CURRENT STATUS OF THE INSTITUTIONAL REPOSITORY AT THE SOUTH EASTERN UNIVERSITY OF SRI LANKA

Abstract:  DSpace is an open-source software which is the most popular and cost-effective tool to build digital repositories. There are 15 Sri Lankan institutional repositories listed in the Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR) platform. OpenDOAR is the global directory of academic open access repositories. The present study mainly focuses on the current status of the Institutional Repository at the South Eastern University of Sri Lanka (SEUIR). The study further attempts to compare SEUIR with other listed institutional repositories in OpenDOAR of Sri Lanka. The data were extracted from the statistics calculated through DSpace open source software and analysed for the necessary information. The study highlights the current status of SEUIR and further developments to improve the accessibility of contents to the viewers.

Open access dell’Università statale di Milano | Scienza in rete

The article presents the OA journal publishing platform owned and maintained by the University of Milan. All journals are no-fee OA journals and the majority of them deal with humanities.

In the extensive introduction, the key concepts related to OA (including Plan S, transformative agreements, self-archiving, etc.) are discussed.

“Collaborating Across Campus to Advance Open Access Policy Compliance” by Andrew Johnson, Melissa Cantrell et al.

In 2018, the Data and Scholarly Communication Services Unit (DSCS) at the University of Colorado Boulder began implementing two open access (OA) policy workflows with the aim of increasing content in the institutional repository CU Scholar, expanding awareness of the campus OA policy that was passed in 2015, and decreasing the burden on researchers for participation in the policy. DSCS leveraged collaborative relationships with other library departments and campus units in order to mobilize the data, infrastructure, procedures, and documentation to execute these workflows. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) workflow identifies existing open access publications by CU Boulder faculty and mediates deposit in order to make them available in CU Scholar. The liaison outreach workflow partners with liaison librarians to request from faculty preprints and author’s final manuscripts of publications in which the publisher version may have copyright restrictions. At present, the DOAJ workflow has resulted in 754 articles deposited in CU Scholar, and the liaison outreach workflow has resulted in 91 articles deposited. Each of these workflows pose challenges that have required flexibility, experimentation, and clear communication between stakeholders. This case study, which includes detailed descriptions of both open access policy workflows, initial results, and plans for future implementation, may serve as a guide for other institutions wishing to adopt and/or adapt institutional repository workflows and forge collaborative relationships to further open access initiatives in their local context.

Cambridge Open Engage

“The collaborative platform to upload, share and advance your research

Cambridge Open Engage is the new early content platform from Cambridge University Press, designed to provide researchers with the space and resources to connect and collaborate with their communities, and rapidly disseminate early research. The platform is currently under development using a co-creation approach and we’re inviting researchers to actively input to help us shape the features and functionality. Register your interest below to stay up to date and to participate in its progress!…”

British Library Shared Research Repository launched in beta – Living Knowledge blog

“The Shared Repository, currently a beta service, brings together the openly available research outputs produced by staff and research associates of six cultural and heritage organisations: the British Library; the British Museum; MOLA (Museum of London Archaeology); National Museums Scotland; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; and Tate. Each partner has their own repository and is responsible for their own content, but users can also explore the combined content using the shared search from the homepage. Articles, book chapters, datasets, exhibition texts, conference presentations, blogs and many more types of our research are now discoverable and downloadable by researchers worldwide. The repository currently holds just a selection of outputs to give a flavour of our research activities, with many more to be added in the coming months….”

FOAA Board recommendations for the implementation of Plan S

[Undated]

“ii. Define a clear transition path for hybrid journals to (Gold) OA. We suggest, in line with Stephan Kuster’s comment at the LERU meeting of October 2018, that to be compliant, the journal would need to be able to demonstrate it is transitioning within a 3-4 year period to fully gold OA by reporting on progress every year. iii. Provide clarity if and how green Open Access (OA) will be compliant. Green OA repositories seem to be endorsed only for preservation, not for OA itself. However, if compliant green OA is explicitly defined as unembargoed libre green OA, this is just as satisfactory as unembargoed libre gold OA, and this might incentivize publishers to hasten the transition of their journals to full gold OA. In this way, the value of repositories for OA itself can be acknowledged, not just for preservation and editorial innovation. iv. We strongly recommend that support for OA promised in Plan S infrastructure be public and open infrastructure, that is, platforms running on open-source software, under open standards, with open APIs for interoperability, owned or hosted by non-profit organizations. This should avoid infrastructure being acquired by large commercial publishers, which is a deliberate approach being taken to increase ownership of the whole scholarly communication ecosystem ….”

