Index of Tables

 Table 1:
Index of Figures

The survey results are presented against international developments in Open Access, both historical and current.

The main purpose of the survey is to help Nordbib gather relevant information for promoting greater visibility to Nordic research and offer a background for creating a joint Nordic approach to further developments in Open Access.

A presentation of the survey project was given at the Nordbib Workshop on "Research Visibility -managing quality for better evaluation" 27-28 October, 2008.

We would like to thank the members of the Nordbib workshop group for valuable viewpoints regarding the final formulations in the questionnaire. We also wish to thank all our contacts in the Nordic countries for their invaluable help in identifying respondents and providing us with email addresses, and other valuable advice and support,

Methodology

We used an earlier survey commissioned in 2007 by the SUHF (The Association of Swedish Higher Education) as a template for a somewhat more inclusive survey to be sent to all Nordic countries except Sweden. 1 All questions were written in English. This initial questionnaire was presented to the Nordbib Workshop 08 group for feedback. They suggested a number of changes, the most significant being a number of new questions relating to Current Research Information Systems.

In order to distribute the questionnaire and process the answers, we used the open source LimeSurvey application. LimeSurvey is written in PHP and was easily installed on a fairly standard Fedora Linux system running the Apache web server (though we had to fix some minor issues).

The web interface provided through LimeSurvey was also evaluated by the Workshop group, in order to make the design as user-friendly as possible and avoid any ambiguities. We modified the style sheets for increased readability, and put in various answer constraints to decrease the risk of typing mistakes. Many questions were also made dependent on the answers to previous questions, in order to facilitate the response and make respondent errors less likely. HE-institution library directors in the targeted countries were selected as the primary respondents or intermediaries. A list of names with corresponding institutions, email addresses and phone numbers was compiled with the help of the Nordbib workshop group, various programme groups and other experts directly contacted. The initial list contained 117 names: 14 from Denmark, 51 from Finland, 9 from Iceland and 43 from Norway. (The numbers varied greatly between different countries, depending on the respective organization of higher education.) The respondents were selected in order to provide a complete map of the situation at all HE-institutions. We did not think it was possible to use representative samples.

An email template was created that provided a brief background for the survey and emphasized its importance. There were also instructions on how to proceed to complete the survey and detailed contact information, including email and phone numbers. LimeSurvey uses a simple token system which assigns a unique token to each respondent. Thus it was possible to supply a unique URL (web link) in each mail. By clicking on this link in the email message, the respondent would be taken directly to the survey without having to log in. In case the recipient of the email wished to delegate the task to someone else, it was very easy to simply forward the message to that person.

We decided to use a personal university email account as sender of the initial mail invitations in order to decrease the risk of interception by spam filters.

Unfortunately we discovered that some old email software corrupted the mail messages and thus destroyed the links to the survey. We had to manually resend invitations to those recipients with instructions on how to copy the URL from the email message to the browser. There were also a number of other technical problems that need not be discussed here.

We also received some responses, saying that they were not the appropriate persons to answer our survey, and that they did not know where to forward the invitation. We thus had to manually adjust the initial list, adding and removing a few names.

We obviously also received a number of automatic out-of-office replies, but this was not a problem, as that would be handled by the normal reminder system. The LimeSurvey application keeps track of which tokens have been used and thus makes it easy to handle reminders. A special reminder email was crafted and sent after a reasonable interval. Altogether nine differently worded email messages were sent as reminders to different respondent groups.

At the end of this process there was still a large number of recipients from whom we had not heard anything. We began to contact some of these recipients via the phone, but this was a very time consuming process with a low yield. (Many proposed respondents promised that they would complete the survey but the survey was never completed according to the LimeSurvey application.)

We also constructed a smaller survey on the same LimeSurvey platform that was sent to Swedish recipients in order to complement the results from the SUHF survey and make them more compatible with the results from the other Nordic countries. This survey was sent to 42 recipients.

Once we decided that we could not get any more answers, we migrated the database to a different system, and proceeded to evaluate the data.

We have also retrieved all data for the Nordic countries from OpenDOAR, ROAR, and the DRIVER inventories to complement and cross-check data from our surveys.

In order to aid the interpretation of survey results and propose recommendations, we have of course also made use of a large body of literature relating to different aspects of research information systems.

Background and History

This chapter attempts to give a general overview of the main issues relating to research information systems. Usually the topics and concepts have been presented in their historical context to better convey their relative importance and significance. The main headings are "Current Research Information Systems" and "Institutional Repositories", corresponding to the main divisions of our survey. Research information systems were widely implemented before most institutional repositories, so they will be discussed first. Many full-text repositories were also initially created as auxiliaries to research information systems. Given that advanced institutional repository systems also provide CRIS functionality, the detailed discussion of standards and software solutions has been reserved for the section on IR.

Current Research Information Systems (CRIS)

At least since around 1970, serious efforts have been underway to develop international standards for research information systems. The main focus was on bibliographic data interchange and machine readability. These efforts were primarily motivated by the exponential growth of scientific literature and the rapid development of automated systems for scientific and technical information. 2 Much of the early work was done within the frameworks of UNESCO and the Smithsonian Institution Within UNESCO and ICSU (the International Council of Scientific Unions), a project began in the late 1960s to coordinate scientific information throughout the world and integrate it into, what was called, a "World Science Information System". The system concerned the basic sciences and was primarily intended for scientists themselves. It also concentrated on published literature, primarily journal articles and, where applicable, monographs. 3 The work within this project focused on standards for bibliographic descriptions (i.e. metadata standards), procedures for creating abstracts, the formats of scientific documents, and standards for indexing and classification.

The Smithsonian Science Information Exchange (SSIE) was set up to facilitate planning and management of federally funded R&D. It had existed in some form since 1949, and contained information about research projects in the "life" and "physical" sciences. (The social sciences were included under life sciences.) Around 1970, close to 100 000 projects were added annually. At the outset, the Exchange was used solely by government agencies to keep track of their funding, but gradually access was given to other types of clients, and more information services were added. 4 Besides a brief abstract describing the project, the database contained funder, budget, principal researchers, institutions and dates.

When discussing research information, it is customary to distinguish between the user context and the researcher context. 5 Frequently the user context has also been further divided into such categories as "practitioner", "educational", "managerial", "policy making", or "general public". 6 Beside various ways of classifying the consumers, research information has also been analysed in terms of the type of use or utilization. Donald Pelz and others have distinguished between the instrumental, symbolic and conceptual use of knowledge, for example.

Although, as we have seen, the early discussions about research informations systems took into account many different user categories and types of use, the actual technical work tended to be almost entirely focused on the researchers as consumers, as in the UNESCO/ICSU project. The second most important user group were the main funders, such as research councils, who wanted to keep track of their funded projects in project databases such as the SSIE. The problem of adopting the systems to different uses of information was often ignored in the early technical reports, and much of that discussion simply assumed that previously existing information systems (i.e. various paper-based bibliographies and library catalogues) should be adopted to electronic form. A number of limitations were posed by the high cost of memory and storage in the computer systems of the time.

The work to integrate research information systems progressed very slowly, and when, in 1992, the Netherlands Agency for Research Information (NBOI * ) began to create a world-wide directory of research information systems, they found about 100 different systems with different content, formats and means of access. In 1996 they made the Directory of Research Information Systems available on the web, and by then there were 70 different systems listed, of which 85 % were available online. Only 19% of the systems had worldwide coverage. 59% covered one or more European country, and 11% covered North America. See The term open access will be understood in this report in the conventional sense. It is a system of publication that makes research results freely available via the Internet without any barriers whatsoever. Users may download and distribute the data without any restrictions, as long as the integrity of the data and its creator/author attributions are not compromised.9

Electronic publishing and the role of repositories

Most of the early information retrieval systems all tended to have a fairly similar structure. Because of the focus on the prepublication phase, an "electronic journal" was often seen as more akin to an electronic bulletin board than a paper journal. The only major distinguishing characteristic was that the journal only contained articles that had passed peer review.

As John Senders put it in 1976:

"The 'journal' would once again exist in its etymological sense: i.e., publication would be carried on every day. It would, in fact, be a continuous process, and the present form of separated subsections of the scientific literature now called journals would no longer be necessary." 13 There were also new systems for making research data directly available, such as the NIH-EPA Chemical Information System from 1973. This also led to renewed practices of publishing, where the data corresponding to a research article was published separately in a database.

Thus early electronic journals tended to have fluid boundaries and were seen as part of larger 10 Bourne & Hahn ( 2003) pp 14-17 11 For details of the EMISARI system see e.g. Kupperman & Wilcox (1972).

12 Hiltz & Turoff (1978) pp 18 ff 13 Senders (1976) information and communication systems.

At the same time publishers of scientific journals had many reasons to be apprehensive about these developments. They were concerned about how to protect their brands in a world where information became more diffuse, and the existence of data in electronic form gave rise to worries about copyright protection.

When early digital versions of well known scientific journals appeared, they tended to mimic the paper versions. The electronic format was seen essentially as a new mode of distribution, rather than a new way of publishing. Instead of distributing the articles in paper form, they were distributed in electronic form, and they were meant to be printed and read on paper. (In this sense they were seen as mainly a development of earlier distribution projects, such as e.g.

Elsevier's ADONIS, which began in 1979 and provided access to electronic versions of paper journals on optical disks.)

On the other hand, as we have seen, many information specialists and scientists had long seen a revolutionary potential in electronic publishing and worldwide network access. Visionaries, such as Bruce Schatz at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications and Stevan

Harnad at Prince ton University, wanted electronic journals and archives that would improve scientific communication in general, and not just make the distribution of articles more efficient.

Harnad and others gradually developed a new electronic journal from the combination of a discussion group and an FTP archive. He wished to reform the entire process of submission, peer review, and publishing, and argued that electronic publishing would profoundly affect all phases of scientific enquiry.14 There were also other influential projects with (at least initially) less ambitious goals. Paul

Ginsparg at the Los Alamos National Laboratory wanted to provide a way of distributing preprints which was more efficient than email. 15 His work resulted in one of the most successful document repositories, ArXiv.org, which gradually came to introduce many of the new information sharing technologies envisioned by Schatz, Harnad, and others.

When peer reviewed electronic journals first became available in the late 1980s, they were met with much scepticism. As a former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine put it succinctly in 1991: "The hard-copy journal is hard to beat". 16 Yet, information specialists had, at least since the 1970s, pointed out a number of reasons why they saw the future in electronic publishing. The main advantages were lower cost per delivered article, decreased time interval between submission and publication, and less limitations of space (storage). 17 Early electronic journals also quickly began to exploit some of the possibilities offered by the new medium.

Current Clinical Trials, for example, which first appeared in 1991, and required special software for full functionality, linked to the abstracts of referenced articles and had a subjectbased alert service. It also functioned as a kind of preprint archive for Lancet.

In 1990 William Gardner found three principal advantages in using archives instead of journals as the main form of electronic publishing. 18 A: The structure of an archive is more easily adopted to users with different computer skills and tools. B: The archive may be personalized to fit the research profiles of individual researchers. (In essence, each user creates her own journal.) C: The archive can allow more efficient discovery and retrieval of information in an article. This may be done through user profiles and the creation of links between documents and document segments.

Research information systems and repositories

Despite considerable opposition from some groups, as outlined above, an increasing proportion of scientific publications became available electronically during the 1990s. More and more electronic journals began to appear, and large preprint archives such as the arXiv (created 1991 as "hep-th"), NCSTRL (launched at Cornell in 1995), and CogPrints (launched 1997 by Harnad), became the main sources of scientific information in many fields. Many large research institutions also began to deposit various reports, dissertations, and other types of nonjournal literature and data electronically. 19 Naturally, as various initiatives came under way to integrate research information in large Current Research Information Systems, as described above, it made sense to add links to the 16 Palca (1991) 17 E.g. Clayton (1983) 18 Gardner (1990a) 19 Compare the discussion in Crow (2002). Crow distinguished between four kinds of repositories publishercentric, discipline specific, scholar specific and institutional digital repositories. Crow and other authors such as Harnad (2003), Pinfield & al (2002) emphasized the increased institutional visibility as an important motivation for institutional repositories. This is because they compare institutional repositories to the other kinds of digital repositories. But a CRIS with direct links to the published documents would clearly provide the same kind or even greater visibility.

full text of research publications. At the same time, the lack of control over the publishers' web sites frequently made this a very work-intensive and sometimes impossible task. The publisher could move the article to another URL without notice, or use complex schemes with login, post variables and cookies to make direct linking impossible. Also, the access restrictions normally made harvesting and URL-checking impossible, and various users of the research information system could have different access rights to the linked content. User X could have access via provider A, user Y access via provider B, and user Z no access at all.

Another difficulty was the distributed nature of full-text archiving. The maintainers of a CRIS would have to determine the location and bibliographic format for every full-text publication to be included. This problem will be further discussed in the next subsection.

The desire to create efficient research information systems was thus an important impetus for the creation of dedicated and standardized publication repositories. A CRIS could be seen as dysfunctional if the actual research results were difficult to access by the CRIS users.

Based on the desire to create functional CRIS systems, and some of the improvements in electronic publishing mentioned above, it is possible to list different functional specifications that pose slightly different demands on the underlying computer systems. Some examples of such functional specifications and the corresponding technical requirements are listed in the clearly not complete in any sense. Various additional parameters will be discussed in more detail below. Suffice it here to observe that requirements five to seven demonstrate the difficulty of using centralized repositories, and that the first three requirements may easily be met by widely distributed systems. Beginning with requirement five, it is very difficult to design a system that is equally suitable for all forms of data. Thus research institutions with different research profiles tend to favour different systems that are suited to their types of data.

Moving on to requirement six, many large publishers allow self-archiving of published papers or monographs, but do not allow secondary publishing. As for the seventh requirement, it is usually easier to publish quickly in a local repository where the work flow is better adopted to existing regulations and organisational parameters.

There are of course also some advantages with using central repositories. An argument in favour of centralised solutions has recently been put forward by Romary and Armbruster. 20 From the overview presented below, it should be clear that both institutional and central repositories play an important role, and also that the difference between the two may not be as great as one may first believe.

Open Access and Institutional Repositories

As we saw above, many of the CRIS systems were integrated with institutional or national repositories. There were also many research institutions with separate full-text repositories. The electronic publishing of theses and dissertations had begun in the late 1980s21 Yet, so far there had been very little national or international coordination, and many repositories were only used for internal reports and dissertations. A number of initiatives came under way during the 1990s to improve this situation.

Between 1994 and 1998, the National Science Foundation in the US funded the Digital Library Initiative (later called DLI-1). Among the projects funded were Stanford Integrated Digital Library Project (SIDLP), which, among other things, was instrumental in the development of the Google search engine. There were also other similar initiatives in other countries, albeit with smaller budgets. In the UK, for example, JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee) funded a number of projects under its eLib programme. Most of these projects focused on fairly fundamental issues, but they also contributed directly to the creation of digital libraries, such as e.g. Schatz's Interspace at the University of Illinois, and the University of Michigan digital library which cooperated with JSTOR.

A JISC-funded project that should be mentioned in this context was NetEc, an international effort, which started in 1993, and aimed at improving research communication in Economics.

Rather than creating a single subject-based archive, or some digital library at a HE-institution, The same year work also came underway to integrate the main existing preprint archives through means similar to those used in Dienst. This lead to the creation of OAI, the Open Archives Initiative. 23 OAI created a standard protocol that allowed repository data to be uniformly harvested from institutional repositories.

NetEc
The protocol OAI-PMH allowed bibliographic metadata in any format (as long as the format could be specified in an XML schema), but it required all repositories to support the DC (Dublin Core) standard, first proposed in 1995 at a workshop in Dublin, Ohio, sponsored by OCLC and NCSA. DC was constructed to be simple, flexible, and easily integrated with other bibliographic standards. Thus, for example, whereas the RFC 1357 mentioned above, had a repeating field labelled "CR-CATEGORY", which required special computer science report categories, DC had a field called "Subject" which could be specified according to a number of different schemes (LCSH, MeSH, Sears, AAT, INSPEC, ERIC and DDC ), as well as free-form ("Scheme=Other"). Another important feature was the "Relation" field, which allowed the specification of different relationships to other documents (e.g. "supersedes", "contained in", "cites" etc).

OAI-PMH did not specify any standard for unique persistent references to digital objects. The objects were referred to using a normal URI, and unique identifiers should be put in the metadata records in accordance with whatever bibliographic format being used.

The protocol allowed documents to be retrieved using the identifiers from bibliographic records. It did not contain any methods for depositing or updating documents. It was simply intended to allow easy harvesting of repository data.

In 2002 SPARC published a very influential "position paper" supporting institutional repositories (IR). 24 Institutional repositories were seen as the basis of a new more efficient "scholarly publishing paradigm", and as an important way for research institutions to present a window to the outside world. The essential features of an IR was that it was institutionally defined, had scholarly content, had sufficient permanence, and was open and interoperable. 25 An IR would " aim to preserve the entire intellectual output of the institution ". SPARC expected library consortia to coordinate and assist the development of institutional repositories.

The Current Situation in the Nordic Countries

As we have seen in the brief historical overview above, the development of Current Research Information Systems and Institutional Repositories in the Nordic countries may be seen as part of a global development, and also as part of various European initiatives to integrate research information for the use of various groups besides the producers of research themselves.

In this chapter, the current situation in the Nordic countries will be discussed. Most of the data comes from our surveys, but data have also been used from other sources, notably the ROAR and OpenDOAR databases and various DRIVER reports.

The first section will discuss the task of research information from the perspective of legal requirements and the goals of the Berlin Declaration. The second section will deal with financial constraints. The third section discusses software systems and functional requirements.

Finally the fourth section will cover content-related issues.

Legal and regulatory framework

27 Ibid p 87 20 This section will, for obvious reasons, not deal with all the laws, regulations, and agreements relating to scholarly communication in the Nordic countries. The focus will be on the issues the respondents of our surveys found to be most important.

University Laws and Research Information

The basic legal framework for research information is quite similar in the Nordic countries.

