deposit on Time? Tracking Open Access Policy Compliance Drahomira Herrmannova Nancy Pontika Petr Knoth Knowledge Media Institute Knowledge Media Institute Knowledge Media Institute The Open University The Open University The Open University Milton Keynes, United Kingdom Milton Keynes, United Kingdom Milton Keynes, United Kingdom orcid.org/0000-0002-2730-1546 orcid.org/0000-0002-2091-0402 orcid.org/0000-0003-1161-7359 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT vs. post-print) should be made openly accessible [17]. Arguably Recent years have seen fast growth in the number of policies man- one of the most significant OA policies, the UK Research Excel- 3 dating Open Access (OA) to research outputs. We conduct a large- lence Framework (REF) 2021 Open Access Policy , was introduced scale analysis of over 800 thousand papers from repositories around in the UK in March 2014 [8]. The significance of this policy lies the world published over a period of 5 years to investigate: a) if the in two aspects: 1) the requirement to make research outputs OA time lag between the date of publication and date of deposit in a is linked to performance review, creating a strong incentive for repository can be effectively tracked across thousands of reposito- compliance [25, 29, 30], and 2) it affects over 5% of global research 4 ries globally, and b) if introducing deposit deadlines is associated outputs . Under this policy, only compliant research outputs will with a reduction of time from acceptance to public availability of be evaluated in the national Research Excellence Framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Positioning Library and Information Science Graduate Programs for 21St Century Practice
    Positioning Library and Information Science Graduate Programs for 21st Century Practice Forum Report November 2017, Columbia, SC Compiled and edited by: Ashley E. Sands, Sandra Toro, Teri DeVoe, and Sarah Fuller (Institute of Museum and Library Services), with Christine Wolff-Eisenberg (Ithaka S+R) Suggested citation: Sands, A.E., Toro, S., DeVoe, T., Fuller, S., and Wolff-Eisenberg, C. (2018). Positioning Library and Information Science Graduate Programs for 21st Century Practice. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Museum and Library Services. Institute of Museum and Library Services 955 L’Enfant Plaza North, SW Suite 4000 Washington, DC 20024 June 2018 This publication is available online at www.imls.gov Positioning Library and Information Science Graduate Programs for 21st Century Practice | Forum Report II Table of Contents Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................1 Panels & Discussion ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Session I: Diversity in the Library Profession ....................................................................................... 3 Defining metrics and gathering data ............................................................................................... 4 Building professional networks through cohorts ........................................................................ 4
    [Show full text]
  • Discipline-Specific Open Access Publishing
    F1000Research 2020, 7:1925 Last updated: 24 APR 2020 RESEARCH ARTICLE Discipline-specific open access publishing practices and barriers to change: an evidence-based review [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] Anna Severin 1,2, Matthias Egger1,2, Martin Paul Eve 3, Daniel Hürlimann 4 1Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, Bern, 3012, Switzerland 2Swiss National Science Foundation, Bern, 3001, Switzerland 3Department of English and Humanities, Birkbeck University of London, London, WC1H 0PD, UK 4Research Center for Information Law, University of St.Gallen, St.Gallen, 9000, Switzerland First published: 11 Dec 2018, 7:1925 Open Peer Review v2 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.17328.1 Latest published: 26 Mar 2020, 7:1925 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.17328.2 Reviewer Status Abstract Invited Reviewers Background: Many of the discussions surrounding Open Access (OA) 1 2 3 revolve around how it affects publishing practices across different academic disciplines. It was a long-held view that it would be only a matter version 2 of time before all disciplines fully and relatively homogeneously (revision) report report implemented OA. Recent large-scale bibliometric studies show, however, 26 Mar 2020 that the uptake of OA differs substantially across disciplines. We aimed to answer two questions: First, how do different disciplines adopt and shape OA publishing practices? Second, what discipline-specific barriers to and version 1 potentials for OA can be identified? 11 Dec 2018 report report report Methods: In a first step, we identified and synthesized relevant bibliometric studies that assessed OA prevalence and publishing patterns across disciplines.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access, Predatory Publishing and Peer-Review
