CURATOR Chiba Universitys Repository HUSCAP Hokkaido Universitys Repository

CURATOR Chiba University’s Repository & HUSCAP Hokkaido University’s Repository Chiba Univ. Haruo ASOSHINA Hokkaido Univ. Maiko KOSAKA Hokkaido Univ. Masako SUZUKI 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ.

Chiba University • • Faculty Staff Undergraduate Students Graduate Students • Undergraduate Programs – Letters, Education, Law & Economics, Science, Engineering, Pharmaceutical Science, Nursing Science, Horticulture, Medicine Graduate Programs(Master’s and Doctoral) – Humanities, Education, Social Science, Science and Technology, Medical and Pharmaceutical Science – Law School 1 University Hospital 12 Research Centers • • • 1 -2. DEC. 2005 1, 200 1, 300 12, 000 3, 500 http: //www. chiba-u. ac. jp/e/ meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 2

Chiba University Library http: //www. ll. chiba-u. ac. jp/ • Main Lib & 2 branchs • Collection 1, 500, 000 • Circulation/year 148, 000 • ILL /year 10, 000 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 3

Our IR : CURATOR • Name： CURATOR Chiba University's Repository for Access to Outcomes from Research • Contents： 800 - records, so far • System： self-developed(Not using open source softwares) OS: Linux DB: Oracle • Registration： OAI data provider, IAR(Institution Archives Registry) • URL http: //mitizane. LL. chiba-u. jp/curator/ 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 4

CURATOR: Status Team System ØIR WG Ø’ 03 Prototype (‘-05) üyoung staff(6) & Div. Manager(1) ØMainly in charge of üSystem & serials section (2) ØCommittee of Info. dissemination üFaculty & lib. Managers (10) PR on/off campus ØPresentation for faculties ü each campus & unit ØWeb Site ØSymposium (Sep. ’ 05) üWhat is IR, What is CURATOR. 1 -2. DEC. 2005 üIndependent system ü 1 Ghz, 1 GB, 80 GB Dell Ø’ 06 - Enforce for “actual release” ü 3 GHz, 2 GB, RAID 5(1 TB) Dell Cooperation ØDomestic üCSI (18 univ. consortia for developing IR) üHarvested Junii (National GW) ØInternational üOAI , IAR üScirus as well as T-Space üGoogle meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 5

CURATOR: Number of records Now (Dec. ’ 05) ØThree quarters depending on “digitized bulletins” (batch-loaded) ØIntend to advocate all faculties by presentation and pamphlet, but very few responsed. total 827 ØVery few (Green) journal articles submitted. ØCooperation with “Faculty accomplishment system” (semi-automatically catch articles) ØNot believe and not rely on self-archiving. ü We(library)“find and gather anything” ØNot intend to advocate all faculties OA. ü Negotiation with “targeted customers”. ØAnyway, break and try new route as above. Expected (Dec. ’ 06) total over 7, 500 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 6

CURATOR: Faculties’ contribution How many articles do our faculties submit to CURATOR? Now (Dec. ’ 05) Expected 1 -2. DEC. 2005 (Dec. ’ 06) ØMiserable… ØI hope at least like this… meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 7

CURATOR: Future ØAnyway, we need content, content. ØFor the moment, our basic interest is only “how do we make our IR richer with contents, rather reasonably and automatically? “ Ø 1. Finish the past (digitizable paper) ASAP. Like complete jigsaw. Ø 2. Break several routes to collect “present & future” (digital version) rather than SA. 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 8

Location Hokkaido Univ. • • Researchers 2, 123 Undergraduate students 11, 299 Graduate students 6, 250 Established in 1876 as Sapporo Agricultural College (札幌農学校) Chiba Univ. 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ.

HUSCAP Hokkaido University collection of scholarly and academic papers • DSpace 1. 2. 1 • 100 researchers • 150 papers - peer-reviewed: 100 - hit: 18, 300 times • Jul. 2005～ Feb. 2006 trial HASKAP （berry） 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 10

HUSCAP http: //eprints. lib. hokudai. ac. jp/ 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 11

Before HUSCAP (1/2) • WG (all librarians) started in June 2004 • Researcher’s survey on OA practice in Nov. to inform researchers of OA, IR… , and to understand researcher’s needs for IR – Responded 466(22%) of 2142 faculty • Agree with OA 421(91%) (51 already practiced) • Agree with IR 328(70%) • Agree to discuss with library about OA and IR 168 – No one knows about IR 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 12

Before HUSCAP (2/2) “Hokkaido Univ. Academic Repository” • March 2005 ～ May 2005 • Campus-use only • Uploaded by researchers themselves • Request to 168 researchers to upload their papers in the list of green papers made by library from Wo. S • 30 researchers, 50 papers however 26 of them were pub. pdf • Interview （→mostly, Author’s ver. files lost） 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 13

HUSCAP • World wide access • Uploaded by librarians Researchers email papers by attached files • Receive researcher’s submission at the same time as the journal rather than upload past papers retrospectively • Change the way of approach to researchers – Before： IR, OA, serial crisis, strictly – Now： Digital Library Collection with a function of IR and OA 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 14

Which to emphasize? Library collection development Accountability as a public-funded research organization Visibility, Research Impact Chiba University To researchers To executives Inside library Hokkaido University To researchers To executives Inside library Keio University To researchers To executives Inside library 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 15

Present policies • Committee to discuss the IR matters (established since Nov. 2005) – Consists of 9 researchers, 1 official and 1 librarian • Requesting cooperation from the Departments – Digital theses project – Online Departmental Bulletin Project • Effective public relations – Presentation to researchers, posters, leaflets, etc. 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 16

For researcher’s understanding • Explanatory meeting to researchers 28 times – Librarians went to lab to explain – Announcements by posters, leaflets, newsletters – 110 researchers attended the meetings • Researcher Interview 20 times – Lunch meeting, seminar, individual appointment – Librarians went to researcher’s workplaces to explain Good for understanding about HUSCAP. But NOT a cost-effective method and too slow! 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 17

Problems for the future • Obtaining more recognition by researchers – What is the cost-effective method? • Cooperating with “Research Achievements Database Hokkaido Univ. ” – Is it possible to manage researchers information using DSpace? – Whether to include metadata without full text 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ. 18

Presentation finished 1 -2. DEC. 2005 meeting at Toronto univ. & Rochester univ.