Re: Funder mandated deposit in centralised or subject based

From: Kiley ,Robert <r.kiley_at_WELLCOME.AC.UK>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 13:55:12 -0000

Garret

You raise an interesting query, and one which the UKPMC Funders Group
are working to address.

In short, we want to avoid a situation where a researcher is required to
deposit papers in both an IR (to meet their institutions mandate) and a
central repository, like PMC and UKPMC, (to meet the needs of a funder
such as the Wellcome Trust).

To try to address this issue the Wellcome Trust (on behalf of the UKPMC
Funders Group) is working with NCBI at the NIH (developer of the
underlying UKPMC software) to devise a practical solution.

Although on the face of it may appear easy to resolve this issue --
simply use the SWORD protocol to move content from repository A to
repository B -- this approach does not address the rights issues. To
give a very practical example there are some publishers (e.g. Elsevier)
who allow authors to self-archive papers in an IR, but do NOT allow
self-archiving in a central repository like PMC or UKPMC. To be clear,
if such papers were harvested into UKPMC from an IR, then they would be
subject to a formal take-down notice.

In addition to the rights-management problem, there are other issues we
need to address such as how a manuscript, ingested from an IR, could be
attached to the relevant funder grant, and how a researcher could be
motivated to "sign-off" the version of the document in PMC/UKPMC, given
that they would have already deposited in the IR. [As you may be aware,
every author manuscript in PMC and UKPMC is converted to XML. To ensure
that no errors are introduced through this exercise, authors are
required to sign-off the conversion before it can be released to the
public archive.]

In view of these issues our preferred approach is to encourage
researchers to deposit centrally, and then provide IR's with a simple
mechanism whereby this content can be ingested into their repository.
Of course, even with the UKPMC to IR approach there may be rights
management issues to address.

This development work has only just begun but I will keep you (and this
list) abreast of progress.

Regards
Robert

Robert Kiley
Head of Digital Services
Wellcome Library

-----Original Message-----
From: Repositories discussion list
[mailto:JISC-REPOSITORIES_at_JISCMAIL.AC.UK]
On Behalf Of Garret McMahon
Sent: 18 February 2010 12:05
To: JISC-REPOSITORIES_at_JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Funder mandated deposit in centralised or subject based
repositories

Dear All,

I have a general query regarding funder requirements that stipulate
deposit into a centralised or subject based repository such as PubMed
Central. Is anybody meeting such a requirement by developing processes
that incorporate the institutional repository as the primary point of
ingest and subsequently uploading content to the centralised service?
I'm particularly interested in two aspects of this question. Firstly,
how an institutional policy supporting the home repository does not find
itself at variance with funder deposit policies that specify a
preference for locus of deposit external to the institution. Secondly,
what is critical to the home and centralised repositories in terms of
service design in any such collaboration.

Kind Regards,

Garret McMahon
Institutional Repository Content Manager - www.tara.tcd.ie Systems
Office Ussher Library Trinity College Dublin 2 Ireland
Tel: +353 1 896 1646
email:garret.mcmahon_at_tcd.ie



This message has been scanned for viruses by Websense Hosted Email Security - www.websense.com
Received on Sun Feb 21 2010 - 17:59:09 GMT