International Association of Scientific and Technological University Libraries

IATUL News Alerts

Archive January 2013

Future of Library Systems

Wednesday, 30 January 2013 3:51:07 p.m.

This issue of Information Standards Quarterly on the Future of Library Systems spotlights the topic of the new generation of products that I call Library Services Platforms. The earlier term integrated library systems (ILS) is associated with the functionality and concepts associated with managing print collections and the metadata about them. These new products and projects cast a wider net, consistent with the expansion of library collections to include a complex assemblage of electronic and digital materials in addition to their physical inventories.
Information Standards Quarterly (ISQ)
Fall 2012 Volume 24, no. 4
Go to source:

Planting the Green Seeds for a Golden Harvest: Comments and Clarifications on "Going for Gold"

Wednesday, 30 January 2013 3:49:21 p.m.

The economic modelling work we have carried out over the past few years has been referred to and cited a number of times in the discussions of the Finch Report and subsequent policy developments in the UK. We are concerned that there may be some misinterpretation of this work. This short paper sets out the main conclusions of our work, which was designed to explore the overall costs and benefits of Open Access (OA), as well as identify the most cost-effective policy basis for transitioning to OA at national and institutional levels. The main findings are that disseminating research results via OA would be more cost-effective than subscription publishing. If OA were adopted worldwide, the net benefits of Gold OA would exceed those of Green OA. However, we are not yet anywhere near having reached an OA world. At the institutional level, during a transitional period when subscriptions are maintained, the cost of unilaterally adopting Green OA is much lower than the cost of unilaterally adopting Gold OA — with Green OA self-archiving costing average institutions sampled around one-fifth the amount that Gold OA might cost, and as little as one-tenth as much for the most research intensive university. Hence, we conclude that the most affordable and cost-effective means of moving towards OA is through Green OA, which can be adopted unilaterally at the funder, institutional, sectoral and national levels at relatively little cost.
Go to source:

Gold Open Access: Counting the Costs

Wednesday, 30 January 2013 3:47:11 p.m.

Research Councils UK (RCUK) have recently announced a significant amendment to their open access (OA) policy which requires all research papers that result from research partly or wholly funded by RCUK to be made open access. To comply with this policy, researchers must either; a) publish in an open access journal, termed Gold OA, which often incurs an article processing charge (APC); or, b) ensure that a copy of the post-print is deposited in an appropriate repository, also known as Green OA.
A subsequent clarification from RCUK stated that Gold OA is the preferred mechanism of choice to realise open access for outputs that they have funded and have announced the award of block grants to eligible institutions to achieve this aim. Where a Gold OA option is unavailable, Green OA is also acceptable; however, RCUK have indicated that the decision will be ultimately left up to institutions as to which route to take.
Go to source:

Licensing E-Journal Bundles from Large Publishers

Wednesday, 30 January 2013 3:45:01 p.m.

The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) has released a pre-publication version of an article on “The State of Large-Publisher Bundles in 2012,” which will be featured in the forthcoming Research Library Issues (RLI) no. 282 (Spring 2013).
In this article, authors Karla Strieb and Julia Blixrud report on the results of a recent survey of journal licenses in ARL member libraries. The authors conclude that there are “ongoing strains in libraries’ relationships with publishers and in their ability to maintain electronic journal bundles in difficult financial times.” They found that journal collections have become smaller and more tailored, and that stronger licensing language is needed in the clauses that are most important to research libraries. The authors note that licenses need to allow libraries to: make new uses of the licensed content, share information with peers about licensing terms, and rest assured that licensed content will be available in the future.
Go to source:

Thirteen Ways of Looking at Libraries, Discovery, and the Catalog: Scale, Workflow, Attention: The Catalog as an Identifiable Service

Wednesday, 30 January 2013 3:42:28 p.m.

There is a renaissance of interest in the catalog and catalog data. Yet it comes at a time when the catalog itself is being reconfigured in ways which may result in its disappearance as an individually identifiable component of library service. It is being subsumed within larger library discovery environments and catalog data is flowing into other systems and services. This article discusses the position of the catalog and uses it to illustrate more general discovery and workflow directions.
The context of information use and creation has changed as it transitions from a world of physical distribution to one of digital distribution. In parallel, our focus shifts from the local (the library or the bookstore or …) to the network as a whole. We turn to Google, or to Amazon, or to Expedia, or to the BBC. Think of two trends in a network environment, which I term here the attention switch and the workflow switch. Each has implications for the catalog, as it pushes the potential catalog user in other directions. Each also potentially recasts the role of the catalog in the overall information value chain.
Go to source:

Institutional Repositories: Exploration of Costs and Value

Wednesday, 30 January 2013 3:36:43 p.m.

Little is known about the costs academic libraries incur to implement and manage institutional repositories and the value these institutional repositories offer to their communities. To address this, the authors report the findings of their 29 question survey of academic libraries with institutional repositories. We received 49 usable responses. Thirty-four of these responses completed the entire survey. While meant to be exploratory, results are varied and depend on the context of the institution. This context includes, among other things, the size of the repositories and of the institutions, the software used to operate the repositories, such as open source or proprietary, and whether librarians mediate content archiving, or content producers directly deposit their own material. The highlights of our findings, based on median values, suggest that institutions that mediate submissions incur less expense than institutions that allow self-archiving, institutions that offer additional services incur greater annual operating costs than those who do not, and institutions that use open source applications have lower implementation costs but comparable annual operating costs with institutions that use proprietary solutions. Furthermore, changes in budgeting, from special initiative to absorption into the regular budget, suggest a trend in sustainable support for institutional repositories. Our findings are exploratory but suggest that future inquiry into costs and the value of institutional repositories should be directed at specific types of institutions, such as by Carnegie Classification category.
Go to source: