Academic Libraries, Open Access, Institutional Repositories, and the Public Good

Sarah W. Sutton (@sarahwws)Kansas Library Association Annual Conference

Wichita, KSOctober 21, 2016

Scholarly communication

• Information communication technology• Traditional products in traditional venues: e-journals• Non-traditional venues: social media• Non-traditional products: grant reports, data sets• New measures of research impact

Where we’re going today• Sharing what I’ve learned

• Open access• Institutional repositories• Academic libraries• Public Good

• Synthesis• Fractured efforts• Lessons learned• The way forward

• Evangelizing

The public good• Not new to libraries• Cataloging• At the heart of open access• Increasing emphasis on accountability

• “An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good” (BOAI, 2002)

• “The tradition of scholars to share results of their work freely and without expectation of payment with the full expectation that their peers would not only read their work but build on their results in order to advance scholarship” (Joseph, 2016)

Open access: A brief history• Born of advances in communication technologies

“The premise that the web was built for and built on is the idea of open” (Joseph, 2016) access to information.

• Not just for librarians• Well funded• My influences: Peter Suber & Steve Harnad

Open access initiatives• Budapest Open Access Initiative - BOAI (2002)

• making the literature that “scholars give to the world without expectation of payment…primarily peer-reviewed journal articles” freely accessible online in order to “accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge” (BOAI, 2002)

• Bethesda Statement (2003)• “stimulate the discussion within the biomedical research community on how to proceed, as

rapidly as possible, to the widely held goal of providing open access to the primary scientific literature” (Bethesda Statement, 2003). It included statements from three working groups: scientists and scientific societies, libraries and publishers, and institutions and funding agencies about “significant, concrete steps that all related parties…can take to promote the rapid and efficient transition to open access publishing” (Bethesda Statement, 2003).

Open access initiatives

• Berlin Declaration (2003)• “with the aim of developing a new web-based research environment using

the Open Access paradigm as a mechanism for having scientific knowledge and cultural heritage accessible worldwide” (Berlin Declaration on open access, 2003a).

"An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good” (BOAI, 2002).

SPARC (Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition)• Association of Research Libraries, 2002• “A global coalition committed to making open the default for research

and education” (SPARC, 2016)• Stakeholders collaborate to encourage new norms

“If we could reinvent the system of sharing scholarship and research in a way that’s optimized for the academy, what would that look like and how would we get there?” (Joseph, 2016)

Two “flavors” of open access

•Gold OA•Green OA

Institutional repositories Build “capacity for preserving, managing, and providing access to unique digital collections of enduring value” (TDL, 2016a)

“Our empowering technology infrastructure, services, and community programs:• Support research, teaching, and digital curation efforts at our member

institutions• Facilitate collaboration amongst our community and with external partners• Connect local work to a global ecosystem of digital library efforts” (TDL, 2016b).

Institutional repositories: challenges

•Marketing• Policy development• Theses and dissertations• Scholar buy-in Tenure & promotion

Two visions of institutional repositoriesBoth• Early days of IRs• Advancing open access

1. Innovation and new forms of information (Lynch)

2. Disaggregating scholarly publishing in order to expand access (SPARC’s early days)

Innovation and new forms of information (Lynch)

“Three elements for institutional repositories:• to manage, provide access to, and to preserve new forms of

scholarship• to nurture innovation in forms of scholarly communication, and• to facilitate the preservation and reuse of the evidence underlying

scholarly work” (Plutchak, 2016)

Disaggregating scholarly publishing in order to expand access (SPARC’s early days)

“Two strategic issues for institutional repositories:

• IRs could be sued to inform scholarly communication by developing an alternative, disaggregated model for scholarly publishing that would expand access through open access models…• IRs as a mechanism for demonstrating the significance of an

institution’s research activity” (Plutchak, 2016)

Current challenges for IRs

• Impact on commercial publishing• Too many copies• Faculty/scholar buy-in

However, the real success that IRs have achieved is in sharing “material that is outside the formal publishing program” because “when we provide access to data that we start to really advance science” (Plutchak, 2016)

Fractured efforts and lessons learned• "20th century policies and practices governing 21st century information" need

a radical reset, how can we fully take advantage of networked digital technologies?

• If we could reinvent the system of screen sharing scholarship and research in a way that’s optimized for the academy what would that look like and how would we get there?

• "An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good” (BOAI, 2002).

Fractured efforts and lessons learned• SPARC’s strategic review• Problems and solutions• Parallel movements without much collaboration• How to pull these fractured efforts together?• Green OA?• Gold OA?

(Joseph, 2016)

Fractured efforts and lessons learnedWhat do we know now that we didn’t know ten years ago? How can we apply them to current problems?

• Look at the whole picture• Clearly define the end goal• Different approaches to the question of why open• Reward open in meaningful ways

REWARD OPEN IN MEANINGFUL WAYS

No, really…

Lessons learned: What you can do• Focus on solving specific problems (Joseph, 2016)• Reward open in meaningful ways (SPARC, 2016)• Use research information systems rather than IRs to highlight the

institution’s research output (Plutchak, 2016)• Reduce duplication of OA versions by including in an IR only versions

that are not available in OA anywhere else (Plutchak, 2016)• Focus on ingesting, curating, and preserving materials in your IR that

compliment formal publications (i.e. data) (Plutchak, 2016)

Academic Libraries, Open Access, Institutional Repositories, and the Public Good

Sarah W. Sutton (@sarahwws)ssutton3@emporia.edu

References• Berlin9.org. (2003, February 22). Berlin declaraion on open access. Retrieved from

http://www.berlin9.org/about/declaration/• Bethesda statement on open access publication. (2003, April 11). Retrieved from

http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm• Budapest open access initiative. (2002, February 14). Budapest open access initiative.

Retrieved from http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read• Cancer Moonshot 2020. (2016, July 22). In Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cancer_Moonshot_2020&oldid=731027185• Joseph, H. (2016, June). The power of open. Keynote address presented at the NASIG

Annual Conference, Albuquerque, NM.• Lynch, C. (2003). Lynch 2003.pdf (No. 226). Retrieved from

http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/arl-br-226.pdf

References• Max Planck Society. (2003, February 22). Berlin declaraion on open access. Retrieved from

https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration• Plutchak, T. S. (2016, June). Dialectic on the aims of institutional repositories. Keynote address

presented at the NASIG Annual Conference, Albuquerque, NM.• Poynder, R. (2016, September 22). Q&A with CNI’s Clifford Lynch: Time to re-think the institutional

repository? Retrieved September 30, 2016, from http://www.richardpoynder.co.uk/Clifford_Lynch.pdf• SPARC. (2016). 2016 SPARC Program Plan. Retrieved October 7, 2016, from http://sparcopen.org/who-

we-are/program-plan/• Suber, P. (n.d.). Open Access. Retrieved October 6, 2016, from

https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/9780262517638_Open_Access_PDF_Version.pdf• Texas Digital Library. (2016a). Members. Retrieved October 15, 2016, from

https://www.tdl.org/members/• Texas Digital Library. (2016b). Our mission. Retrieved October 15, 2016, from

https://www.tdl.org/members/