There are government mandates for all universities and similar institutions to make their research results as accessible as possible.

In Denmark, clause 1:2(3) of the University Act states that universities shall exchange "knowledge and competences with society and encourage its employees to take part in the public debate."

According to the Finnish University Act, the universities must similarly promote the "impact on society" of research results and artistic activities.

Iceland's Higher Education Institution Act mandates the "dissemination of knowledge and skills to students as well as to society in general."

In Norway the law speaks about informing "public administration, cultural life and business and industry."

In Sweden,the Higher Education Act, (1:2.2) stipulates that all higher education institutions must inform society about their activities and endeavour to make research results accessible.

Recently (SFS 2009:45), an additional emphasis was placed on the responsibility of HEinstitutions to facilitate the exploitation of research findings. In the preparatory legislative documents, however, the issue of usability is never explicitly tied to the infrastructure of research information. The focus is upon issues such as the protection of immaterial rights and access to risk capital.

Copyright and Publisher Licences

There are, however, also some legal complications regarding research information, and these pertain mainly to institutional repositories. One issue concerns publisher licences.

Many publishers provide authors with standard copyright assignment forms, which require them to transfer their copyright. Because of such agreements, the right to deposit a publication in an institutional archive becomes dependent upon the publisher's permission. More recently there has been many attempts to replace these copyright assignment forms with licences to publish. In such a licence the author transfers certain specified rights to the publisher. All other rights remain with the author, e.g. the right to deposit in an open archive.

Major scientific publishers have begun to provide authors with standard licences to publish that do not require authors to assign their copyright to the publisher. 28 Yet this is a very complex issue, and it is extremely difficult for individual researchers to know what type of licences are compatible with funder or institutional policies. In fact, there are several studies showing that many researchers are not even aware of the current copyright status of their papers. 29 This is undoubtedly one of the areas where additional higher-level (national or Nordic) coordination would be the most immediately beneficial. One example of work that is currently being done is the transfer of the SURF/JISC model licence into the Nordic countries. This is carried out as part of a Nordbib project.

Mandating Open Access

Many major universities and research organizations in all Nordic countries except Iceland have signed the Berlin Declaration, which requires signatories to "encourage" making all research results available open access. Some major international funders have made OA a requirement for their support. Thus there is considerable interest in examining legal issues in relation to OA mandates.

These issues are somewhat different for universities and funders. An example of a university mandate is provided by Helsinki University. 30 Unless researchers deposit their articles and book chapters, the department may lose funding corresponding to the missing number of publications. Marjut Salokannel, a legal expert who chairs a working group tasked with the implementation of the OA mandate, predicted that "[t]he most complicated part with regard to the implementation of the self-archiving mandate will, at least in the beginning, probably be the relations with the publishers.". The challenge is to make sure all researchers sign the right kind of licences, and that these licences are accepted by all publishers.

An The library directors were asked to rate the relative benefit of coordination and assistance in eight different areas relating the operation of repositories and research information systems.

The possible choices were "not important", "important" and "very important". These answers have been assigned the values 0, 1, and 2 and added together in order to derive Figure 1 which thus shows the relative importance of assistance in these areas. Copyright was clearly seen as the area were national or higher-level coordination would be the most useful.

The respondents were also asked what they saw as the greatest challenge or problem regarding electronic research publishing. This was a question with free answers, but most of the responses fell into three categories: missing funding/resources/staff, difficulties motivating researchers, and issues relating to copyright. Figure 2 is intended to show the relative importance of these problems. It shows how copyright issues are seen as a major obstacle not only to filling the institutional repositories but to electronic publishing in general.

Some Concluding Remarks

As we have seen, there is considerable uncertainty among both library staff and researchers concerning copyright and licensing issues.. Various publishers have different policies in regard to preprints and postprints, and these policies may change from day to day. There is a database called SHERPA/RoMEO which attempts to keep track of these changes. Sometimes, however, the policies from publishers are not entire clear, and it is difficult to know the exact limits of author rights. There may be many complicating details regarding such issues as embargo intervals, last depositable version, distribution and use of the archived papers, etc. At times authors risk unknowingly signing conflicting agreements with funders and publishers or 24

The Financial Situation

From Figures 1 and2, above, it is clear that Nordic library directors view the lack of funding as one of the main obstacles to developing the electronic infrastructure of scholarly communication. This section will discuss the economic aspects of the research information infrastructure in some detail.

Funding Issues and the New Publishing Models

It was mentioned above, on page 18, how, when SPARC was created in 1997, one of its principal aims was to combat the spiralling costs of academic research information. In their announcement, the Association of Research Libraries noted that during the previous decade, "despite canceling hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of serials, research libraries are spending 124% more on serials to acquire 7% fewer titles." 33 ..

In 1998 Brendan J. Wyly, from a research library at Cornell University, noted that the "costs of acquiring scholarly information are relatively substantial in research libraries, and even in terms of entire universities' budgets". 34 He discussed the large profit margins of major publishers, and observed that in the area of scholarly publishing, "the major impediment to competition is that all of the direct incentives for authors lead them to publish in well known channels to reach the largest number of readers without regard to the cost of those channels to the readers.". Wyly concludes by noting that the current system of publication was simply too expensive and cannot handle the volume of published research findings. .Technological innovation in publishing could not only solve such problems, but would also serve the main aim of academic research, since research institutions could afford to make all their work visible and accessible.

In the 2002 SPARC report on institutional repositories, Raym Crow listed four essential components of scholarly communication: registration -establishing intellectual priority, certification -certifying the quality or validity of the findings, awareness -making others 33 ARL (1997) 34 Wyly (1998) aware of the results, and archiving -preserving the cultural heritage.

Crow observed that the melding together of these components in the traditional paper-based publishing model tended to disguise both the fact that the academic community has stood for most of the labour and costs involved, and what the actual cost of each component really is.

Thus, when technological innovation has reduced the cost of a communication component, the publishers have been able to keep the same price level and increase the profit margin. Crow argued that institutional repositories, by disaggregating the traditional publishing model, would lead to much lower overall costs and more efficient cooperation, not only between libraries, but especially between libraries and researchers..

Crow noted that most of the costs associating with creating and maintaining institutional repositories were related to content management and policy issues. 35 Among the expensive tasks specifically mentioned were the development of policies and agreements for access and submission, the crafting of educational material, and metadata considerations. The cost of such tasks could clearly be greatly diminished by increasing coordination and cooperation between different institutions.

More recently John Houghton and others have examined the economic implications of alternative publication models in some detail. 36 They concluded that "[o]pen access publishing and self-archiving (with overlay services) appear to be more cost-effective systems for scholarly publishing, with cost savings available throughout the scholarly communication process". 37 "[T]here are gains to be realised from moving towards open access publishing models and, despite the lag between the costs and the realisation of benefits, the transition may be affordable within existing system-wide budgetary allocations". 38 In his report to the Knowledge Exchange, published in June 2009, Houghton has examined the costs and benefits of open access publishing in the UK, Netherlands, and Denmark. 39 His estimates of the costs for various publishing models have been reproduced here as Figure 3. He calculates that switching to "Gold" publishing, where the authors publish in channels paid for through author fees, would bring net savings of around EUR 70 M per year in Denmark.

"Green" publishing, where no subscriptions are cancelled, but authors self-archive in 35 Crow (2002) 36 Houghton & al (2009) 37 Ibid p XXII 38 Ibid 39 Houghton (2009) institutional repositories could save around EUR 30 M per year in Denmark.

Houghton observes that the relative savings from Green publishing are much greater for Denmark than for the UK or Netherlands. This is due to the fact that the Danish repository system has lowered overhead costs per published paper.

Resources Required to Operate Research Information Systems

As Crow noted, most of the costs of maintaining research information systems normally do not pertain to the maintenance of hardware and software systems (which will be discussed below),

, but to the work relating to the content. Therefore a good approximation of the actual resources required may be gathered by looking at how much work is necessary at the library level. What is missing from that picture is, besides the technical costs, mainly the work carried out by researchers when they enter data. On the other hand, in a good system, even with very productive researchers, this work should not take many hours per year. Alma Swan and Sheridan Brown found, in their large survey from 2005, that most authors needed only a few minutes to self-archive an article, and many systems have become more user-friendly since then. 40 40 Swan & Brown (2005) 27

Figure 3: This figure has been copied from Houghton (2009) Among the institutions included in our surveys, some operate an integrated CRIS, whereas others (the majority) have separate IR and CRIS. The figures below show the staff required to operate these systems.

As would be expected, more staff is needed to operate an integrated system, than separate, but for the institutions that operate dual systems, it is clear that (in general) the two systems together require more staff than a single integrated one.

Obviously, the resources needed to operate a CRIS or IR, will depend on the size of the university, and on the number of items entered into the system every year. It will also dependent on what phase the system is in, since the initial launch of a new system or major changes clearly 29

Separate IR Staff required

Less than 1 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) 1-2 FTEs 2 or more FTEs

will require more work than continuing maintenance. Yet these relationships are far from simple, and some major universities operate their institutional repositories with less than one FTE. The University of Tampere, for example, had around 1100 researchers and produced 1480 peer-reviewed publications in 2007. They operate a self-developed IR (in fact there are three different systems 41 ). One person manages all tasks relating to their IR, including promotion, support, and technical issues, on less than full time.

