Will the parasite kill the host? Are institutional repositories a fact of life - and does it matter?

Abstract

Despite an apparent lack of enthusiasm among academics themselves, institutional repositories seem set to grow. Two studies have highlighted the possible damage which could be caused to journal subscriptions by widespread self-archiving. If journals were damaged financially, the scholarly community would lose some functions which it appears to value very highly: management of peer review; editing; selecting and collecting content into a convenient package. It would also suffer indirectly, if learned societies were no longer able to give the same support to their disciplines. However, publishers cannot afford simply to oppose these developments; rather, they need to work with the scholarly community to identify those functions which are of greatest importance to the community in the digital era, and then to work out how to deliver and market these.

Some economic aspects of the scholarly journal system

“…Of concern to publishers is that 53 percent say that availability of OA archives is an important or very important factor in determining cancellations. Morris (2007) examines publisher attitudes toward OA institutional repositories and concludes that some revenue will be lost, and if journals are damaged financially the value‐added processes could be lost to readers. However, Pinfield (2007) examines whether OA repositories and peer‐reviewed journals can coexist and concludes that they are not necessarily in competition.…”

Interlending and document supply: a review of the recent literature: 62

“…The author looks at much of the same material as Pinfold, and comes to much more negative conclusions. She underlines the damage that can be done by IRs to peer reviewed journals and concludes that:Institutional repositories are not going to go away […] However, publishers must avoid shroud waving and […] need to work with the communities that they serve, to figure out how best to add value” (Morris, 2007a). JISC in the UK has sponsored the launch of Depot, a digital repository for all UK researchers:The Depot has two main services on offer:• a re‐direct service, with the Depot acting as a gateway, especially to repositories at UK universities (institutional repositories)• a deposit service for e‐prints, with the Depot acting as a national repository for researchers not yet having an institutional repository in which to deposit their papers, articles, and book chapters (e‐prints).It even has a “DEPOSIT NOW” button, which couldn't be easier.…”

“…Institutional repositories are not going to go away […] However, publishers must avoid shroud waving and […] need to work with the communities that they serve, to figure out how best to add value” (Morris, 2007a).…”

A new digital platform to open up Chinese university journals: publishing, communication and some OA initiatives

“…Some successful cases in the international community, such as arXiv, Citeseer and many institutional repositories, have proved that repositories can coexist well with the relevant journals. 6 And Chinese university journals would not be affected unduly by circulation decrease due to OA repositories 7 for the reasons stated above. This proposed initiative will have at least five advantages: 1) it will integrate the scattered information and put it into specialized groups; 2) it will attract more readers; 3) it can act as an exchange platform, to allocate some contributions to subject-specific university journals so that the resource can be mutually complementary; 4) it will improve the level of digitization; and 5) it will be open access and, by being OAI-PMH compliant, will improve international accessibility and visibility.…”