OSF | Public Access Submission System (PASS)

“The Sheridan Libraries at Johns Hopkins University, the Center for Open Science, MIT Libraries and the Harvard University Office for Scholarly Communication are building the Public Access Submission System (PASS), an open platform that would support researchers’ workflows related to compliance with funding agencies’ public access policies. The main ideas for this project arose based on discussions between Harvard, MIT and COS over the last two years….

While many federal agencies require research results to be made publicly accessible, the processes and requirements to do so vary greatly from one agency to another. The heterogeneous processes and requirements have become burdensome for researchers and their institutions, resulting in lower rates of compliances or compliance efficacies. Federal agencies, however, are not in a position to develop and commit to a solution, which would harmonize these workflows.

On the university side, many researchers are subject to more than one OA policy, for example, a university policy and a funder policy. Similarly, in the case of researches with multiple funding sources, researchers are subjects to public access policies from different funders. Universities would face an implementation nightmare, if the only paths to compliance were the different submission interfaces at different funders and institutions,. A unified submission interface would lighten the load on universities, and improve compliance, even if the unified submission interface were not exclusive….”

Innovating for Impact: The Next Evolution of Library Consortia

“One of the most common approaches is centralized consortium support or management for member library digital repository platforms, which allows institutions to showcase and disseminate student and faculty scholarly and creative works. A precursor to the broader scope of current institutional repositories is seen in shared digital collections of theses and dissertations (ETDs), with OhioLINK’s ETD Center (created in 2001) one of the best examples of a library consortium-supported ETD repository. Other regional consortia or state university systems (e.g., Texas Digital Library, California Digital Library) support similar shared ETD repositories. Most consortia-supported digital repositories now focus on creating institutionallybranded portals (rather than shared collections) that include faculty publications, student scholarship, and other unique and locally-created or curated content. Digital repositories are supported by different types of academic library consortia and library systems. For example, the California State University (CSU) system’s Digital Library Services offers centrally-supported repository services called ScholarWorks to all CSU libraries, while the British Columbia Electronic Library Network (BCELN)–a consortium that includes members ranging from small technical colleges to large research universities–provides a shared repository platform that offers individually branded portals and federated search across all member repositories. Both CSU and BCELN use open source platforms (CSU is currently migrating to Samvera/Hyrax, while BCELN uses Islandora), leveraging shared, centralized support to configure and manage software that would not necessarily be feasible (or desirable) for individual members to maintain on their own. The growth in academic library engagement with open access publishing is also driving interest in consortia support and management of platforms that facilitate formal publishing processes beyond the simple dissemination of a repository or digital asset system….”

COAR Next Generation Repositories: Vision and Objectives

“Vision

To position repositories as the foundation for a distributed, globally networked infrastructure for scholarly communication, on top of which layers of value added services will be deployed, thereby transforming the system, making it more research-centric, open to and supportive of innovation, while also collectively managed by the scholarly community.

Technical Vision

Our vision rests on making the resource, rather than the repository, the focus of services and infrastructure. Rather than relying on imprecise descriptive metadata to identify entities and the relationships between them, our vision relies on the idea inherent in the Web Architecture, where entities (known as “resources”) are accessible and identified unambiguously by URLs. In this architecture, it is the references which are copied between systems, rather than (as at present) the metadata records. Furthermore we encourage repository developers to automatize the metadata extraction from the actual resources as much as possible to simplify and lower the barrier to the deposit process.

Objectives

  • To achieve a level of cross-repository interoperability by exposing uniform behaviours across repositories that leverage web-friendly technologies and architectures, and by integrating with existing global scholarly infrastructures specifically those aimed at identification of e.g. contributions, research data, contributors, institutions, funders, projects.
  • To encourage the emergence of value added services that use these uniform behaviours to support discovery, access, annotation, real-time curation, sharing, quality assessment, content transfer, analytics, provenance tracing, etc.
  • To help transform the scholarly communication system by emphasizing the benefits of collective, open and distributed management, open content, uniform behaviours, real-time dissemination, and collective innovation. “

Harvard’s DASH for open access – Harvard Gazette (August 2009)

“Harvard took a DASH toward opening access to its scholarship this week (Aug. 31).

DASH stands for Digital Access to Scholarship. It’s an open-access repository of scholarly works administered by the University Library. So far, more than 350 members of the Harvard research community take part, including more than a third of scholars in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS).

“DASH is meant to promote openness in general,” said Robert Darnton, Carl H. Pforzheimer University Professor and director of the University Library. “It will make the current scholarship of Harvard’s faculty freely available everywhere in the world.”

He compared DASH to Harvard’s current digitizing of books in its library system, making titles accumulated since the 17th century accessible worldwide.

“These and other projects,” said Darton, “represent a commitment by Harvard to share its intellectual wealth.”

Visitors to DASH can locate, read, and use some of the most up-to-the-minute scholarship Harvard has to offer — more than 1,500 items….

In legal terms, each participating faculty member grants DASH users nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up, worldwide license to exercise any and all rights under copyright in any medium, and to authorize others to do the same, provided that the articles are not sold for a profit.

In addition, faculty members are committed to providing copies of their manuscripts for distribution, an action the DASH repository enables.

The policy was written by OSC Director Stuart M. Shieber, Harvard’s James O. Welch Jr. and Virginia B. Welch Professor of Computer Science. It marked a groundbreaking shift from simply encouraging scholars to consider open access to creating a pro-open-access policy with an “opt-out” clause….”

