1 Spanish Scientific Information Policies Presentation to UCLA Library Management Council 28th of...

1

Spanish Scientific Information Policies

Presentation to UCLA Library Management Council

28th of May, 2008

José Manuel Báez Cristóbal. Head of R&D Services Dpt. (e-mail: [email protected])

2

Spanish Scientific Information Policies

Summary

1. General context: Spain and its scientific system

2. How we do buy Scientific information.

3. Open Access: Policy and Developments.

3

1.- General context: Spain and its scientific system

• Spain: a few data of context

• Some indicators on Science System.

• Role of FECYT.

4

Brief History

• 1975, dead of Mr. Franco: end of Dictature

• 1977, first democratic election

• 1978, new Constitution

• 1982, first victory of Socialist Party

• 1986, access to Europena Union

• 1986, Law of Science

• 1988, First National Science Plan

5

500.000 Sq-Km. Second member of the EU by extension

44 million people. Fifth member of the EU by Population

GNP: 1 B€ (spanish). Fifth memeber of the EU by economic dimension.

Context: SPAIN (I)

6

Quasi-federal organisation:

• 17 regional governments

•Regional administration manages importan public budgets, e.g.: health-care and EDUCATION (including universities)

Context: SPAIN (II)

7

Context: SPAIN (III)

• Science and Tecnology Policy is a full competence of the National Government, ... >80% of funding for Science programmes is managed nationally and (expected) by a single ministry.

•Current funding for public Universities comes from Regional governments.

•Regions are developping their own science and innovation policies: new research centres and new Human Ressources programmes.

8

SPANISH GENERAL BUDGET FOR R&D(Expenditure Programme 46)*1990-2008

Initial Credits (in current Millions of €)

Mill

ion

s of

€

(*) Until 2005, budgets for Scientific, Techinical, and Applied Research were covered in Function 54

Source: Treasury Ministry. General Spanish Budgets 1990-2008

Chapter VIII Excluded (financial assets) TotalYears

Some indicators (I)

9

Some indicators (II)M

illio

ns

of

€

(*) Until 2005, budgets for Scientific Techinical and applied research where covered in Function 54

Source: Treasury Ministry General Spanisj Brdged 1990-2008


SPANISH GENERAL BUDGET FOR R&D(Expenditure Programme 46)*1990-2008Initial Credits in constant million euros (1990)

10

Inte

ryear

vari

ati

on

RA

TE





Interyear variation RATE (%) of initial credits at current prices

Some indicators (III)

11

Some indicators (IV)In

tery

ear

vari

ati

on

RA

TE





Interyear variation RATE (%) of initial credits at constant prices 1990

12

Some indicators (V)%

bu

dg

et

46

/ G

en

era

l S

pan

ish

bu

dg

et


(1) Chapter 9 excluded: pasive financial

Source: Treasury Ministry General Spanish Budget. 1990-2008


SPANISH GENERAL BUDGET FOR R&D(Expenditure Programme 46)*1990-2008% of budget 46 in Spanish General budget (1)

13

(*) Before 2002 it is calculaled in 0/00 with respect to working population

(1) Estimations

(2) Serie breaking off due to methological change (includes continue and temporary R&D). From 1995, the private non lucrative organization are included

Source: National Institute of Statistics. Statistics about R&D activities (1990-2006)

R+D staff/working population (0/00) Researches/working population (0/00)

Work

ing

pop

ula

tion

(0

/00

)

EMPLOYEES IN R&D WITH RESPECT TO WORKING POPULATION. 1990-2006

Every 1000 working population (0/00) (*)

Years

Some indicators (VI)

14

Some indicators (VII)

WORKING PEOPLE IN R&D ACTIVITIES BY EXECUTION SECTOR1990-2006

Percentage Structure

% P

ers

on

nel (E

JC)

(1) Estimations

(2) Serie Breaking-off due to methological change. Includes continuous and temporary R&D

Source: National Institute of Stadistics. Starastic about R&D activiteies. 1990-2006

Superior EducationCompanies Public Administration

IPSFL

Years

15

RESEARCHERS BY EXECUTION SECTOR 1990-2006Percentage Structure

% In

vest

igato

rs (

EJC

)

(1) Estimations

(2) Serie Breaking-off due to methological change. Includes continuous and temporary R&D

