Re: Incentives (RE: In the news (Georgia State)

[Ann Okerson <ann.okerson@yale.edu>]

Sandy:  A recent reading of Raym Crow's 2002 SPARC White Paper on 
IRs reminded me that he gave two principal reason for setting 
them up:

1.  Serve as tangible indicators of an institution's quality and 
to demonstrate the relevance of its research activities, thus 
increasing the institution's visibility, status, and public value 
(what one could term administrative aggregation).

2.  Provide tools to assist universities in re-shaping the 
scholarly communications process (what one could term a repair 
function).

Ann Okerson/Yale Library


On Mon, 28 Apr 2008, Sandy Thatcher wrote:

> Rick's question suggests another: the main rationale for using 
> IRs to promote OA seems to be that universities have a strong 
> interest in exhibiting the research that their faculties 
> produce, but do administrators really believe that?  Is an 
> administrator at a state university testifying before a 
> legislative hearing and trying to get more funding going to 
> point to all that research on the IR as a reason for the state 
> to increase its financial support? And just how would this kind 
> of demonstration work? And who are private universities trying 
> to impress? Members of Congress whose votes are needed to 
> increase funding for NIH, Defense Department research, etc.? 
>
> Are universities perhaps trying to impress each other so as to 
> raid one another for their best faculty? It is just unclear to 
> me what this presumed self-interest universities have in their 
> IRs really amounts to, and how it can actually be put to 
> practical use. Does anyone have a good answer?
>
> --Sandy Thatcher, Penn State Press