Budget Issues

The respondents who operated a dedicated CRIS or IR were asked how it was funded. Most institutions let the costs be absorbed into the library budget as routine costs. This figure was slightly higher for CRIS, perhaps, as we will see below, since most of the CRISs had been in operation for a very long time. Around 20% used a specific item in the library budget for CRIS and IR. Dedicated funding from the central administration was equally common. Grant's from external sources were extremely rare. See Figures 7 and8 below. Alma Swan has listed five different "business models" for repositories. 42 The repositories at Nordic HE-institutions could theoretically use any of her first three models: the "institutional", the "publicly funded", and the "community model". The survey results seem to show that in actuality, the institutional model is the one being used.

One issue, which should be mentioned here, even if it was not included in out questionnaire (we had too many questions already), concerns publication fees. As more and more researchers can be expected to switch to Gold publishing, some funds will move from subscription costs to 42 Sawn (2008) 31

Figure 8: Sources of funding for operating an IR

Financing Institutional Repositories

Costs are absorbed into the library budget as routine costs A specific item in the library budget Grant/s from external source/s Dedicated funding from the central administration publication costs. At the same time, the benefits of OA publishing are generally considered to be much larger than the savings from cancelled subscriptions.

Lund University may perhaps be a useful example in this regard. The University was early to adopt an OA policy and was the first European member of BioMed Central. In the 2009 LU has allocated $163 000 earmarked for publication fees for OA (Gold) publishing. 43 This fund will be managed by the Lund University Libraries, Head Office. This way the Head Office may sign general agreements with major OA publishers, thus relieving authors of any associated worries.

The fund will not be used to pay for hybrid journals, since that would, in a sense, mean paying for the same content twice.

There are of course many other possible financial models, but this example illustrates some of the main questions for consideration.

A recent report by Universities UK and the Research Information Network recommends that all HE institutions should "establish dedicated budgets to which researchers can apply for funds to meet the costs of publication fees". 44 In a previous Nordbib report concerning open access in the Nordic countries, Ingegerd Rabow and Turid Hedlund discussed some of these issues in more detail. 45 They concluded that "[t]he employer role of the universities in an author pay model creates a need to find means to finance publishing of the research output of the university employees. An important question for future discussions is therefore finding possible solutions either in the form of funding included in the research grants or specifically established funds in the universities to finance publishing.

Software Systems and Functional Requirements

The fundamentals of the technologies and systems relating to scholarly publication systems have already been discussed above. In this section, we will therefore only briefly describe the most important features of some commonly used software packages, and give an overview of the systems currently being used at Nordic HE-institutions.

43 Eriksson & Bjørnshauge (2009) 44 Universities UK etc (2009) p 19 45 Hedlund & Rabow (2007) 4.3.1

Research Information Software

Since software systems for institutional repositories, such as DSpace and FEDORA, already have facilities for entering metadata, and it is fairly easy to add additional related information, such as information about organisations, researchers or funders, it may well be asked why there is a need for dedicated CRIS systems. As we saw above, it is generally more work-intensive to maintain two separate systems than one integrated.

There are two main reasons for this situation. One is that many popular packages for institutional repositories are still difficult to use for a CRIS. The only major exception is the PURE system, developed by Atira A/S in Aalborg, Denmark. PURE is popular, especially in the Nordic countries, both as an integrated system, and as a separate CRIS. As will see in the next subsection below, it is very common to use PURE for CRIS functionality and DSpace for the repository functions. One of the major weaknesses of software like DSpace is the lack of support for metadata profiles. There is support for basic Dublin Core, as part of the OAI-PMH functionality, but this is normally not enough. There are also often other problems with using repository software by itself for a CRIS, such as e.g. the lack of user-friendly input forms and work-flows, difficulties of handling project data from external sources, and difficulties of dealing with complex organisational structures.

The other main reason is the work load involved in migrating data, work-flows, and interfaces to a different system. It may often be more efficient to simply develop a connector to the repository system. Such work is usually fairly easy to do in-house when using an open-source system, and for proprietary software, large customers may be able to convince the vendor to provide a connector. 9 below for an overview.

Forskdok, used in Norway, was derived from the BIBSYS system at the University of Bergen.

(Compare above page 9.) OPUS is a publication database developed at the University of Uppsala. It is used by many Swedish HE-institutions. It is completely compliant with the SVEP recommendations for metadata descriptions. 46 Sordino has been developed by Timo

Tahvanainen at Sordino Information Systems Ltd, and is used by some Finnish universities.

TRIP is not exactly a dedicated CRIS system, but is a database system developed in Sweden.

It was one of the first such systems to make full text searching a simple task. (The acronym stands for "Text, Retrieval, Input and Presentation".) The system has been used for CRISs and similar systems in several Nordic countries. Frida is a system for research documentation developed at the University of Oslo, and is used at some Norwegian HE-institutions. (It was built on top of an Oracle database.)

46 The SVEP recommendations may be found in Andersson & al (2005) The respondents were asked whether the CRIS systems follow national recommendations for metadata standards. Among the integrated systems, less than one percent were reported as deviating from national standards. Among separate CRIS systems, that figure was considerably higher: close to 20%.

Finally there were a number of questions relating to the functionality of the CRIS. The percentage of systems supporting a particular function are listed in Table 5. The figures should not be taken too literally, since they may not have been answered by anyone directly involved with the CRIS, but they should be useful as a general indication of functionality available.

(Since a certain functionality had to be selected actively, the figures are probably a bit to low.)

Please note that the questions about connecting the CRIS to an IR did not apply to any integrated system.

The answers are not exhaustive in terms of possibilities. 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 The choice, development and modifications of systems for CRIS or IR may be a quite complex question, and the decision-making process, when choosing a new system may take a long time and involve many people.

As an example, Lund University fairly recently decided to switch to a new repository system.

After consulting with a number of users with different roles, as well as with technical experts, a preliminary functional specification was drafted. This initial specification was sent out for additional feedback, and this process was repeated again with a smaller group. The final document listed a number of functional requirements, and to this was added a number of additional recommendations. Clearly the results of such a process, including specifications and feature lists, and test results could be useful for other HE-institutions with similar needs.

Repositories, especially when integrated with CRIS-data, may be used for e-learning, group collaboration, research visibility, bibliometric evaluations, research maps, easy generation of publication lists and many other tasks. This is definitely an area where many existing systems could be used more efficiently.

Content and Usage

The previous sections have dealt with legal, financial, and technological aspects of the scholarly communication system. Despite the importance of all these aspect, the crucial part of any communication system is obviously the actual communication. To operate a CRIS or IR without data would be rather like operating a railway without any trains. This section will describe the contents of CRIS and IRs in the Nordic countries.

The survey contained some questions about what kind of data institutions register in their Current Research Information Systems,. As was mentioned above, when discussing CRIS functionality, the answers to these types of questions may have a larger margin of error than the others in our survey. Also, for similar reasons, the reported frequencies will probably be slightly lower than the actual.

The reported data in CRIS are listed in The survey also contained a number of questions about the content of institutional repositories. This leads to a number of questions about how to populate the repositories with more full-text documents. Vanessa Proudman has recently tried to identify the most important factors that lead to a good coverage. 48 Based on her investigations she produced four recommendations:

1) Communicate with the research community based on a thorough knowledge of their particular work processes and motivations.

2) Make sure that the repository and its services are tailored to the needs and problems of the researchers.

3) Create document collections that reflect the academic output of the institution's disciplines.

4) Try to identify other locations where researchers have deposited papers, and harvest from those location, either using some standard protocol or by special agreement with the maintainers of the external source. researchers would readily comply with a funder or institutional mandate to self-archive in repositories. Yes many are reluctant to do so without any immediate incentives. One important factor which prevents researchers from depositing, apart from copyright or licensing issues, is the perceived difficulty or work load. In another survey Swan and Sheridan Brown asked researchers who did self-archive about their motivation for doing so. They found that most of them were motivated by their support of open access, and by the desire to make their research more visible. 49 As was mentioned above, it is of course also very important to make the process of depositing as quick and effortless as possible for the researchers. Useful data may be harvested and sent from and to other sources, in order to make sure the researchers never have to enter the same data twice into different systems. AJAX or similar technologies may be used to facilitate input and to ensure data quality.

There are a number of areas that would clearly benefit from national and/or Nordic coordination. Much useful work is currently being carried out within the European DRIVER IIproject, but there are also many areas where a specific Nordic cooperation would be advantageous. The conditions are very similar, and, although there may be exceptions, most major HE-institutions in the Nordic countries are in the front-line of the international development. They have already well-established networks of stakeholders and appropriate central organisation for handling this cooperation, e.g. Nordbib.

The same factors that create special conditions for Nordic scholarly publishing may also provide a special role for Nordic scholarly repositories. 50 The historical overview in the first chapter showed how slowly the scholarly communication system has evolved. It also showed how research libraries have played a crucial role throughout this development. We hope that, with proper cooperation, coordination, and funding, the Nordic HE libraries will continue to improve the research infrastructure, and solve the difficulties revealed in the present report.