Source: National Institute of Stadistics. Starastic about R&D activiteies. 1990-2006

Superior Education Public Administration

IPSFLCompanies Years

Some indicators (VIII)

16

SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION 1992-2006

Nº

Pu

blic

ati

on

s

(1) Papers from spanish institutions and publises in SCI journals. At least one autor belongs to institution

(2) Full time equivalents (FTE) and only Public Administration and uperior Education

(3) From 2000 also researchers scholars are included as researches

Source: ISI, IEDCYT, SCI Search. 1992-2006

Papers/researchers (2)% World production

Years

% W

orld

wid

e p

rod

uctio

n

Number of papers (1)

Some indicators (IX)

17

Some indicators (X)

TOTAL INTERNAL EXPENDITURE IN R&D BY REGIONS 1990-2006

Percentage structure

(1) Estimations

(2) From 2002, it refers to Ceuta and Melilla

Source: National Institue of Statistics (INE) 1990-2006

18

Some indicators (XI)

• From 0.5 % of GNP in 1985 to 0.9% in 1992-2000; to 1.2 % in 2006. (and increasing)

• From 25,000 researchers in 1986 to 116,000 in 2006 (FTEs)

• From 45,000 R&D employees in 1986 to 190,000 in 2006.

19

FECYT (I) Definition and objectives

The Spanish Science and Technology Foundation (FECYT), which is a public foundation of the Ministry of Science and Innovation; created by resolution of the Council of Ministers in 2001 as a tool of the national knowledge generation and technology transfer system.

Its strategic objective was to help to improve the way that the Spanish science and technology system operates and articulates itself: including relations between science policy makers, scientists and society.

20

FECYT (II) Strategic lines and programmes

3 strategic orientations, 3stakeholders, 3 programmes,

3 operating departments

To help to orient the science and technology policies, providing support to policy makers in the planning, evaluation, execution and monitoring of national programmes: Programme for support to Science and Technology Policy.

To develop scientific culture, helping citizens to appreciate and value the importance of science and technology for their own wellbeing, and cultural and financial benefit: Science and Society Programme.

To provide tools for scientific activity, supporting scientists to better develop their capacities, networking and access to infrastructure: R&D Infrastructure Programme.

www.fecyt.es

21

How we do buy Scientific informtion

• Regional Consortia

• The Web of Knowledge case

• BECyT

• European Links

22

Regional Consoria (I)

Point of departure: Universities and their ‘General Cost Budget’ depend on the Regional Governments

Universities represent more that 70% of total scientific information demand

The main budget for acquisition of scholar information is distributed among many different governments, National included: fragmentation.

The ‘small Big Deals’ are dealt with regionally.

Some consequences:

• economic innefficiency, and

• diversity of access rights.

23

Regional Consoria (II)

The two main regions with strong consotia are: Catalunya and Andalucía.

There exist other regional consortia with minor impact: Galicia, Madrid, Castilla-León.

CSIC is ‘de facto’ the third actor.

There is an association of Librerians, called REBIUN, including all the Universities and CSIC: the total cost of information licenses for them is around 100 M$.

Even for the case of ‘small Big Deals’, Andalucía and Catalunya, have clearly identified the advantages of Consortia: increase of accessibility leads to increases in real access.

24

The Web of Knowledge case (I)

In 2002 REBIUN made a proposal to the Science and Tecnology Ministry to negotiate a National License for Web of Science.

In 2003 the Ministry decided to ask FECYT to develop such license.

In june FECYT proposed a Web of Knowledge National License:

•Including contents over WoS. (e.g. patents)

•Including all reserach centres (not only CSIC)

•Including Hospitals.

•Including Tecnology Research centres.

•Including S&T developments Parks

25

The Web of Knowledge case (II)

The WoK National License was signed in Decembre 2003, for a 4-year period: 2004-2007. Its main characteristics are:

• Includes all research intitutions: 827 centres in total.

• Covers more than 200.000 researchers

We developped our own acces portal: based on a National access protocol (PAPI).

We are developping Sindicated access methods: in particular Shiboleth. We want to push for it.

www.accesowok.fecyt.es

26

The Web of Knowledge case (III)

The use has multiplied by three in three years

The efficiency of use by researchers is very significant

0

1.000.000

2.000.000

3.000.000

4.000.000

5.000.000

6.000.000

7.000.000

8.000.000

CONSULTAS GENERALES POR AÑO

Consultas 2004 Consultas 2005 Consultas 2006 2007

27

The Web of Knowledge case (IV)

The level of use is extremely diverse.

