To cite this version:Chris Armbruster, Laurent Romary. Comparing Repository Types -Challenges and barriers for subject-based repositories, research repositories, national repository systems and institutional repositories in serving scholarly communication.

The Entrepreneurial University is a failed idea. This is not to disparage the entrepreneurial activities of faculty, graduates and students. Neither is it to criticise industrysponsored research and co-authorship. University research and higher education have a role in innovation. However, if entrepreneurialism is institutionalised as a policy of governments and universities, all manner of things start to go wrong. Not only do participants suffer from disappointed expectations, as expected returns fail to materialise, but also, more importantly, universities that 'go entrepreneurial' ultimately destroy the science commons essential to the university's continued existence. A systematic critique of the concept of the Entrepreneurial University is offered and key data is reviewed. Simultaneously, a broader research programme on university autonomy and finance is advanced.

A series of developments over the past two decades has shaped scientific communication such that parallel to the long-standing tradition of scientific publishing, online environments have been set up to provide fast, wide and free access to content by means of publication repositories. This article posits a crossroads for publication repositories, tracing contextual factors that explain why and how it is necessary for us to reconsider the basic parameters of how publication repositories should evolve further. 1 The current system of so-called institutional repositories, even if it has been a sensible response at an earlier stage, may not answer the needs of the scholarly community, scientific communication and accompanied stakeholders in a sustainable way. However, having a robust repository infrastructure is essential to academic work. Yet, current institutional solutions, even when networked in a country or across Europe, have largely failed to deliver (cf. Basefsky, 2009). Consequently, a new path for a more robust infrastructure and larger repositories is explored to create superior services that support the academy. A future organisation of publica-

No abstract

The current system of so-called institutional repositories, even if it was a sensible response at an earlier stage, may not answer the needs of the scholarly community, scientific communication and accompanied stakeholders in a sustainable way. However, having a robust repository infrastructure is essential to academic work. Yet, current institutional solutions, even when networked in a country or across Europe, have largely failed to deliver. Consequently, a new path for a more robust infrastructure and larger repositories is explored to create superior services that support the academy. A future organisation of publication repositories is advocated that is based on macroscopic academic settings providing a critical mass of interest as well as organisational coherence. Such a macro-unit may be geographical (a coherent national scheme), institutional (a large research organisation or a consortium thereof) or thematic (a specific research field organising itself in the domain of publication repositories).