. 50 On this issue see e.g. Hedlund & Rabow (2009) [Shared resources for technical advice ?] The year the service was launched Does the system/software support OAI-PMH?

What is your integrated system/service called?

URL to the service What unit in your organisation is responsible for the service? (more than one alternative may be selected)

[The Administration]

[The Library]

  The types of data in research information systems 1996.................................................8 Table 2: Some examples of functional requirements for full-text repositories,...........................15 Table 3: Open access mandates and recommendations...............................................................23 Table 4: An overview of commonly used repository software....................................................36 Table 5: Functionality of the CRIS as reported in the surveys. ..................................................39 Table 6: Types of data in a CRIS as reported in the surveys.......................................................43

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Need for assistance for IRs..........................................................................................23 Figure 2: Challenges for electronic publishing............................................................................24 Figure 3: This figure has been copied from Houghton (2009)....................................................28 Figure 4: FTEs required to operate an integrated CRIS and IR..................................................29 Figure 5: FTEs required to operate a separate IR........................................................................29 Figure 6: FTEs required to operate a separate CRIS...................................................................29 Figure 7: Sources of funding for operating a CRIS. ...................................................................30 Figure 8: Sources of funding for operating an IR........................................................................31 Figure 9: Relative proportion of CRIS systems from the main survey ......................................38 Figure 10: Years current institutional repositories at Nordic HE-institutions first launched. .....40 Figure 12: PhD theses in IRs 2006..............................................................................................44 Figure 13: PhD theses in IRs 2007..............................................................................................44 Figure 14: Exam papers in IRs 2006...........................................................................................44 Figure 15: Exam papers in IRs 2006...........................................................................................44 Figure 16: Articles in IRs 2006....................................................................................................44 Figure 17: Articles in IRs 2006....................................................................................................44 Figure 18: Reports in IRs 2007....................................................................................................45 Figure 19: Reports in IRs 2006....................................................................................................45

  created RePec, which was a widely distributed database that besides preprints also contained journal articles, software components, together with author and institutional data. A number of different interfaces in different locations and with different functionality were built on top of the RePec database. Any institution could easily create its own archive by simply depositing the documents into local ftp or http directories. All they had to do was to provide text files with document descriptions in the ReDIF format. These institutional repositories could thus very easily become integrated (using the Guildford protocol) into the global RePec archive, with no need for any advanced software solutions at the institutional level.A similar system had been developed in parallel through the CS-TR (Computer Science Technical Reports) project. This was a joint research project between CNRI, Carnegie Mellon, Cornell, MIT, Stanford and Berkeley and it was funded by ARPA. The primary aim of the project was to provide uniform access and search facilities for technical reports in various departmental archives. These reports were normally stored in FTP directories, and the only descriptions were provided through text files in the same directory named "index", "readme" or something similar. Different institutions used different conventions which made it difficult to develop indexing and search services on top of such repositories. Different bibliographic formats were used for metadata, the reports and other files were in different formats such as e.g. Postscript, TIFF or plain text, and the dates of the files in the FTP directories may not correspond to the actual creation date of the documents. James Davis at Xerox and Carl Lagoze at Cornell University developed the Dienst system. 22 It used the HTTP protocol to retrieve documents in various formats from departmental repositories. All the documents had to be given a unique persistent docid, which included a unique code for the publishing institution. Every document was also required to have bibliographical information attached. Bibliographic metadata were stored in a simple format previously used in email messages (RFC 1357) . Dienst allowed users to search the abstracts and bibliographic fields of all documents at all participating institutions through a single web interface. Dienst was, with some additional improvements, used as the basis for the NCSTRL repository at Cornell University.In 1997 the Association of Research Libraries created SPARC, (Scholarly Publishing & Academic Resources Coalition). SPARC was to find ways of combating the spiralling costs for scientific literature, and promote the use of new technology for improving scientific communication. SPARC came to play a very important role in the development of institutional repositories in coordination with research libraries.In 1999, the Nobel Price winner Harold Varmus, then director of the NIH (National Institutes of Health), proposed the creation of "E-biomed". E-biomed was to be an electronic publishing site in the biomedical field. The site should contain both peer-reviewed papers and working papers.Working papers should be accepted without quality control and only rejected if they contained "extraneous or outrageous material". The main benefits of the new system would be open access to all reports and the ability to create personalized journals, more rapid dissemination of results, reduced costs, access to more and enriched data. (It would no longer be necessary to publish some data in an external archive, images could be provided with higher resolution, related documents could be linked, etc Varmus also mentioned other possibilities, previously discussed by Harnad and others, such as bulletin boards, open peer review, and multiple revisions. E-biomed was launched that same year as Pubmed Central. (The name was intended to convey the close relationship to Pubmed, the version of the Medline database which was made freely accessible via the internet in 1997. )

Figure

  Figure 1: Need for assistance for IRs

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Challenges for electronic publishing.

Figure 6

 6 Figure 6: FTEs required to operate a separate CRIS

Figure 4 :

 4 Figure 4: FTEs required to operate an integrated CRIS and IR.

Figure 5 :

 5 Figure 5: FTEs required to operate a separate IR.

Figure 7 :

 7 Figure 7: Sources of funding for operating a CRIS.

  have demonstrated how new models of publication, where institutional repositories play a crucial role, have considerable impact on the economy of scholarly communication. It is difficult to determine from our survey to what extent this has had any effect on the funding streams. With Green (parallel) publishing, there are initially only costs for maintaining the institutional repositories. Thus it seems reasonable to expect that some of the funding used for research should be used to improve the infrastructure of scientific communication. If Houghton's calculations are correct, this would be investments with a very high rate of return.

Figure

  Figure 12: PhD theses in IRs 2006

Figure

  Figure 19: Reports in IRs 2006

[

  A national centre for advice and guidelines regarding copyright management] [Joint production of materials for marketing and teaching] [A national centre for current awareness and information dissemination] [Support for e-publishing of journals and other periodicals] [A national search service for the research publications from your country] [Start-up funding] Comments The following questions were sent to institutions with an integrated CRIS & IR: What type of software (or program platform) do you use for your integrated service?

Table 1

 1

	below for

table below :

 below

	1. Stable	2. Uniform	3. Easy	4. Content-based	5. Many different types	6. Open access 7. Quick and easy
	location	access	harvesting &	queries	of data		publishing
			indexing
	Permanent url,	IP-independent	Standardized	Standardized open	Basic structure of the	Easy access to	Easy interface for
	separate links to	and path-	simple protocols,	content formats.	interface and underlying	metadata and	authors. No red
	each version,	independent	e.g. OAI-PMH	Structured document	database independent of	especially peer	tape. Tools to assist
	standard	access.	etc. Standardized	data. Efficient retrieval	data types. Flexible	review status.	peer review and
	document	Standardized	metadata and	mechanisms. Fast	metadata standards.	Simple interface	quality control.
	identifiers.	document	content Fast	system.	Facilities to aid the	for self-archiving.	Support for work
	Stable document	formats. Browser	high capacity		browsing and finding of	Support for	flows, version
	formats.	independent	system.		non-textual objects.	different work	management,
		access.				flows.	access rights etc.

Table 2 :

 2 Some examples of functional requirements for full-text repositories, Table 2 is only intended to illustrate the most basic requirements of research repositories and is

  be established for all research funded by the European Commission.27 The same year the EC also launched the DRIVER (Digital Repository Infrastructure Vision for European Research) project. DRIVER intended to make any form of scientific content, including scientific/technical reports, research articles, experimental or observational data, freely accessible via the internet. It aimed to build on existing institutional repositories and networks in Europe and integrate them into one large-scale virtual content resource . The project was supported by ten major universities and research organizations. The initial DRIVER project was followed in 2008 by DRIVER II, which continues to promote an interconnected repository infrastructure in Europe.In 2007 a JISC-funded project called SWORD (Simple Web-service Offering Repository Deposit) was launched. SWORD aims to develop a simple deposit protocol, a complement to OAI-PMH to facilitate and standardize depositing across different repository systems.

	The European Commission published in 2006 a report commissioned by its Directorate
	General for Research. 26 The report recommended that all publicly-funded research should be
	deposited in open access repositories, and further that a policy mandating open access archiving
	24 Crow (2002)
	25 Ibid p 16
	26 Dewatripont & al (2006)

The director of SPARC had also in February 2002, together with Stevan Harnad and others, signed the Budapest Open Access Initiative. The Initiative recommended two complimentary strategies to achieve open access. One was self-archiving in IRs made interoperable through the OAI-PMH protocol,, and the other was publishing in open access journals. Budapest was followed in 2003 by the Bethesda and Berlin declarations which also promoted open access publishing through self-archiving and were signed by many leading research organizations all over the world. should

Table 3 :

 3 example of a funder mandate is provided by the Norwegian Research Council. Their policy requires researchers to deposit in OA repositories but allows an exception in cases where the publishers do not allow self-archiving. This is a much softer stance than that of the European Open access mandates and recommendations

	Research Council, whose policy (from 2007) clearly states that "all peer-reviewed publications
	from ERC-funded research projects be deposited […] and subsequently made Open Access
	within 6 months of publication." A recent report commissioned by the Swedish Research
	Council did not find any legal obstacles preventing an OA funder mandate. 31 It should be noted
	in this context ,that according to a recent DRIVER inventory, 50% of the respondents saw the
	lack of policies requiring OA depositing as one of the most important obstacles preventing the
	development of digital repositories. 32
	The table below gives an overview of the present situation of OA mandates and policy
	recommendations based on the survey responses.
		Denmark	Finland	Iceland	Norway	Sweden
	Mandatory	None	University of	None	A few inst +	Res. Council
	OA		Helsinki		Res. Council
	Recommended	Some	Some	None	Around half of	All major
	OA				the institutions	institutions

Table 4

 4 below contains an overview of commonly used software systems for institutional repositories. It aims to show the great variety of solutions (these are only a small sample of all systems used), and how different systems have different strengths and weaknesses. The table is not entirely fair, since some features mentioned for one software package may also exist for another, without being mentioned.