FOAA Board recommendations for the implementation of Plan S

[Undated]

“ii. Define a clear transition path for hybrid journals to (Gold) OA. We suggest, in line with Stephan Kuster’s comment at the LERU meeting of October 2018, that to be compliant, the journal would need to be able to demonstrate it is transitioning within a 3-4 year period to fully gold OA by reporting on progress every year. iii. Provide clarity if and how green Open Access (OA) will be compliant. Green OA repositories seem to be endorsed only for preservation, not for OA itself. However, if compliant green OA is explicitly defined as unembargoed libre green OA, this is just as satisfactory as unembargoed libre gold OA, and this might incentivize publishers to hasten the transition of their journals to full gold OA. In this way, the value of repositories for OA itself can be acknowledged, not just for preservation and editorial innovation. iv. We strongly recommend that support for OA promised in Plan S infrastructure be public and open infrastructure, that is, platforms running on open-source software, under open standards, with open APIs for interoperability, owned or hosted by non-profit organizations. This should avoid infrastructure being acquired by large commercial publishers, which is a deliberate approach being taken to increase ownership of the whole scholarly communication ecosystem ….”

The International Open Access Movement and Its Status in Pakistan

Abstract:  The objective of this study is to analyze the present status of the open access movement in Pakistan, identify challenges, and make recommendations for the effective use of this publishing model. The article looks primarily at the open access movement in Asia, with special reference to Pakistan, India, and China. Findings show that, since the emergence of the Budapest Open Access Initiative in 2001, the open access movement has developed rapidly at the international level. From the Pakistani perspective, gold open access, in which articles or monographs are freely available in their original form on publishers’ websites, developed quickly. However, green open access, which relies on authors to self-archive their articles in institutional or subject repositories, has been relatively slow to develop. A lack of support from educational institutions, libraries, library associations, and funding bodies may explain the slow growth of green open access in Pakistan. The author recommends that Pakistani universities, research institutions, and funding agencies develop open access policies, set up institutional repositories, and encourage publishing in open access journals and self-archiving in institutional repositories. 

Public Access to NIST Research | NIST

“NIST is committed to the idea that results of federally funded research are a valuable national resource and a strategic asset.  To the extent feasible and consistent with law, agency mission, resource constraints, and U.S. national, homeland, and economic security, NIST will promote the deposit of scientific data arising from unclassified research and programs, funded wholly or in part by NIST, except for Standard Reference Data, free of charge in publicly accessible databases.  Subject to the same conditions and constraints listed above, NIST also intends to make freely available to the public, in publicly accessible repositories, all peer-reviewed scholarly publications arising from unclassified research and programs funded wholly or in part by NIST. 

 

NIST publications can be located through the NIST website.  Peer-reviewed papers are deposited in PMC.  NIST Technical Series and publications that are not peer reviewed are available through govinfo.  Papers can also be located through science.gov along with other government papers.  NIST data can be located through the Science Data Portal on the NIST website and through data.gov, along with other government data.  Links to repositories containing NIST code, data, and publications are provided to the right.

 

NIST has established an embargo period of no more than 12 months post-publication for making peer-reviewed publications freely available through NIST’s repository on PMC.  Stakeholders may petition NIST’s Open Access Officer to change the embargo period in the following year for publications in a specified scientific field.  A petition must demonstrate that the existing embargo period for certain fields of scientific research does not provide a public benefit and is inconsistent with the objectives articulated in the OSTP Memo.  When considering changes to the embargo period, NIST will consult with other agencies that fund related areas of scientific research.”