Promoting Open Access at the Cyprus University of…

Promoting Open Access at the Cyprus University of Technology: survey results :

« Today the Open Access movement gains more and more followers. The Library and Information Services at the Cyprus University of Technology has defined Open Access as one of its main strategies. Considering the current economic crisis, Open Access appears to be a solution to the reduction of funds at the academic institutions. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the perception and reaction of the academic community of the Cyprus University of Technology towards Open Access. The Library and Information Services conducted a survey in order to examine the familiarity of the academic community with Open Access and to define any difficulties that they find.

The survey results showed that the academic community is generally aware of the Open Access movement, but a lot of effort and work has to be done in order to make the academic community to trust and use Open Access. The survey also showed that Ktisis, the institutional repository of the Cyprus University of Technology, is not being used effectively by the academics. It was proved that the deposits in Ktisis do not reach the desired level and the reason is that the academic community is not aware of its existence. Therefore the academic community has to be convinced to prefer Open Access publishers for the deposit of their academic publications instead of commercial publishers and to retain sufficient rights adopting the SPARC addendum. Also, to promote open access through “author pay model” like Biomed Central. »


A Technical Review of Open Access Repository Registries…

A Technical Review of Open Access Repository Registries :

« This document provides a technical review of the capabilities, benefits and drawbacks of two leading Open Access Repository Registries (OARRs) – OpenDOAR and ROAR. Both systems are considered qualitatively and quantitatively with a view to identifying those facets which provide value for a repository registry service. »

A methodology is identified to investigate the relative strengths of each system based on four main parameters: rate of growth, software, API capabilities, and the quality of data held in each system.

Interviews were conducted with members of the software development teams from both OpenDOAR and ROAR to provide insight into current working practices and technical roadmap for both systems. The output from these interviews are included below along with detailed investigation of each system. This included developing and using software client libraries in Python to review each API.

Additional interviews were also carried out with two API users to provide qualitative input on each systems usability in relation to a specific use case. These were Repository66 a repository mapping service and OA-RJ a deposit broker tool.

Although a direct comparison of OpenDOAR and ROAR is avoided the output is summarized for each system to identify the best and worst aspects. These can be seen as underpinning the shape of a new idealised repository registry. »