Old Lions Department: Cultural Historian Robert Darnton at 78 | History News Network

“Darnton’s main ambition [as Harvard University Librarian] was to open up the library to the rest of the world and share its intellectual wealth….Several projects started being developed: the digitization of all of Harvard’s collections that concerned North America in the seventeenth and eighteenth century (an enormous amount, 500,000 documents). “It’s gigantic!” Darnton exclaimed.

 

A digital repository was also created – it was called DASH – which contains the scholarship of Harvard professors and is completely free and available to the public. “It’s a way of democratizing access to knowledge and you can do it from a place that has critical leverage like Harvard.”

 

The next step was the Digital Public Library of America (DPLA), which began when Darnton invited a group of foundation heads, the heads of libraries, and computer scientists to come to a meeting at Harvard in October 2010 in order to discuss an idea. “Namely, shouldn’t we try to link up all the research libraries in the United States in a digital system that would make their resources available to all the citizens of the United States and the rest of the world?”

In April 2013, the DPLA opened its digital doors, and since then, its exponential growth has produced 18 million objects (books and other things) available free of charge to everyone….”

The Evolving Institutional Repository Landscape

“”To gain insights and gather data on IR operations, we conducted interviews, an open survey, and web research to obtain a snapshot of the current perspective and potential role of IRs in a changing landscape….The Directory of Open Access Repositories (DOAR) in the UK includes various types of repositories, such as disciplinary (e.g., arXiv) and governmental (e.g., NLM). Isolating institutional repositories worldwide shows a total of nearly 3,000 IRs. Data from DOAR indicates that there are 478 IRs in 396 institutions in North America. However, an analysis of clients listed on the websites of five platform providers suggests that there are at least 600 IRs in an estimated 500 organizations in North America….When asked about content migration, 25% indicated that they had plans to migrate in the next one to three years, while more than half of the remaining 75% indicated no plans to migrate at this time….IRs depend on Google for content discovery, and that requires attention to Search Engine Optimization (SEO). Fortunately, SEO was the top activity of survey respondents to increase discovery, followed by more traditional library tools, metadata, and open access resources….The leading metric identified by survey respondents was growth over time, which recognizes the effort involved in building this digital collection. Usage metrics on the performance of the repository were followed by a total of items added in the current period….According to survey respondents, deposits were made by librarians at 94% of IRs. Although half of institutions indicate that faculty and students make deposits, it is clear that the majority of content is mediated or deposited by library staff. Nearly half of the institutions have one or less than one equivalent staff working on the IR. The average staff for an IR is one or two people….”

The Evolving Institutional Repository Landscape

“Last year saw a variety of changes in the institutional repository landscape. Download Choice and Informed Strategies’ 2018 report for a snapshot of where institutional repositories stand and perspective on future directions from thought leaders such as Lorcan Dempsey, Vice President and Chief Strategist of the Online Computer Library Center, and Clifford Lynch, Director of the Coalition for Networked Information.”

IRUS-UK

“IRUS-UK (Institutional Repository Usage Statistics UK) is a Jisc-funded national aggregation service, which provides COUNTER-conformant usage statistics for all content downloaded from participating UK institutional repositories (IRs)….

The service consolidates COUNTER-conformant statistics providing opportunities to demonstrate the value and impact of IRs:

  • facilitates comparable, standards-based measurements
  • provides an evidence base for repositories to develop policies and initiatives to help support their objectives
  • provides consistent and comprehensive statistics, presenting opportunities for benchmarking at a national level
  • developing a user community that will ensure that the service is responsive to user requirements….”

Open Access in Biomedical Research (September 2012)

“In recognition of the importance of open access to the biomedical sciences, the European Medical Research Councils (EMRC) of the European Science Foundation (ESF), at the instigation of its Core Group member Professor Josef Syka of the Czech Science Foundation and the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic (GA?R and AV?R), launched an activity to investigate what, if any, steps EMRC could usefully take to improve the open access landscape in the biomedical field across Europe…. The many valuable inputs from participants made it clear that the current model for accessing biomedical research is far from ideal and that all research stakeholders (funding agencies, publishers, research performing institutions, research libraries and learned societies) need to work together to shift to an open access model in the field. However, a number of potential hurdles, discussed in this briefing, remain to be overcome…. [T]his briefing makes a number of recommendations: 1. There is a moral imperative for open access: research papers should be made freely available to all to read, use and re-use, with appropriate acknowledgement, in order to maximise the value of biomedical research, build on the body of knowledge, accelerate the process of discovery and improve human health. 2. Individual agencies must work together to raise awareness of the moral imperative for open access: agencies and organisations that fund and perform research, libraries, publishers and researchers must work in concert to raise awareness of the moral imperative for open access publishing. National, European and international partnerships are the basis for the successful achievement of open access to research outputs. Specific actions that different agencies need to undertake in order to move towards this goal are outlined in this briefing. 3. All research stakeholders should work together to support the extension of Europe PubMed Central into a Europe-wide PubMed Central: in order to facilitate discoveries and innovation in biomedical research, research stakeholders should collaborate to establish a Europe-wide repository in biomedicine as a partner site to the US equivalent PubMed Central. The recently rebranded Europe PubMed Central represents a valuable means to achieving this goal, provided that the diversity of European partner mandates and policies can be integrated….”