Call for action! A new ecology for scholarly communications is emerging which involves openness and sharing of publications, data, research administrative information, and other research outputs.
Libraries and universities are already contributing to this ecology by hosting systems and platforms that provide access to content. But the time has come to increase our participation and bring back control of the system to the scholarly community. This will ensure that the system reflects the value of research as a public good that should be shared widely for the benefit of society, rather than driven and manipulated to support profit making by companies through locking up content and controlling scholarly workflows. In order to ensure widespread access and participation in the system, scholarly services and platforms should be as open as possible. There are already thousands of repositories being managed by research institutions across the world, essentially representing a global knowledge commons. They have coalesced into networks and communities of practice at regional and national levels, and are working at the global level through COAR to ensure interoperability and improve repository platforms so they can expose content in more flexible ways and develop services that support scholarly communication, such as peer review, metrics and researchers’ profiles. To prevent the further takeover of the knowledge commons by corporate interests, we must intensify and build on these early efforts to greatly improve the functionality of our systems, raise awareness of their value, and better support the needs of the research community. Given our shared values and mission, we call on the scholarly community to work together to support and contribute to a system that is truly open, functional, and driven by the needs of the research community. One of COAR’s major objectives for 2016-17 is to identify the core functionalities for the next generation of repositories <https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/advocacy-leadership/working-group-next-generation-repositories/>, as well as the architectures and technologies required to implement them; and to work with the repository community to help adopt these functionalities. We also aim to create a global standard for repositories that establishes repositories as a central place for the daily research and dissemination activities of researchers. Please let me know if you are interested in this activity. We are looking for ways to bring in broader participation. Kathleen Shearer Executive Director, Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com <mailto:m.kathleen.shea...@gmail.com> - +1 514 992 9068 Skype: kathleen.shearer2 - twitter: @KathleeShearer > On May 19, 2016, at 7:16 AM, WALK Paul <p.w...@ed.ac.uk> wrote: > > "The best way to keep Elsevier from dominating the space would be for there > to be plenty of lean and hungry startups seeing opportunities here." > > That seems demonstrably untrue, when such lean and hungry startups often have > acquisition as their main exit strategy... > > Paul > > >> On 19 May 2016, at 11:17, William Gunn <william.g...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Thanks for your comments, Eric F! If we want to improve scholarly >> communications, we have to drop the idea that top-down grant funded projects >> are the ideal. The best way to keep Elsevier from dominating the space would >> be for there to be plenty of lean and hungry startups seeing opportunities >> here. >> >> >> William Gunn >> +1 (650) 614-1749 >> http://synthesis.williamgunn.org/about/ >> >> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Eric F. Van de Velde >> <eric.f.vandeve...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Eric Archambault: >> This is quite impressive and potentially very helpful. >> >> Stevan: >> We started with IRs that would grow organically. When that did not work, we >> pursued institutional mandates. Now, it is national funder mandates. This >> attitude of top-down enforced innovation is at odds with today's tech >> culture of bottom-up innovation. The top-down approach is just too slow. >> >> Libraries have now been managing IRs for over 15 years without any >> significant changes to IRs. They still have no social component, like >> Figshare or academia.edu. As we have seen elsewhere, the social component is >> crucial to achieve organic growth. >> >> Worse than not adding features is the attitude that IRs are the goal. The >> real goal should be better scholarly communication. This may require a new >> IR: Individual Repositories. Social platforms are far more suited for the >> individual researcher. >> >> I am not an absolute free marketer, but the free market is rather good at >> forcing innovation. Perhaps, it is time to make libraries compete for the >> IR/OA management business and force some innovation that way. >> --Eric. >> >> >> http://scitechsociety.blogspot.com >> Twitter: @evdvelde >> E-mail: eric.f.vandeve...