Scholarly publishing is concerned with the distribution of scholarly information through journals and conferences and other information media. As such scholarly publishing can be understood as a specific part of the information industry. With the advent of advanced information technologies many possible technologically enabled futures have been posited for scholarly publishing. This paper describes the current systems, processes and actors. While technological advancements appear to be enabling access to scholarly publications, economic conditions appear to limit access. In addition, a number of alternatives, such as open access are currently in play and there is uncertainty regarding the future of the scholarly publishing system. The system appears to be in the process of being reassembled. Conceptual models of the traditional, the electronic, and some possibilities for future developments in scholarly publishing are proposed, as are topics for future research in the information systems domain.

This paper discusses how Indian open access journals get international visibility with increased outreach through primary and secondary open access journal gateways and aggregators. This paper proposes a self-sustainability model and an international visibility model for open access journals as well as for open access journal publishers from developing countries.

This is a poster titled "DLIST: Opening LIS Research and Practice". It was presented at the National Science Digital Library (NSDL) Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, November 2004. The Educational Impact and Evaluation Standing Committee (EIESC) of the NSDL is using DLIST to build an evaluation materials (evaluation of digital libraries) clearinghouse. The poster discusses the DLIST goal to connect LIS research, which is done by diverse disciplinary communities, with practice, both digital library developers as well as librarians. Techncal details about DLIST together with the processs of deposit and metadata creation are described.

This report contains salary data for all professional staff working in ARL libraries between 2000 and 2001.

This report contains salary data for all professional staff working in ARL libraries between 1999 and 2000

This report contains salary data for all professional staff working in ARL libraries between 2002 and 2003.

This paper reviews how Open Access policies (OA) and Institutional Repositories (IR) might be portrayed as agents of change within the realm of scholarly publishing. Using commentary on academic publishing as background, commentary that sees OA and IR as optimal and inevitable, and beneficially disruptive of the existing system, two theoretical approaches are presented as ways of providing a more detailed and explicit analysis of OA/IR dynamics. Both theories to varying degrees derive their inspiration from an exploration of the nature of change. The first â disruptive technology/disruptive innovationâ approach (Christensen) specifies change in market theory terms, a re-structuring "driven" by innovation within, and possibly disruptive of, existing market arrangements. The second approach views change as a process of "reassembling" and reconfiguring of relationships between elements of a network (Actor-Network Theory). The application of both approaches to OA/IR is explored, including reference to a case study on a university institutional repository implementation. While "disruption" and similar terms might be in common and casual use, the basic idea gains greater clarity in these theories, and in doing so promotes greater awareness of the assumptions being made, and the aspirations being pursued.

Special Issue: Open Access 2004, doi:10l1016/j.serrev.2004.09.009 / Each proposal for Open Access (OA) has its unique combination of features; each argument for or against OA focuses on particular features or criteria. This article is intended to discuss these criteria, both individually and also as each of them contributes to the different proposals for OA. Evaluation of the proposals themselves is not attempted. This discussion is intended to be of value to the supporters of OA, in choosing which plan to adopt, and to those opposed to OA, in showing where the weaknesses do and do not lie. In other words, this article intends to improve the level of factual understanding in the ongoing discussions.

We have mapped and evaluated diabetes research in India and China, based on papers published during 1990â 1999 and indexed in PubMed, Science Citation Index (SCI) and Biochemistry and Biophysics Citation Index (BBCI) and citations to each one of these papers up to 2000. We have identified institutions carrying out diabetes research, journals used to publish the results, subfields in which the two countries have published often, and the impact of the work as seen from actual citations to the papers. We have also assessed the extent of international collaboration in diabetes research in these two countries, based on papers indexed in SCI and BBCI. There is an enormous mismatch between the disease burden and the share of research performed in both countries. Although together these two countries account for 26% of the prevalence of diabetes, they contribute less than 2% of the worldâ s research. We argue that both India and China need to (i) strengthen their research capabilities in this area, (ii) increase investment in health-care research considerably, (iii) facilitate substantive international collaboration in research, and (iv) support cross-disciplinary research between basic life sciences researchers and medical researchers. As data such as those presented here should form the basis of health policy, India and China should encourage evaluation of research.

The domain of scholarly publishing is undergoing rapid change. Change has been instigated and produced by the Internet and open access systems â such as disciplinary and institutional repositories and open access journals. However traditional scholarly publishing is strengthening its hold over prestigious journals thus resisting change. How then does the change come about? An attempt at answering this question led us to examine an institutional repository initiative in a University. As we identified and followed the actors (researchers, research papers, reward systems, institutional repository technology, library staff, RQF, etc.) we saw the emergence of new publishing practices and the forces preserving the old ones. By adopting Actor Network Theory (ANT) we came to understand the materiality, relationality and ambiguity of processes of reassembling scholarly publishing. This paper presents preliminary results and thereby informs a wider debate and shaping of open access and scholarly publishing.