		D	R
		O	O
		A	A						O	Platfor
	System	R	R Profile	Features Import	Search	Meta data	S	m
						The
						bibconvert
						utility lets
					Flexible	administrators
					metadata. Uses	import
					MARC21	metadata	Keyword,
	CDS Invenio	11 14	Developed at CERN, strong in Switzerland	internally. Support for user groups	using xslt or bfx format specifications	boolean, full-text, field-based	MARC XML, MARC21, DC XML	Yes Python
					Contains a
					Windows-
					based, digital
					collection	Imports
					builder , OCR	directly from
					extension	OCLC
					available,	databases.
					hosting at	metadata can
					OCLC	be imported
					available,	from tab-	Keyword,
					indexed by	delimited	form-based,
					WorldCat.	files and	boolean,
					Various tools	matched to	allows			Runs on
				Created by	to create	field names	proximity			most
	CONTENTd m	16 N/A	OCLC, which also provides hosting	reports directly from repository data	with a graphical interface	operators, full-text, field-based	DC, XML, Z39.50	No	Unix and Windows servers
				Set of tools
				and hosting		Many media
				solution from		types,
				Berkeley	Provides	metadata
	Digital Commons, bePress	63 82	Electronic Press, cooperation with Proquest	hosting at bepress, contains peer review module	from pubmed ID, conversion to PDF	Keyword, boolean, full-text, field-based	MODS, DC, Some support for SWORD	No	mod_perl, Apache Unix
							Keyword,
							boolean, full-
					Built for digital		text, field-
					collections.		based,
				Provided by	Facilitates		searches may
				ExLibris,	integration		be limited by
				emphasis on	with e-learning		document
				user interface,	and	DC XML,	types. Allows
	Digitool	11 4	digital collections	institutional portals	MARC XML, CSV tables	search inside XML files	MARC, DC, METS, EAD	No	Oracle and Unix
				Developed at
				Uppsala
				University						Oracle on
				Library. Used						Windows
				in Scandinavia.	Provides	Conversion				server for
				The new	templates in	from MS		Contains 99		database
				version is	MS Word, and	Word and		elements in		backend,
				integrated with	TeX for	XML. Full		internal XML		Tomcat,
				OPUS for	authors to	unicode and	Keyword,	and may		Apache.
				advanced	create	Math support	boolean, full-	generate MARC,		Unix for
	DiVA	14 16	CRIS functionality	document structure	in input forms.	text, field-based	DC, METS, MODS etc	No	applicatio n

Table 4 :

 4 An overview of commonly used repository software. The DOAR column contains the number of repositories in OpenDOAR using the system. ROAR contains the same figure from the ROAR database. The OS column lists whether the software is open-source or not.As mentioned above, almost all Nordic HE-institutions with integrated CRIS and IR use some combination of PURE and DSpace or PURE by itself. In Sweden most institutions use the DiVA system. The second most common solution is to use self-developed software. For separate IR systems, the situation is very similar. Most institutions use DSpace, and among the remainder, self-developed systems are the most frequent. Universities who reported using a separate CRIS system mainly use Forskdok, Opus, Sordino, Trip and Frida. See Figure

	Since the most popular software packages for institutional repositories are all open-source, it is
	usually fairly easy to create connectors to existing research information systems.
	4.3.2	The Current Nordic Infrastructure

Table 5 :

 5 It could be that only project managers may submit informations (i.e. not all researchers in the projects) or that only administrator and some other category (e.g. librarians) may submit information. Functionality of the CRIS as reported in the surveys. The true values are probably a few percent higher.

	Separate CRIS systems
	ForskDok
	Frida
	Opus
	ORBIS
	PURE
	Self-
	developed
	Sordino
	Trip
	Other

As an example, according to the responses, 93% of the CRIS systems allow "researchers and administrators" or "only administrators" to submit information. If we assume that this figure is about 2% too low, that 38 Figure 9: Relative proportion of CRIS systems from the main survey . (This does not include the integrated CRIS and IR where PURE and DSpace was the most common solution.) CRIS can be used by the researcher to create CV 70 CRIS is open online for general public 83 CRIS is used for university's external reporting (e.g. annual reporting for the Ministry/Research Council) 80 CRIS is used for university's internal needs (e.g. strategic planning) 83 40 Figure 10: This figure shows which years current institutional repositories at Nordic HE-institutions were first launched. We did not get this information from all respondents. 2008 has been excluded, since the survey was sent out during that year.

Table 6 :

 6 Table 6 below. It is very difficult to understand exactly how the questions have been interpreted by the respondents. It seems very unlikely, for example, that a CRIS does not include the names of the researchers in a research project.Perhaps the respondents meant that not all researchers were included. The table should therefore not be taken too literally but only used as an indication of the relative frequency of various kinds of data in Nordic CRIS systems.It may be noted that some of these types of data correspond to fields that were proposed as mandatory by EuroCRIS in 1998. According to the CGP ("Code of Good Practice for Current Research Information Systems"), every CRIS should include references to the funding organisation or body, the project title and the "most specific" research unit.47 .Researcher role (e.g. principal investigator, graduate student, etc) 51 Types of data in a CRIS as reported in the surveys. The true values are probably a few percent higher.

	Data Type	Percentage
	Researcher name	95
	Researcher contact information	54
	Researcher affiliations	87
	Researcher areas of expertise	36
	Researcher publications	92
	Researcher other activities/output (apart from publications)	44
	Funding project name	44
	Funding project description	38
	Funding project amount of funding	21
	Funding project time-frame	36
	Organisations name	95
	Organisations description	28

See Danelid & al. (2008)

[START_REF] Wysocki | The UNISIST Programme: A Framework for International Information Exchange[END_REF] p 401

SeeUNESCO (1971)

See Kreysa (1972) for a brief overview

Eg Landry & al (2001)

Eg Beyer & Harrison (1982),[START_REF] Closs | Utilization of nursing research: culture, interest and support[END_REF] The UNESCO report cited above mentions, besides the producers themselves (researchers and engineers), "administrators, managers, policy-making groups, defence officials", and "educators". (p. 31) * Nederlands Bureau voor Onderzoek Informatie

[START_REF] Hansen | Planning and development of a Danish I & D policy[END_REF]

This definition derives from the major BBB declarations on OA.(Budapest, Bethesda and Berlin)

[START_REF] Harnad | Scholarly skywriting and the prepublication continuum of scientific inquiry[END_REF]

[START_REF] Ginsparg | The global-village pioneers[END_REF]

Romary & Armbruster (2009)

Some notable early work in this area was carried out at Virginia Tech, where Yuri Rubinski created a DTD (Document Type Definition) to produce documents in SGML (Standard Generalized Markup Language).

[START_REF] Davis | A protocol and server for a distributed digital technical reportlibrary[END_REF]

For details see[START_REF] Van De Sompel | The Santa Fe Convention of the Open Archives Initiative[END_REF]

For examples see Nature: http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html and Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/contribinfo/prep/license.pdf

See e.g. Swann (2005)

[START_REF] Salokannel | University of Helsinki opens its research vaults: a few words on open access and the new research environment in Finland[END_REF]

EuroCRIS (1998)

Swan & Brown (2005) p

Summary and Discussion

The final overall response rate for the whole survey was 71%. This figure is a bit misleading, however, since the sizes of the HE-institutions vary a great deal, and most of the missing institutions are quite small with little or no research output. Some respondents also failed to reply to all questions that should be answered, but this was fairly uncommon (between 1 and 8 respondents), and again usually for smaller institutions, for which some questions may have

been difficult to answer correctly.

The somewhat low response rate does not seem to be directly related to any technical aspects of the survey design, since the response rates for some countries was much higher. It seems that the amount of previous awareness of the project, and its goals, among library directors, was of paramount importance for getting completed surveys.

Because of the low response rate in some areas together with the skewed distribution of missing responses, and since we noted that some questions had been interpreted differently by different respondents, we have abstained from attempting any kind of statistical analysis of the answers. Such an analysis would require us to hypothesize about the underlying distribution without sufficient basis in facts.

