Whereare wetoday? The ORBiExperience

Transcription

1 Berlin Open Access Conference November 19, Whereare wetoday? The ORBiExperience BERNARD RENTIER, RECTOR UNIVERSITY OF LIÈGE, BELGIUM CHAIR, ENABLING OPEN SCHOLARSHIP (EOS) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TO PAUL THIRION AND THE ULG-ORBI TEAM

2 An InstitutionalOA Policy : why? To know what the University produces To provideresearcherswithincreasedvisibilityfor their scientific production To reducecosts Open Access Green Road

3 The Basics An empty repository is useless, a partly filled repository is partly useless It doesn tworkspontaneously: needfor an official institutional policy Top down first Bottomup comes easy later on An official institutional policy must be enforced or else it is inefficient However: youcannotforce academicsnorscientiststo do thingstheydon twantto do

4 The Basics So, don t impose anything Just inform your researchers that only thosepublications that are in the repository will be consideredin in any evaluation, promotion, grant submission, etc Link publications to address book

5 Historic evolution of ORBi, the ULg repository Total Full Text juil.-08 déc.-08 mai-09 oct.-09 mars-10 août-10 janv.-11 juin-11 nov.-11 avr.-12 sept.-12 févr.-13 juil.-13

6 ORBi today Articles Other ,5 % FT ,3 % FT 1829

7 ORBi today 101,211references 62,247full text(= 61,5 %)

8 Institutional policy: what authorities must do 1. «Mandate» 2. Keepthe authoratthe core 3. Communicate permanently 4. Be coherent 5. Reduce constraints 6. Replace progressivelya top-down by a bottom-up approach

9 Promote incentives Maximise the benefits for the researcher Visibility Long term preservation Addedvalue services : dynamic reports widget, integration with F.R.S-FNRS (funder) institutional reports «Cosmetic» effects Hit parade

10 Promote incentives Maximise the benefits for the researcher Automaticand and contextual help Users guides Pre-import & import ( PubMed, WOS, Scopus, Nasa, EndNote, BibTex ) Statistics, metrics(if, IF5, Eigenfactor, citation indexes, h- index ) Legal help Training Interactive Hot Line

11 The ORBi Website

12 The ORBi Website

13 The ORBi Website

14 The ORBiWebsite

15 Pre-formatted reports

16 Pre-formatted reports

17 ORBi Today New maximum Actual level? (8.000/yr) ULg researchers publish more than we thought Expected level Still work to do on previous years

18 Results: Evolution of the deposits Eachyear, depositsare made earlier

19 Types of documents deposited in ORBi 70.2 % «traditional» publications 85.7 are peer reviewed Theses, 1,3% Books, 2,9% Parts of books (chapters ), 6,8% Papers published in a book, 10,0% Papers published in a serial, 4,4% Scholarly articles, 42,4% Unpublished communications, 10,7% Posters, 6,8% Others, 1,3% Scientific conferences, 4,0% Diverses speeches and writings, 3,9% Reports, 3,5% Learning materials, 1,4% Patents, 0,2% E-prints, 0,5%

20 ORBi s Readership Amongthe 100mostconsultedever, 77are in French 22 in English 1in Spanish Language French Spanish English

21 ORBi Visibility Excluding«spiders»: 3.22 million views 1.86 million downloads Including«spiders»: >12 million views >3.72 million downloads Downloads per day

22 ORBi Visibility: e-print Request

23 ORBi Visibility: e-print Request

24 How accessible are ISI Articles in the UK and in Liège?(Data froms. Harnad, Y. Gargouri, V. Larivière, Y. Gingras, L. Carr & A. Swan) Public Full-Text Restricted Access No Full-Text Articles Not Indexed 3,5% 0,5% 8,3% 6,4% 1,8% 17,4% 15,7% 0,2% 31,6% 87,7% 76.0% 50,8% UK No Mandate UK Mandate ULg«Incentive» Mandate (24 686) (11 995) (1 452)

25 Depositdelay-UK vs ULg (Data froms. Harnad, Y. Gargouri, V. Larivière, Y. Gingras, L. Carr & A. Swan) Liège (N=1199) All UK (N=5930) UK - Mandated (N=2875) UK - Non-Mandated (N=3055) Deposit Delay (mon nths) Public Full-Text Restricted Access No Full-Text

26 Depositdelay-UK vs ULg (Data froms. Harnad, Y. Gargouri, V. Larivière, Y. Gingras, L. Carr & A. Swan) No Full-Text (N=3937 ; Avg=5.3 ; SD=4.98) No Full-Text (N=3 ; Avg=2.4 ; SD=7.7) Public FullText (N=1641 ; Avg=2.9 ; SD=2.67) Restricted Access (N=352 ; Avg=1.4 ; SD=0.78) Public Full-Text (N=459 ; Avg=-1 ; SD=5.5) Restricted Access (N=736 ; Avg=-1.8 ; SD=5.5) Article Count Count Article Deposit Delay (months) UK (M & Non-M) Deposit Delay (months) U. Liège (N= 5 930) (N=1 199)

27 Liège researchers do deposit early Average delay: -44,7 days % before publication date 3.25 % more than1 yearbeforepublication date

28 ORBinow: a widerreach? Mean number of downloads for references (measured October 2013 on downloads of references with FT) Open Access 70 Restricted Access ,73 57, ,01 3,78 1,31 1,70 Downloads Downloads ULg From outside ULg 20.5 times more 34 times more

29 ORBinow: Is Access reallyopen? Proportion of OA deposits better compliance with OA principles fears tend to disappear authorsbecomeawareof OA advantages and benefits 70,0% 65,0% 60,0% 55,0% 50,0% 45,0% 40,0% 35,0% 30,0% Open Access vs Restricted Access 44% 51% 64% 56% 56%

30 The roleof the «Back Office»: QualityControl Authors concerned and responsible But : Suppression : onlyby the ORBiteam Toolto followthe «in press», «in progress», imports, Permanent updatingof the periodicalsdata data bank Hot Line exploitation to improve system and help Targeted comparisonswithwos, Scopus,... Tools for false full text detection Faulty behaviorwarnedto authorby the Rector himself

31 Innovations fromthe «Back Office» Automatic duplication detector Automatic incoherent data detector Co-first author tickbox Export in RIS& CSVformats, soonalsoin BibTeX Specific publisher agreement attachment Multiple improvements for the deposit procedure

32 Proselytism? Belgianuniversitieshave adoptedourmandate but Withoutthe the incentive Workdoneby librarians: little involvement, low responsibility feeling ULg: 61.5 % FT UCL : 25.3 % FT ULB : 16.4 % FT Many requests for presentations of ORBi and the ULg mandate worldwide The Universityof Luxembourghas nowits«orbi Lu»

33 Proselytism? Towards a National Mandate? The FNRS isadoptinga similarmandate Mandatory deposit in IRs, harvesting by FNRS Depositedpapersare the onlyonesin the publication listusedfor grant proposal review( ) A Belgian Mandate Decree in preparation(align onto EU recommendations)

34 Acknowledgements Paul THIRION, Head Librarian Myriam BASTIN Dominique CHALONO Cécile DOHOGNE François RENAVILLE Support team : Laurence THYS, Fabian SMAGGHE, Sylvain DANHIEUX, Lionel ROBERT, Erik USKALIS

35 Thank you for your attention