Re: Stimulating the Population of European Repositories

From: Stevan Harnad <>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 19:18:22 +0100

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Stephanie Meece wrote:

> Thank you for posting this information about the need for mandates. But I
> am
> wondering about the emphasis on mandating deposit. It seems that in our
> enthusiasm for securing a mandate at our institutions we neglect the other
> half of these policies; i.e., how is compliance to be monitored, and most
> importantly, how enforced? It would be useful if other institutions with
> mandates could share their solutions to these issues.

The best way to ensure and monitor compliance is to make the
institutional IR the locus for articles to be considered for performance
assessment. In addition, institutions can monitor compliance with funder
mandates in exactly the same way:

How To Integrate University and Funder Open Access Mandates

SUMMARY: Research funder open-access mandates (such as NIH's) and
university open-access mandates (such as Harvard's) are complementary.
There is a simple way to integrate them to make them synergistic and
mutually reinforcing:
      Universities' own Institutional Repositories (IRs) are the natural
locus for the direct deposit of their own research output: Universities
are the research providers and have a direct interest in archiving,
monitoring, measuring, evaluating, and showcasing their own research
assets -- as well as in maximizing their uptake, usage and impact.
      Both universities and funders should accordingly mandate deposit
of all peer-reviewed final drafts (postprints), in each author's own
university IR, immediately upon acceptance for publication, for
institutional and funder record-keeping purposes. Access to that
immediate postprint deposit in the author's university IR may be set
immediately as Open Access if copyright conditions allow; otherwise
access can be set as Closed Access, pending copyright negotiations or
embargoes. All the rest of the conditions described by universities and
funders should accordingly apply only to the timing and copyright
conditions for setting open access to those deposits, not to the
depositing itself, its locus or its timing.
      As a result, (1) there will be a common deposit locus for all
research output worldwide; (2) university mandates will reinforce and
monitor compliance with funder mandates; (3) funder mandates will
reinforce university mandates; (4) legal details concerning open-access
provision, copyright and embargoes will be applied independently of
deposit itself, on a case by case basis, according to the conditions of
each mandate; (5) opt-outs will apply only to copyright negotiations,
not to deposit itself, nor its timing; and (6) any central OA
repositories can then harvest the postprints from the authors' IRs under
the agreed conditions at the agreed time, if they wish.

Stevan Harnad

If you have adopted or plan to adopt a policy of providing Open Access
to your own research article output, please describe your policy at:

    BOAI-1 ("Green"): Publish your article in a suitable toll-access journal
    BOAI-2 ("Gold"): Publish your article in an open-access journal if/when
    a suitable one exists.
    in BOTH cases self-archive a supplementary version of your article
    in your own institutional repository.
Received on Mon Apr 07 2008 - 19:30:37 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:49:17 GMT