    Fernandez-Llimos F. Open access, predatory publishing and peer-review. Pharmacy Practice 2014 Jan- Mar;12(1):427. Editorial Open access, predatory publishing and peer-review Fernando FERNANDEZ-LLIMOS. Keywords: Publishing; Access to Information; Peer Review, Research; Codes of Ethics; Cooperative Behavior *In recent years, scholarly publishing faced a new paradigm regarding the accessibility: the open access movement. “If an article is "Open Access" it means that it can be freely accessed by anyone in the world using an internet connection”.1 The Budapest Open Access Initiative states: “By "open access" to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself”.2 Some researchers may have never been concerned about this topic. It obviously means that they are affiliated with a rich institution from a rich country. There are few things more discouraging for a researcher than performing a literature search, retrieving a list of potentially interesting articles, and not being able to access many of them because one’s library does not subscribe those journals. And this lack of access will increase, even in major Universities from rich countries3, where the average cost of subscription reached 12,000 USD per faculty member more than 10 years ago.4 Administrations are regulating the access to the results of publicly funded researches by using these open access systems: initially, through a voluntary Public Access Policy and then making it mandatory.5 The European Union slowly followed a similar policy, initiated at the Seventh Framework Programme.6 Many other institutions and countries are following this movement.7 PubMed Central is a free archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • IFLA School Library Guidelines (2Nd Revised Edition)
    IFLA School Library Guidelines Written by the IFLA School Libraries Section Standing Committee Edited by: Barbara Schultz-Jones and Dianne Oberg, with contributions from the International Association of School Librarianship Executive Board 2nd revised edition June 2015 Endorsed by the IFLA Professional Committee International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions, 2015. © 2015 by International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (Unported) license. To view a copy of this license, visit: creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 IFLA P.O. Box 95312 2509 CH Den Haag Netherlands www.ifla.org Table of Contents Preface ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 7 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 10 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Chapter 1 Mission and Purposes of a School Library ............................................................... 16 1.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Guidelines for Pennsylvania School Library Programs
    Guidelines for Pennsylvania School Library Programs Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Education Office of Commonwealth Libraries 2019 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Tom Wolf, Governor Department of Education Pedro A. Rivera, Secretary Office of Commonwealth Libraries Glenn Miller, Deputy Secretary Bureau of Library Development Susan Banks, Director The Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) does not discriminate in its educational programs, activities, or employment practices, based on race, color, national origin, [sex] gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, religion, ancestry, union membership, gender identity or expression, AIDS or HIV status, or any other legally protected category. Announcement of this policy is in accordance with State Law including the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act and with Federal law, including Title VI and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The following persons have been designated to handle inquiries regarding the Pennsylvania Department of Education’s nondiscrimination policies: For Inquiries Concerning Nondiscrimination in Employment: Pennsylvania Department of Education Equal Employment Opportunity Representative Bureau of Human Resources Voice Telephone: (717) 783-5446 For Inquiries Concerning Nondiscrimination in All Other Pennsylvania Department of Education Programs and Activities: Pennsylvania
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Compliance with Open Access Policies
    Monitoring Compliance with Open Access policies Monitoring Compliance with Open Access policies Author: Mafalda Picarra, Jisc Reviewers: Alma Swan, EOS December 2015 Introduction In the last few years, academic communities have seen an increase in the number of Open Access (OA) policies being adopted at the institutional and funder levels. In parallel to policy implementation, institutions and funders have also been engaged in developing mechanisms to monitor academics and researchers compliance with the existing OA policies. This study highlights a few of the cases where compliance is being effectively monitored by institutions and funders. In the first section, Open Access is briefly overviewed and the rationale for monitoring OA policy compliance is explained. The second section looks at best practices in monitoring policy compliance with OA policies by funders and institutions. The case studies reflect on compliance with the UK Funding Councils and the USA National Institutes of Health OA policies. The third section makes recommendations on what processes and procedures universities and funders should adopt to monitor compliance with their OA policies. The final section recapitulates some of the key ideas related to monitoring policy compliance. I. Open Access and monitoring compliance Open Access policies: An overview OA policies have been adopted by universities, research institutions and funders from as early as 2003. The Registry of Open Access Repository Mandates and Policies (ROARMAP) currently records the existence of 738 OA policies across the world, of which 440 have been implemented by universities (347) and funders (53) in Europe. OA policies provide information on the set of criteria that authors are required or encouraged to comply with in order to make their research outputs available on Open Access.
    [Show full text]