Beyond Institutional Repositories Export

@article{citeulike:5416847, abstract = {The current system of so-called institutional repositories, even if it has been a sensible response at an earlier stage, may not answer the needs of the scholarly community, scientific communication and accompanied stakeholders in a sustainable way. However, having a robust repository infrastructure is essential to academic work. Yet, current institutional solutions, even when networked in a country or across Europe, have largely failed to deliver. Consequently, a new path for a more robust infrastructure and larger repositories is explored to create superior services that support the academy. A future organization of publication repositories is advocated that is based upon macroscopic academic settings providing a critical mass of interest as well as organizational coherence. Such a macro-unit may be geographical (a coherent national scheme), institutional (a large research organization or a consortium thereof) or thematic (a specific research field organizing itself in the domain of publication repositories).The argument proceeds as follows: firstly, while institutional open access mandates have brought some content into open access, the important mandates are those of the funders and these are best supported by a single infrastructure and large repositories, which incidentally enhances the value of the collection (while a transfer to institutional repositories would diminish the value). Secondly, we compare and contrast a system based on central research publication repositories with the notion of a network of institutional repositories to illustrate that across central dimensions of any repository solution the institutional model is more cumbersome and less likely to achieve a high level of service. Next, three key functions of publication repositories are reconsidered, namely a) the fast and wide dissemination of results; b) the preservation of the record; and c) digital curation for dissemination and preservation. Fourth, repositories and their ecologies are explored with the overriding aim of enhancing content and enhancing usage. Fifth, a target scheme is sketched, including some examples. In closing, a look at the evolutionary road ahead is offered.}, author = {Romary, Laurent and Armbruster, Chris}, booktitle = {SSRN eLibrary}, citeulike-article-id = {5416847}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=1425692}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1425919_code434782.pdf?abstractid=1425692&mirid=1}, day = {25}, journal = {Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series}, keywords = {cyberinfrastructure, digital\_repositories, scholarly\_communication}, month = {June}, posted-at = {2009-08-11 18:24:05}, priority = {4}, publisher = {SSRN}, title = {Beyond Institutional Repositories}, url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=1425692}, year = {2009} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:5416847 L3 - citeulike-article-id:5416847 N2 - The current system of so-called institutional repositories, even if it has been a sensible response at an earlier stage, may not answer the needs of the scholarly community, scientific communication and accompanied stakeholders in a sustainable way. However, having a robust repository infrastructure is essential to academic work. Yet, current institutional solutions, even when networked in a country or across Europe, have largely failed to deliver. Consequently, a new path for a more robust infrastructure and larger repositories is explored to create superior services that support the academy. A future organization of publication repositories is advocated that is based upon macroscopic academic settings providing a critical mass of interest as well as organizational coherence. Such a macro-unit may be geographical (a coherent national scheme), institutional (a large research organization or a consortium thereof) or thematic (a specific research field organizing itself in the domain of publication repositories).The argument proceeds as follows: firstly, while institutional open access mandates have brought some content into open access, the important mandates are those of the funders and these are best supported by a single infrastructure and large repositories, which incidentally enhances the value of the collection (while a transfer to institutional repositories would diminish the value). Secondly, we compare and contrast a system based on central research publication repositories with the notion of a network of institutional repositories to illustrate that across central dimensions of any repository solution the institutional model is more cumbersome and less likely to achieve a high level of service. Next, three key functions of publication repositories are reconsidered, namely a) the fast and wide dissemination of results; b) the preservation of the record; and c) digital curation for dissemination and preservation. Fourth, repositories and their ecologies are explored with the overriding aim of enhancing content and enhancing usage. Fifth, a target scheme is sketched, including some examples. In closing, a look at the evolutionary road ahead is offered. JF - Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series TI - Beyond Institutional Repositories PB - SSRN T2 - SSRN eLibrary KW - cyberinfrastructure KW - digital_repositories KW - scholarly_communication AU - Romary, Laurent AU - Armbruster, Chris PY - 2009/June/25/ UR - http://ssrn.com/abstract=1425692 ER -