EN

Evaluation of research activities of universities of Ukraine and Belarus: a set of bibliometric indicators and its implementation

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Vladimir Lazarev, Serhii Nazarovets, Alexey Skalaban

Monitoring bibliometric indicators of University rankings is considered as a subject of a University library activity. In order to fulfill comparative assessment of research activities of the universities of Ukraine and Belarus the authors introduced a set of bibliometric indicators.

A comparative assessment of the research activities of corresponding universities was fulfilled; the data on the leading universities are presented. The sensitivity of the one of the indicators to rapid changes of the research activity of universities and the fact that the other one is normalized across the fields of science condition advantage of the proposed set over the one that was used in practice of the corresponding national rankings.

URL : https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.02059

FR

La transition bibliographique : le modèle FRBR

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Auteur/Author : David Forfait

L’information acquiert un sens nouveau dans la mesure où les catalogues s’harmonisent avec les pratiques du web. La « transition bibliographique » (le modèle FRBR englobe FRBR, FRAD et FRSAD) s’inscrit dans une démarche de mise en évidence des connaissances. Les contenus ainsi diffusés seront davantage lisibles par les machines et par l’homme.

Les bibliothèques, en améliorant l’accès à leur contenu, facilitent la recherche de l’information en proposant des ressources plus vastes jusque-là peu accessibles. Globalement, la démarche repose sur un protocole de structuration des données.

Chaque ressource se voit ainsi attribuée un nombre de métadonnées interopérables. Cependant, la transition bibliographique est en cours. Data.bnf.fr, reste l’exemple le plus représentatif des futurs catalogues dans leurs présentations, alimente le Catalogue général de la Bibliothèque nationale de France : c’est la FRBRisation des catalogues.

Maintenant, le développement de FRBR-LRM oriente le travail vers la normalisation du catalogage, notamment avec RDA, en direction des tâches utilisateurs en repensant le système des entités-relations.

URL : La transition bibliographique : le modèle FRBR

Alternative location : https://memsic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/mem_01558555

FR

Web et édition numérique

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Auteur/Author : Emmanuelle Usclat

Le livre numérique est un produit hybride issu de l’édition traditionnelle et de l’écosystème du web. L’objectif de ce travail de recherche est de montrer comment le livre numérique est lié au web et comment se positionnent les professionnels des deux écosystèmes, en donnant d’abord une définition et un historique des deux secteurs, puis en mettant en évidence les liens qui les rattachent, et en finissant par interroger directement les professionnels pour recueillir leur opinion sur le sujet.

URL : Web et édition numérique

Alternative location : http://www.enssib.fr/bibliotheque-numerique/notices/67717-web-et-edition-numerique

FR

L’édition de livres numériques : un défi technique, économique et culturel

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Auteur/Author : Bianca Tangaro

Le livre numérique est un objet-frontière à la double filiation : d’une part celle de la culture de l’édition, et, d’autre part celle de la culture numérique. Le livre numérique défie le monde de l’édition sur le plan technique, économique et culturel à la fois, et trace la voie d’une convergence réelle entre les professionnels du web et ceux de l’édition.

URL : L’édition de livres numériques : un défi technique, économique et culturel

Alternative location : http://www.enssib.fr/bibliotheque-numerique/notices/67719-l-edition-de-livres-numeriques-un-defi-technique-economique-et-culturel

 

EN

If funders and libraries subscribed to open access: The case of eLife, PLOS, and BioOne

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : John Willinsky​, Matthew Rusk

Following on recent initiatives in which funders and libraries directly fund open access publishing, this study works out the economics of systematically applying this approach to three biomedical and biology publishing entities by determining the publishing costs for the funders that sponsored the research, while assigning the costs for unsponsored articles to the libraries.

The study draws its data from the non-profit biomedical publishers eLife and PLOS, and the nonprofit journal aggregator BioOne, with this sample representing a mix of publishing revenue models, including funder sponsorship, article processing charges (APC), and subscription fees.

This funder-library open access subscription model is proposed as an alternative to both the closed-subscription model, which funders and libraries no longer favor, and the APC open access model, which has limited scalability across scholarly publishing domains.

Utilizing PubMed filtering and manual-sampling strategies, as well as publicly available publisher revenue data, the study demonstrates that in 2015, 86 percent of the articles in eLife and PLOS acknowledged funder support, as did 76 percent of the articles in the largely subscription journals of BioOne. Twelve percent of the articles identified the NIH as a funder, 8 percent identifies other U.S. government agencies.

Approximately half of the articles were funded by non-U.S. government agencies, including 1 percent by Wellcome Trust and 0.5 percent by Howard Hughes Medical Institute. For 17 percent of the articles, which lacked a funder, the study demonstrates how a collection of research libraries, similar to the one currently subscribing to BioOne, could cover publishing costs.

The goal of the study is to inform stakeholder considerations of open access models that can work across the disciplines by (a) providing a cost breakdown for direct funder and library support for open access publishing; (b) positing the use of publishing data-management organizations (such as Crossref and ORCID) to facilitate per article open access support; and (c) proposing ways in which such a model offers a more efficient, equitable, and scalable approach to open access than the prevailing APC model, which originated with biomedical publishing.

URL : If funders and libraries subscribed to open access: The case of eLife, PLOS, and BioOne

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3392v1

 

EN

Open Publication, Digital Abundance, and Scarce Labour

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Martin Paul Eve

This article examines the challenges of labour provision in the open-access online scholarly publishing environment. While the technological underpinnings of open access imply an abundance, it is also the case that the labour that remains necessary in the publishing processes is based on a set of economics that are scarce: the availability of human time, effort, and expertise.

I here argue, with a demonstration of some of the labours of XML typesetting, that we are unlikely to realise the transformations of an abundant proliferation of scholarship without a substantial change and re-distribution of labour functions to authors, which is unlikely to be socially accepted.

The resultant outputs from this process would also, I argue, be less likely to be machine readable and semantically rich, thereby conflicting with other imagined digital possibilities.

URL : http://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/19432/

EN

‘Predatory’ Open Access Journals as Parody: Exposing the Limitations of ‘Legitimate’ Academic Publishing

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Kirsten Bell

The concept of the ‘predatory’ publisher has today become a standard way of characterising a new breed of open access journals that seem to be more concerned with making a profit than disseminating academic knowledge.

This essay presents an alternative view of such publishers, arguing that if we treat them as parody instead of predator, a far more nuanced reading emerges. Viewed in this light, such journals destabilise the prevailing discourse on what constitutes a ‘legitimate’ journal, and, indeed, the nature of scholarly knowledge production itself.

Instead of condemning them outright, their growth should therefore encourage us to ask difficult but necessary questions about the commercial context of knowledge production, prevailing conceptions of quality and value, and the ways in which they privilege scholarship from the ‘centre’ and exclude that from the ‘periphery’.

URL : ‘Predatory’ Open Access Journals as Parody: Exposing the Limitations of ‘Legitimate’ Academic Publishing

Alternative location : http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/870