<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<p>Good mornig!<br>
</p>
<p>In the last Open Repositories Conference which was held last week in
Madrid (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://or2010.fecyt.es/publico/Home/index.aspx">http://or2010.fecyt.es/publico/Home/index.aspx</a> ) was presented
in the poster session the project called MELIBEA.<br>
</p>
<p>MELIBEA (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/">http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/</a>) is a directory
and a validator of institutional open-access (OA) policies regarding
scientific and academic work. As a directory, it describes the existing
policies. As a validator, it subjects them to qualitative and
quantitative analysis based on fulfilment of a set of indicators (
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/politicas_estructura.php">http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/politicas_estructura.php</a>) that
reflect the bases of an institutional policy.
</p>
<p>Based on the values assigned to a set of indicators, weighted
according to their importance, the validator indicates a score and a
percentage of fulfilment for each policy analyzed. The sum of weighted
values of each indicator is converted to a percentage scale to give
what we have called the “validated open-access percentage” (see how i t
is calculated:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/default.php?contenido=acerca">http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/default.php?contenido=acerca</a> ).</p>
<p>The types of institution analyzed include universities, research
centres, funding agencies and governmental organizations.</p>
<p>MELIBEA has three main objectives:</p>
<ul>
<li>1. To establish indicators that reveal the strong and weak points
of institutional OA polices.</li>
<li>2. To propose a methodology to guide institutions when they are
drawing up an institutional OA policy.</li>
<li>3. To offer a tool for comparing the contents of policies between
institutions.</li>
</ul>
The aim is not to be a ranking, but to offer a tool where to aanlyse
and visualize the weaknesses or strenghts of an institutional OA policy
based on its wording. It seems something trivial but accomplishment of
a policy is based on its terms.<br>
Please if you detect any mistake or you would like to make a comment,
contact me. I will be pleased if you could check your policy, if any,
to analyse our approach.<br>
Best wishes<br>
Reme<br>
<br>
<br>
R. Melero
<br>
IATA, CSIC
<br>
Avda Agustín Escardino 7, 46980 Paterna (Valencia), Spain
<br>
TEl +34 96 390 00 22. Fax 96 363 63 01
<br>
E-mail <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:rmelero@iata.csic.es">rmelero@iata.csic.es</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.accesoabierto.net">http://www.accesoabierto.net</a><br>
</body>
</html>