The survey has identified the main strengths and weaknesses of the Nordic CRIS and IR systems. In general, the Nordic HE-institutions are at the forefront of the international

developments. Yet there are many areas where improvements are of great importance. The population of full-text in IRs was far from sufficient in many institutions. Hopefully the situation has since improved, but there is still much to do in this area. Many HE-institutions operate CRIS systems that are not entirely up-to-date, and they often do not contain enough data to be truly useful.

Intellectual property rights, funding models, and technical coordination have been highlighted by respondents as key subjects for high level assistance. It is clearly not cost-efficient if individual libraries spend time and staff resources developing their own repository systems. A multitude of differing systems also makes integration and efficient usage of the repository services much more difficult.

7 Appendix -A list of all questions sent to the respondents.

The following questions were sent to all respondents: The following questions were sent to institutions without any IR or CRIS:

Why have you decided not to offer an institutional repository service? Please rate the following alternatives from 1 to 5, where 5 is the most accurate or important.

[Our institution does not publish any research]

[The question has not been raised]

[It has been discussed but resources/competence has not been available]

If you lack competence or resources, please specify in which area(s). More than one alternative may be selected.


Benoit Eckert

Benoît Durville

Sarah Fourgeaud

Igor Le Bars

Christophe Marquie

Benoit Durville

New outcomes from combustion of wood inside package shock absorbers after fire test

à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

INTRODUCTION

According to the IAEA regulation [START_REF]Regulation for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material (IAEA[END_REF], type B packages and packages used to transport fissile materials, must be submitted to a fire test of 800 °C for 30 minutes after the regulatory mechanical tests representative of the normal and accident conditions of transport (free fall drop onto unyielding target and drop onto a steel cylindrical bar). Most of the package designs are equipped with shock absorbers containing different species of wood. The mechanical tests can lead to damage the external steel envelope of the shock absorbers, leading to expose wood blocks to the flame during the 30 minutes hydrocarbon fuel/air flames of the regulatory thermal test. In addition, the consecutive oxygen supply can maintain wood combustion initiated during the fire long after that. Usually, studies of the thermal behaviour of packages, presented in safety analysis reports, don't take into account the consequences on the package components temperatures of the heat transfers associated to wood combustion which could occur during the cooling time after the fire test. However, this phenomenon could significantly increase the temperatures of the components of the package located near the shock absorbers. When those components are part of the closure system and include elastomer gaskets, this temperature increase could question the hypothesis considered to determine the activity release of the package in accident conditions of transport. In this context, the Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN) has performed a fullscale fire test with an hybrid model representative of two typical designs of wood shock absorbers equipping packages (later called B1 and B2 packages) to highlight the existence of the wood combustion phenomenon after the fire test and to estimate the heat transfers associated. In addition, we evaluated the gaskets temperature increase of the B1 package design, loaded with spent fuel assemblies, and taking into account those heat transfers.

DESCRIPTION OF THE TEST SPECIMEN

Specimen characteristics

We used a full-scale shock absorber. The specimen, presented in figure 1, was representative of 2 shock absorber designs equipping packages commonly used in France to transport up to 16 fresh BWR fuel assemblies (B2 package) and 12 PWR spent fuel assemblies (B1 package).

The outer stainless steel casing of the specimen is a parallelepiped. The specimen right half part, called B1, is filled with two different wood species (oak and high-density balsa). On the left part, called B2, we decided to use a unique low-density wood (balsa) to enlarge the experimental field. The shock absorber specimen contains 450 kg of wood composed of approximately 130 kg of lowdensity balsa, 120 kg of high-density balsa and 200 kg of oak wood.

In order to take into account the effects of the regulatory mechanical tests, the following damages were represented on the specimen, as shown in figure 1: A linear opening, of 500 mm x 15 mm, centered in the lower part of the front stainless-steel sheet of the shock absorber. This damage simulates local rupture of the shock absorber welds regularly noticed after free-fall drop tests. This damage leads to uncover blocks n°6 and n°10. A punch hole, with a diameter equal to 150 mm, leaning 40°from vertical axis, centered in the upper part of the front steel sheet of the shock absorber. This type of damage can be observed after the regulatory drop test onto a punch bar. This approach leads to uncover blocks n°4, n°7 and slightly n°8.

A gap between the wood blocks and the front stainless steel sheet of the shock absorber, equal to 7 mm taking into account the usual manufacturing rules.

Experimental device designed to take into account the thermal loading and package inertia The main objective of the fire test performed is to analyse the thermal exchange due to the wood combustion inside the shock absorbers equipping packages. Thermal power of the content (which can reach 70 kW for the transport of spent fuel assemblies) and ambient conditions defined in IAEA regulation [START_REF]Regulation for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material (IAEA[END_REF] can lead to already substantive wood temperature in normal conditions of transport.

In this regard, we developed a dedicated electrically-heated oil exchanger to reproduce the internal flux transmitted through the lid. This experimental device, in contact with the rear surface of the specimen steel casing on a surface of 1.26 m², allowed to maintain a temperature of the steel casing of 120±2.5°C, representative of normal conditions of transport. Moreover, this approach has the advantage to reproduce the effect of the thermal inertia of the lacking part of the loaded package, not represented by the specimen. The experimental installation is presented in figure 2. 3 wood blocks were equipped each with 5 thermocouples, covering different depths inside the wood from front to rear side. 17 ultrathin heat fluxmeters located between shock absorber and oil heat exchanger. Their number and localisation allow to follow combustion progress and to detect peak values.

x HYDROCARBON POOL FIRE TEST DESCRIPTION Several preliminary fire tests were performed in order to identify the influence of different parameters such as fuel type and wind screens. All these tests have been performed taking into account the IAEA recommendations [START_REF]Advisory Material for the IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material (IAEA[END_REF] in particular for the characteristics of the fuel.

On the basis of the results of the preliminary tests performed at reduced scale (2.6 m² pools with shock absorber represented by a mock up made of SIPOREX ® ), it was decided to use heptane for the fuel, to remove wind screens and to impose stringent wind velocity criterion, lower than 0.5 m/s, as wind screens induced combustion rate limitation and instability.

In addition, two preliminary tests at scale 1 were performed. These two large fires confirmed a flame slope due to the site topography. Nevertheless, temperatures all over the external surface of the specimen were equal to 910±80°C and in-flame radiative thermal fluxes exceeded 100 kW/m². The thermal test duration was precisely monitored by fuel mass control. The final thermal test took place outdoor in a 25 m² open pool. Before fire ignition, the shock absorber was preheated during 24 hours to reach a thermal steady state so that the inner average temperatures of the wood blocks reached 57°C. Ambient temperature and wind velocity during the fire test were respectively around 13°C and lower than 0.5 m/s. Fire total duration was equal to 35 minutes including lighting and extinction periods for a developed fire duration equal to 33 minutes and 47 seconds.

As previous tests proved it, flame temperature always exceeded the recommended 800°C. During the first 13 minutes, the specimen was correctly engulfed by the flame. The time average of the 13 thermocouples measuring the package surface temperature was equal to 762°C with a standard deviation of 61°C. Nevertheless, during the last 20 minutes, due to a flame slope inversed compared to preliminary tests, the shock absorber was partially and temporarily visible leading to an average temperature of the package external surface equal to 580°C with a standard deviation of 80°C. This unexpected flame behaviour is supposed to be a result of the meteorological conditions (inversion layer revealed by the presence of fog).

Based on the temperatures measured on the specimen external surface during 30 minutes, the test cannot be considered completely representative of a regulatory fire test since the flame does not surround perfectly the specimen during all the fire duration. Nevertheless, regarding the presence, several minutes after the end of the test, of flames located at the specimen damages and wood smouldering as shown in figure 3, we consider that the specimen thermal aggression by the flames was effective.

POST-COMBUSTION OF THE WOOD

The main experimental objectives were, on the one hand to observe how and how long wood combustion could take place inside the shock absorber and progress from one block to another and, on the other hand to estimate the heat fluxes generated by wood combustion. Thanks to measurements, thermal video camera recording and observation of smoke four days long, these goals were reached.

Concerning the specimen B2 half part, presenting low density wood charachteristics, combustion of the wood blocks ceased 72 hours after the end of the fire test. Maximum local heat flux exceeded 8 kW/m² for several hours on the rear specimen surface in the lower damage area. Local flame developments inside the specimen structure led to internal temperatures equal to 900°C.

Wood combustion progress inside the B1 top shock absorber half part is described in figure 4. The combustion of the wood blocks located in the B1 top shock absorber half part was initiated at the damage areas. Internal flames and embers have been observed until respectively 12 hours and 2 days after the end of the fire test.

The following noteworthy events, presented in figure 4, have been noticed: At the end of the fire test (T 0 ), important wood combustion is recorded on the direct path between damages located in the lower and upper parts (wood blocks n°7, 8, 9 and 10 are affected). Until T 0 +12 h, oxygen inside specimen structure leads to create local flames spreading to new wood blocks (n°13, 14 and 15). At T 0 +24 h, the wood block n°10 stopped burning (total combustion). At T 0 +36 h, the wood blocks n°9 and 14 stopped burning (total combustion), shortly followed by wood block n°15. Due to oxygen supply increase, combustion of the blocks n°12 and 13, located at specimen mid-height restarted. Between T 0 +60 h and T 0 +104 h, wood smouldering was noticed in the specimen top area. At approximately T 0 +72h the combustion of the wood blocks n°7 and 11 restarted. The temperature of the specimen rear surface in this area reached 155°C with local thermal flux equal to 0,9 kW/m².