@gmail.com >> >> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Éric Archambault >> <eric.archamba...@science-metrix.com> wrote: >> Eric >> >> >> >> At 1science, we have developed a robust solution to address some of the >> problems you are mentioning. In contrast to the optimistic view of the >> repositories that Stevan has, in our efforts to locate all the contents >> which is available in green and gold (including hybrid), we are finding that >> most of the IRs have only about 5-8% of the papers published by authors at >> the universities hosting these repositories. Another contrast, the latest >> data we have compiled at 1science shows that we are fast approaching 60% of >> the papers indexed the Thomson Reuters Web of Science which can be found in >> gratis OA form somewhere on the internet. Given the law of large numbers, on >> average, there is a gap of more than 50% between what is available somewhere >> on the net, and what is available in local IR. It’s clear tat a solution >> that fills that gap quickly can remove a huge pain point in the filling of >> IR with full-text (or links to full-text) and proper metadata. >> >> >> >> We have developed a product called oaFoldr which basically repatriates these >> papers to the IRs. Our privileged model is to feed the IRs with good quality >> metadata (and when institutions are subscribing to the Web of Science, we >> can install the WoS API and populate the repository with very high quality >> metadata and this removes a lot of the pain of entering data manually) and >> then place URLs that points to locations (other IR, publishers’ websites, >> arXiv, Scielo, PMC,…) where a gratis OA version is located. This turns empty >> IRs into institutional knowledge hubs. Of course, many librarians are also >> actively examining these links and copying a physical version of the paper >> in the IR (where possible considering licencing and rights issues). If the >> uptake is good for this product (which we think it will as we developed this >> solution because we kept hearing from tens of university librarians that >> something of the kind was really needed), IRs are going to be way more >> populated, way faster, and librarians and researchers will be able to spend >> more time archiving and self-archiving pre-prints and post-prints that do >> not exist anywhere else. For libraries to spend time looking at what is >> uniquely missing makes sense, this is an exercise in search engine >> optimization as the Bing and Google bots will see unique content. This >> solution will help move universities towards 100% OA availability at the >> institutional level. Take Caltech – they already have a stunningly good IR >> but using 1science’s data it’ll be every better – we can find close to 80% >> of Caltech’s paper in Gratis OA somewhere on the internet. Of course, this >> solution is not a silver bullet and some problems will remain but it will >> help creating a more robust, distributed architecture. >> >> >> >> Éric >> >> >> >> >> >> Eric Archambault, Ph.D. >> President and CEO | Président-directeur général >> Science-Metrix & 1science >> >> T. 1.514.495.6505 x.111 >> C. 1.514.518.0823 >> F. 1.514.495.6523 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf >> Of Eric F. Van de Velde >> Sent: May 18, 2016 4:39 PM >> To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <goal@eprints.org> >> Subject: Re: [GOAL] Prophylactic Against Elsevier Predation >> >> >> >> Stevan: >> >> Yes, >> >> distributed management of Institutional Repositories spread the costs and >> immunize them against a take-over. That is why advocated for them as early >> as the 1999 UPS meeting in Santa Fe. >> >> >> >> But, >> >> it is now also increasingly clear that this distributed management comes >> with significant downsides. Any successes of the OA movement have been in >> recruiting content for IRs and in enacting OA mandates. Unfortunately, the >> network of IRs federated through OAI-PMH is simply not good enough for >> professional-level research. If IRs fail at this task, they'll simply >> disappear into obscurity. Distributed management does not immunize IRs >> against becoming irrelevant. >> >> >> >> Each IR is managed to accommodate idiosyncratic local concerns and not the >> broader interests of the world. There is no consistent access to the full >> text (many records contain only metadata). Many records just contain bad >> scans. Many IRs prohibit/discourage data mining. With globally inconsistent >> metadata, it is impossible to search and find anything with consistent >> reliability. Moreover, in its institutionalized form, the supposedly-cheap >> IR has become rather expensive. >> >> >> >> The distributed nature has led to a paralysis in development. To put it >> bluntly: Today's institutional repositories are run with software of the >> early 2000s and managed with the cataloging mindset of the 1980s. >> >> >> >> Frankly, I have no solution to offer. The crowdsourced alternatives like >> figshare, academia.edu, etc. look increasingly better in comparison. >> >> >> >> --Eric. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://scitechsociety.blogspot.com >> >> Twitter: @evdvelde >> >> E-mail: eric.f.vandeve...@gmail.com >> >> >> >> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 5:26 AM, Stevan Harnad <amscifo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The worldwide distributed network of Green Institutional Repositories is by >> far the best prophylactic against Elsevier predation. I hope universities >> and research funders will be awake enough to realize this rather than >> falling for quick "solutions" that continue to hold their research output >> hostage to the increasingly predatory publishing industry. >> >> >> >> "We have nothing to lose but our chains..." >> >> >> >> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Paul Walk <paul.w...@bath.edu> wrote: >> >> "The software may change, but you can't sell off a distributed network of >> independent repositories.” >> >> I agree, and I think that this is the crucial point. The software doesn’t >> matter (well, it does matter, but it doesn’t affect this principle). It’s >> about the distribution of *control*. >> >> We are truly fortunate to have a global, distributed infrastructure of >> institutional repositories which are (mostly) under institutional control. >> This is quite an unusual arrangement these days - and I think we should >> regard it as precious and inherently powerful in its denial of the >> possibility of “ownership” by one party. >> >> We should do what we can to both hang on to this infrastructure, and to >> exploit it more fully, in pursuit of a better scholarly communications >> system. >> >> Paul >> >>> On 17 May 2016, at 22:06, Leslie Carr <l...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: >>> >>> The software may change, but you can't sell off a distributed network of >>> independent repositories. >>> >>> Prof Leslie Carr >>> Web Science institute >>> #⃣ webscience #⃣ openaccess >>> >>> On 17 May 2016, at 21:35, Joachim SCHOPFEL >>> <joachim.schop...@univ-lille3.fr<mailto:joachim.schop...@univ-lille3.fr>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Uh - "the distributed network of Green institutional repositories worldwide >>> is not for sale"? Not so sure - the green institutional repositories can be >>> replaced by other solutions, can't they ? Better solutions, more >>> functionalities, more added value, more efficient, better connected to >>> databases and gold/hybrid journals etc. >>> >>> ----- Mail d'origine ----- >>> De: Stevan Harnad <amscifo...@gmail.com<mailto:amscifo...@gmail.com>> >>> À: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) >>> <goal@eprints.org<mailto:goal@eprints.org>> >>> Envoyé: Tue, 17 May 2016 17:03:18 +0200 (CEST) >>> Objet: Re: [GOAL] SSRN Sellout to Elsevier >>> >>> Shame on SSRN. >>> >>> Of course we know exactly why Elsevier acquired SSRN (and Mendeley): >>> >>> It's to retain their stranglehold over a domain (peer-reviewed >>> scholarly/scientific research publishing) in which they are no longer >>> needed, and in which they would not even have been able to gain as much as >>> a foothold if it had been born digital, instead of being inherited as a >>> legacy from an obsolete Gutenberg era. >>> >>> I don't know about Arxiv (needless centralization and its concentrated >>> expenses are always vulnerabe to faux-benign take-overs) but what's sure is >>> that the distributed network of Green institutional repositories worldwide >>> is not for sale, and that is their strength... >>> >>> Stevan Harnad >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Bo-Christer Björk >>> <bo-christer.bj...@hanken.fi<mailto:bo-christer.bj...@hanken.fi>> wrote: >>> >>> This is an interesting news item which should interest the >>> readers of this list. Let's hope arXiv is not for sale. >>> >>> Bo-Christer Björk >>> >>> >>> >>> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >>> Subject: >>> Message from Mike Jensen, SSRN Chairman >>> Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 07:40:29 -0400 (EDT) >>> From: Michael C. Jensen <ad...@ssrn.com><mailto:ad...@ssrn.com> >>> Reply-To: >>> supp...@ssrn.com<mailto:supp...@ssrn.com> >>> To: bo-christer.bj...@hanken.fi<mailto:bo-christer.bj...@hanken.fi> >>> >>> >>> >>> [http://papers.ssrn.com/Organizations/images/ihp_ssrnlogo.png]<http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://www.ssrn.com> >>> [http://static.ssrn.com/Images/Header/socialnew.gif] >>> >>> >>> Dear SSRN Authors, >>> >>> >>> SSRN announced today that it has changed ownership. SSRN is >>> joining Mendeley<https://www.mendeley.com/?signout> and >>> Elsevier<https://www.elsevier.com> >>> to coordinate our development and delivery of new products and >>> services, and we look forward to our new access to data, products, >>> and additional resources that this change facilitates. (See Gregg >>> Gordon’s Elsevier >>> Connect<https://www.elsevier.com/connect/ssrn-the-leading-social-science-and-humanities-repository-and-online-community-joins-elsevier> >>> post) >>> >>> >>> Like SSRN, Mendeley and Elsevier are focused on creating tools >>> that enhance researcher workflow and productivity. SSRN has been >>> at the forefront of on-line sharing of working papers. We are >>> committed to continue our innovation and this change will enable >>> that to happen more quickly. SSRN will benefit from access to the >>> vast new data and resources available, including Mendeley’s >>> reference management and personal library management tools, their >>> new researcher profile capabilities, and social networking >>> features. Importantly, we will also have new access for SSRN >>> members to authoritative performance measurement tools such as >>> those powered by Scopus<https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus> and >>> Newsflo<http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://www.newsflo.net> >>> (a global media tracking tool). In addition, SSRN, Mendeley and >>> Elsevier together can cooperatively build bridges to close the >>> divide between the previously separate worlds and workflows of >>> working papers and published papers. >>> >>> >>> We realize that this change may create some concerns about the >>> intentions of a legacy publisher acquiring an open-access working >>> paper repository. I shared this concern. But after much discussion >>> about this matter and others in determining if Mendeley and >>> Elsevier would be a good home for SSRN, I am convinced that they >>> would be good stewards of our mission. And our copyright policies >>> are not in conflict -- our policy has always been to host only >>> papers that do not infringe on copyrights. I expect we will have >>> some conflicts as we align our interests, but I believe those will >>> be surmountable. >>> >>> >>> Until recently I was convinced that the SSRN community was best >>> served being a stand-alone entity. But in evaluating our future in >>> the evolving landscape, I came to believe that SSRN would benefit >>> from being more interconnected and with the resources available >>> from a larger organization. For example, there is scale in systems >>> administration and security, and SSRN can provide more value to >>> users with access to more data and resources. >>> >>> >>> On a personal note, it has been an honor to be involved over the >>> past 25 years in the founding and growth of the SSRN website and >>> the incredible community of authors, researchers and institutions >>> that has made this all possible. I consider it one of my great >>> accomplishments in life. The community would not have been >>> successful without the commitment of so many of you who have >>> contributed in so many ways. I am proud of the community we have >>> created, and I invite you to continue your involvement and support >>> in this effort. >>> >>> >>> The staff at SSRN are all staying (including Gregg Gordon, CEO and >>> myself), the Rochester office is still in place, it will still be >>> free to upload and download papers, and we remain committed to >>> “Tomorrow’s Research Today”. I look forward to and am committed to >>> a successful transition and to another great 25 years for the SSRN >>> community that rivals the first. >>> >>> >>> Michael C. Jensen >>> >>> Founder & Chairman, SSRN >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> Search >>> the SSRN >>> eLibrary<http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://papers.ssrn.com/> >>> | Browse >>> SSRN >>> <http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/DisplayJournalBrowse.cfm> >>> | Top >>> Papers<http://hq.ssrn.com/GroupProcesses/RedirectClick.cfm?partid=2338421&corid=4024&runid=15740&url=http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/topten/topTenPapers.cfm> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> GOAL mailing list >>> GOAL@eprints.org<mailto:GOAL@eprints.org> >>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GOAL mailing list >>> GOAL@eprints.org<mailto:GOAL@eprints.org> >>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GOAL mailing list >>> GOAL@eprints.org >>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> GOAL@eprints.org >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> GOAL@eprints.org >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> GOAL@eprints.org >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> GOAL@eprints.org >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> GOAL@eprints.org >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > ------------------------------------------- > Paul Walk > Head of Technology Strategy and Planning > EDINA, University of Edinburgh > http://www.edina.ac.uk > ------------------------------------------- > > > > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
