[GOAL] Re: Library Vetting of Repository Deposits

[Andrew A. Adams]

Dana Roth wrote:

> Thanks to Stevan for reminding the list that working with librarians
> will, in the long run, be much more productive than denigrating their
> efforts.

I am all in favour or working with librarians when those librarians are 
working to promote Open Access. When librarians work in ways which inhibit my 
view of the best route to Open Access, I reserve the right to criticise those 
actions. There are many librarians who do get it and with who I'm happy to 
share common cause, and to praise their efforts. I have in the past said that 
the ideal situation for promoting open access at an institution is for a 
coalition of reseaerchers, manager and librarians to work at explaining the 
benefits to the institution (in achieving its mission and in gaining early 
adopter relative benefits) to the rest of the researchers, managers and 
librarians.

Unfortunately, in too many cases, librarians (often those who were not the 
original OA evangelist librarians) apply a wrong-headed set of roadblocks to 
institutional repository deposit processes which delays OA, makes deposit 
more frustrating and more difficult for researchers, and weakens the deposit 
process. It is these librarians that I wish to "get out of the way", not 
librarians in general.




-- 
Professor Andrew A Adams                      aaa at meiji.ac.jp
Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/