NASIG Newsletter

PRECONFERENCE 

How to Implement an Institutional Repository

Carol Hixson, Head, Metadata & Digital Library Services, University of Oregon Libraries
Reported by Valerie Bross 

Drawing on her extensive experience as a digital repository coordinator, Carol Hixson outlined issues involved in planning, implementing, and sustaining an institutional repository. 

What is an institutional repository? According to Clifford Lynch, an institutional repository consists of digital collections and a set of services for the management and dissemination of these collections. Services as well as content form the basis of a repository. 

Key to establishing a repository is a long-term institutional/administrative commitment, a coordinator with vision and energy, and a dedicated staff. Other core elements are: planning, flexibility, and perseverance. If you do not have a clear initial idea of why you are implementing it and are not willing to be involved  for the long haul, Hixson emphasized, you might as well not begin.  

Staffing issues are a fundamental concern. Hixson recommended: a coordinator, a web designer, a policy group, staff to handle/review submissions, groups to market the repository, and staff for subsidiary services (e.g., copyright clearance & PR). The University of Oregon’s repository effort began with a task group in the library consisting of the repository coordinator (Hixson), the head of reference, a technical staff member, and the cartographic librarian. Later, the head of serials was added; as well as another reference librarian and another technical staff member. The entire core group at the University of Oregon worked in the library, but other institutions have included faculty members. 

Hardware and software decisions will shape the repository, sometimes in unexpected ways. For example, D-Space’s “world-view” of a repository as a hierarchical system of communities—sub-communities—collections—titles—files has obvious but also subtle effects on customizability, navigation, and storage. For example, to provide a view of a digitized journal with issues in Chronological order, the University of Oregon had to find a workaround for title entries. 

Rights management is another issue that will affect the repository at many levels. Four players must be considered: the content owner, the submitter, the institution, and the users. As a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education (Monaghan, Peter, “Digital Dissertation Dust-Up,” 28 Apr. 2006: p. A41) demonstrated, the issues are complex.   

Metadata is another core issue, and one which needs to be approached with flexibility. To be blunt, it is not cataloging. Nevertheless, repository planners should take care in following metadata standards. Be aware that repository software may not support the full range of cataloging services (e.g., authority control). Also, in addition to cataloging at the work level, one must consider whether metadata is needed at other levels of granularity (e.g., article level).  

Marketing, of increasing importance to all library units, is especially important to the success of an institutional repository. The appeal of open access to information is not always shared by faculty; the repository must prove itself to the community it wishes to reach. After two years of relentless marketing, the University of Oregon Scholars’ Bank has finally reached a critical mass—where departments are approaching the library (rather than vice versa) and where the size of the collection is drawing in new contributions. 

Powerpoint presentation: https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/dspace/handle/1794/2484