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.

This report contains salary data for all professional staff working in ARL libraries between 1998 and 1999.

This is issue 237, December 2004. "ARL is the bimonthly report on research library issues and actions from ARL (Association of Research Libraries), CNI (Coalition of Networked Information), and SPARC (Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition). ARL reports on current issues of interest to academic and research library administrators, staff, and users; higher education administrators and faculty; information technologists and those who depend on networked information; as well as anyone concerned with the future of scholarly communication or information policy developments." TABLE OF CONTENTS Libraries and Changing Research Practices: A Report of the ARL/CNI Forum on E-Research and Cyberinfrastructure by Diane Goldenberg-Hart, Communications Coordinator, Coalition for Networked Information [PDFâ see pages 1-5] SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION The Development of an Open Source Publishing System at Cornell and Penn State Universities by Terry Ehling, Director of Electronic Publishing at Cornell University Library [PDFâ see pages 6-7] SPARC Presents Workshop on Institutional Repositories [PDFâ see page 7] Balancing Stakeholder Interests in Scholarship-Friendly Copyright Practices by Julia Blixrud, Assistant Executive Director, External Relations, ARL, and Assistant Director, Public Programs, SPARC [PDFâ see page 8] OLMS INFORMATION SERVICES Library Services in Non-Library Spaces excerpted from ARL/OLMS SPEC Kit 285 by Gordon Aamot, Head, Arts, Architecture, and Business Libraries, and Steve Hiller, Head, Science Libraries/Library Assessment Coordinator, University of Washington [PDFâ see page 9] ARL ACTIVITIES ARL Membership Plans for the Future [PDFâ see page 10] Preserving Audio Collections: Action Plan Developed [PDFâ see page 11]

It is an annotated bibliography for a panel discussion at the 2007 American Library Association Annual Conference. It focuses on relevant articles published from Jan. 2005 through May 2007.

As more libraries embrace the term 'information commons' to name services and symbolise their mission, this paper explores the meaning of the concept in Australia and the US. The public library as we know it was founded on principles of providing free access to all. This is now threatened by the growth of information as commodity, and has led many to question the controls and costs of information in society. This paper examines threats that emerge from commercialisation, legislation, funding, and the changing role of libraries. The responses to these threats by libraries, individuals and organisations are detailed. Projects and alternative models that aim to protect the information commons are discussed. This paper asks if libraries should be political about this issue, and what the consequences of such action may be on funding, intellectual freedom, trust and communities. What steps can librarians take to ensure access to information for all individuals in the future? Do the information commons represent a new direction for librarianship, or a renewed emphasis on traditional values?

This is a presentation of 30 slides at the Brown Bag Series, School of Library and Information Science, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana on 31 March 2006. Abstract: Commons-based digital libraries are an emerging phenomenon. They are based on a new vision of digital information organization and use. A definition of commons-based digital libraries, some examples, fundamental characteristics, emerging information behaviors, and preliminary results from a scholarly communication survey of LIS faculty will be presented.

This is the summary of a study about the collaborations between research libraries and university presses. The study was conducted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Association of Research Libraries' 2007/08 Leadership and Career Development Program.