At approximately T 0 +96 h, a thermal flux reaching 1kW/m² was measured on the specimen rear surface, in front of the wood block n°12.

We noticed that the temperature in local areas of the specimen rear surface can reach 460°C. This temperature is higher than 200°C for 2.5 hours (h) between T 0 +7.5 h and T 0 +10 h. Concerning the fluxes recorded, peaks of 6.2 kW/m 2 and 8.1 kW/m 2 have been measured, with an average exceeding 5 kW/m 2 during this period. A second local noteworthy thermal flux has been measured between T 0 +40 h and T 0 +57 h, reaching a maximum value equal to 4.6 kW/m². Average heat flux resulting from wood combustion and integrated at the oil exchanger is presented in figure 5, with 4 of the most interesting fluxmeters.

POST-FIRE TEST ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Excepted the top corner blocks n°1 and 11, all the blocks were reduced to ashes. Complete disappearance of several passive temperature indicators, in front of blocks n°7, 9, 10 and 13, confirmed temperatures of the specimen rear surface higher than 340°C. Main difference between B1 and B2 top shock absorber behaviour concerns the flame front progression speed: 5 to 8 times faster for B2 half, leading to a 30 % shorter total combustion time, mainly explained by the different wood species. The test highlighted that air access inside the shock absorbers is a key parameter concerning the wood combustion duration and intensity. Oxygen accessibility implies the possibility for the air to pass through the specimen, from a bottom opening to an upper one. In the present case, a limited lower air entrance (0.0075 m² cross sectional area) and an outlet of 0.05 m² were sufficient for the total combustion of the wood contained in shock absorber, as long as smoke outlet (504 cm² cross sectional area) was not restrictive. Considering air inlet, fusible holes contribution was found negligible (5% of air inlet cross sectional area).

After the test, the front surface of the specimen has been laser scanned in three dimensions. Due to the thermal distortion of the specimen steel casing (all weld spots were broken), the thickness of the gap between the wood blocks and the front steel casing increased 5 times which should have much contributed to air access and fire spreading.

IMPACT OF WOOD COMBUSTION ON THE THERMAL BEHAVIOUR OF PACKAGE COMPONENTS AFTER THE FIRE TEST

The experimental part of the study was completed by a numerical analysis to evaluate the impact of the heat fluxes, generated by wood combustion on the temperature of the package components important for safety, in particular the elastomer gaskets equipping the cavity closure system. To guarantee the containment of radioactive materials, the gaskets shall remain leaktight, which implies that their maximum allowable temperature is not exceeded. In this context, we used the heat flux measurments recorded from the B1 specimen half part.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PACKAGE MODEL

The half upper part of the package, including the cavity closure system located near the top shock absorber, has been modelled in three dimensions. According to symmetries axis, only a quarter of the package section has been considered. The numerical analysis was divided in two steps: Preliminary calculations have been performed to evaluate the temperature increase of the gaskets equipping the cavity plug and its orifices due to the heat transfers associated to the combustion of the wood blocks composing the top shock absorber. In this regard, the package geometry has been simplified as presented in figure 6. The wood blocks have not been modelled and the thermal fluxes measured during the test have been directly applied on the bottom of the shock absorber steel casing. In addition, the thermal power of the spent fuel assemblies has not been modelled in these calculations to evaluate the direct effect of the wood combustion on the temperature of the package components. Nevertheless, the geometry and the thermal properties of the spent fuel assemblies have been considered to model the thermal inertia of the content and to ensure the relevance of the heat transfers kinetic.

In a second approach, the temperature increases of the gaskets due to the wood combustion have been added to the temperatures of the package submitted to the regulatory fire test (800°C for 30 minutes) specified in the IAEA regulation [START_REF]Regulation for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material (IAEA[END_REF] (hypothesis of our modelling). These calculations have been performed taking into account all the package components including the wood blocks inside the shock absorber structure.

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

The preliminary calculations used to determine the influence of the heat fluxes measured on the temperatures of the package components have been performed taking into account the heat exchanges by radiation and convection between the packaging external surfaces and the ambient environment. Regarding the wood combustion phenomenon occurring during the cooling time of package after the fire test, we considered an external thermal emissivity of steel components equal to 0.8 to take into account the presence of soot.

The wood combustion has been modelled by applying the thermal flux measured during the experimental test (see figure 5) directly on the bottom of the shock absorber steel casing located in front of the package cavity closure system as presented in figure 7. We also determined the averaged heat flux measured on all the surface of the specimen B1 half part, to evaluate its influence on the package thermal behaviour.

RESULTS OF THE NUMERICAL STUDY

We focused this analysis on the temperature of the elastomer gaskets equipping the components of the cavity closure system. The maximum allowable temperature of the gaskets is equal to 250°C (FKM gaskets). Above this temperature, the gasket failure could lead to an activity release higher than the regulatory criterion of A 2 /week applicable in accident conditions of transport. In addition, gaskets are subjected to thermal expansion. At high temperature, the gasket volume could exceed the volume of its groove and create high mechanical loads in the closure system forcing a gap between plug and body. Then gasket leaktightness could not be guaranteed any longer. In this context, the temperature increases of inner cavity plug and orifice plug gaskets were analysed.

The temperature increases of the B1 package gaskets due to the combustion of the wood blocks, confined into the top shock absorber steel sheet, are presented in Figure 8. Regarding the results presented in figure 8, the thermal flux associated to the combustion of the wood blocks lead to a maximum increase of the gaskets temperatures higher than 50°C reached approximately 28 hours after the end of the fire test. In addition, the temperatures distribution in the bottom of the shock absorber steel casing, the kinetic of the heat transfers and the temperature of the steel casing, presented in figure 9, are consistent with the test measurements.

In a final approach, the thermal behaviour of the B1 package exposed to the regulatory fire test (800°C for 30 minutes) was studied taking into account the heat transfers by conduction in wood blocks as it is usually considered in the safety demonstrations. The thermal power of the twelve PWR spent fuel assemblies loaded in the packaging cavity has been considered. In addition, the calculation has been performed taking into account the regulatory boundaries conditions concerning the heat transfers by radiation and convection between the package and the flame or the ambient environment during the cooling time.

The temperatures of the gaskets, which equipped the containment system during the regulatory fire test, are presented in figure 10. In addition, we plotted on these graphics the temperature increases due to the wood combustion. As a result, the post-combustion of the wood present in the top shock absorber of the B1 package leads to an increase of the gaskets temperature approximately equal to 50°C which is not negligible. Nevertheless, the maximum gaskets temperatures remain lower than the criterion (250°C). Finally, it is important to highlight that the thermal flux measured during the test, and taken into account in the calculations, are based on one fire test configuration. In this regard, these results could not be applied to other shock absorber designs and fire conditions without complementary demonstrations.

CONCLUSIONS

The Fire test involving a shock absorber evidenced a wood combustion until practically complete burning of the wood. The shock absorber damages, resulting from regulatory mechanical tests creating openings for air inlet and smoke outlet, have certainly enhanced the combustion of the wood allowing air circulation near the fire. Heat fluxes and temperatures measured during the fire test on the rear surface of the specimen were significant and combustion of the wood blocks kept on during 4 days, with local extreme peaks reaching 8 kW/m². On the basis of numerical calculations, we have shown that the heat fluxes measured during the test could significantly increase the temperature of elastomer gaskets equipping the containment system, around 50°C for the studied design. Such temperature increase is not negligible but will depend on the wood combustion phenomenon, linked to the shock absorber design and the wood species properties. Consequences of the wood post-combustion should therefore be evaluated considering each package and shock absorber design.

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Detailed view of the specimen and its instrumentation

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Global view of the experimental device Instrumentation The specimen was extensively instrumented, as presented in figure 1, including: rear inner surface passive maximal temperature indicators; 13 outer surface thermocouples;

Figure 3 :

 3 Figure 3: general views of the specimen during and after the fire test

Figure 4 :

 4 Figure 4: Wood combustion progress (synthesis)

Figure 5 :

 5 Figure 5: heat flux generated by wood combustion towards the oil exchanger, with recorded local heat flux evolutions exhibiting large peaks

Figure 6 :

 6 Figure 6: General view of the B1 package mesh

Figure 7 :

 7 Figure 7: Thermal flux applied on the rear surface of the B1 top shock absorber casing (kW/m²)

Figure 8 :

 8 Figure 8: Temperature increases of the B1 package gaskets due to the wood combustion

Figure 9 :

 9 Figure 9: Package temperatures at different times after the end of the fire test

Figure 10 :

 10 Figure 10: Maximum temperatures of the B1 package gasketsWe can notice that:The maximum temperatures of the cavity plug gasket and the orifice plug gasket due to the fire test are reached respectively 3 and 12 hours after the end of the fire. The maximum increases of the gaskets temperature due to combustion of the wood are reached approximately 28 hours after the end of the fire.