Even having made specific promotion actions in some areas (Hospitals)

CONSULTAS POR TIPO DE CENTRO

0,32%

0,21%

2,84%18,57%

69,14%

2,47%2,46%

2,03%1,86%

0,09%

Universidad CSICServicio Salud Acceso Web TemporalCentro o Parque Tecnológico OPIServicio de investigación agraria Organismo MinisterialAcceso académico desconocido Acceso gubernamental desconocido

28

BECyT (I)

Biblioteca Electrónica de Ciencia y Tecnología:

Electronic Library for Science and Tecnology.

AIMS

To equalise access to information to all researchers, independently of their institution size.

To increase efficiency in the consumption of scientific info, and in particular for public budgets.

To expand the ‘Big Deal’ benefits to new areas: in particular health research.

29

BECyT (II)

BASIC ELEMENTS:

• Who buys: a consortium led by FECYT and the Ministry.

• Who pays the Bill: 1/3 by National Government, 2/3 are for Regional Governments and/or Institutions

• What to buy: the most asked collections:

1. Nuclear BECyT: Multidisciplinary collections.

2. Basic BECyT: lower demand multidisciplinary and huge disciplines (e.g.: chemistry, health, engineering)

3. Advanced BECyT: Specific collections highly demanded

1 & 2 are ‘All for All’ 3 should be ‘Some for Some’

30

BECyT (III)

After first Go-ahead, negotiations where initiated, begining 2007, for licenses to start on Jannuary 1st 2008, with:

1. Elsevier

2. Springer - Kluwer

3. Blackwell - Willey

4. Taylor and Francis

5. Nature

6. Sage

7. Science

31

BECyT (IV)

In July 2007:

• Negotiations where almost completed and consensus seemed to be attainable with 5 editors.

• Criteria to share 2/3 of costs between institutions/regions where very advanced.

•Consortia principles and documents where drafted.

BUT governmental budget approuval failed and the project was freezed up to a new budget ocassion.

NEVERTHELESS: we work to make it succeed in 2008-2009 and we have analised some of the problems.

32

BECyT (V)

Problems with editors:

1. How to make it sustainable, i.e.: yearly price revision rate in line with restrictive budgetary policies (Euro).

2. How to introduce new insituttions.

3. How to make editors accept Open Access Policy principles based on Extended licenses.

4. Technical Standards (IT) are not enough developed nor adopted by publishers.

Specific european problem: difference of VAT between ‘paper’ and ‘electronic’ products. (Of course, the

national license was to be electronic only).

33

BECyT (VI)

Problems with consortia members:

• Diversity of institutional/ administrative situations.

• Huge diversity in price policies by editors to each of pre-existing licenses depending on factors such as year of licensing (and thus ‘category’ of spanish prices at each point in time)

• Diversity in technology development

• Diversity in payment schedules.

Nevertheless, the main problem, in fact the only one, was the ammount of National Government funding necessary to facilitate the operation.

34

BECyT (VII)

The Future:

• New Spanish Goverment in force for four years.

• Although the compromise is 16% yearly increase in R&D budget, the economic situatuion is declining very fast.

• Licenses starting in 2009 are almost unafordable.

BUT:

We need to be ready to go on and try to improve what is feasible if we are pushed to finally do it.

Then: ¿What kind of problems we did sitll not find? ¿How can we solve those that we already found?

35

Open access Policy and developments

• European Policies.

• Spanis Repositories and harvester.

36

OPEN ACCESS DEBATE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

COUNCIL CONCLUSIONS ON SCIENTIFIC INFORMATIN IN THE DIGITAL AGE: ACCESS, DISSEMINATION AND PRESERVATION

Competitiveness (Internal Market, Industry and Research) Council Meeting. Brussels, 22 and 23 Nov 2007

COUNCIL CONCLUSIONS ON SCIENTIFIC INFORMATIN IN THE DIGITAL AGE: ACCESS, DISSEMINATION AND PRESERVATION

17 Dec 2007

37

CONCLUSIONS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ON SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE: ACCESS, DISSEMINATION AND PRESERVATION

CONSIDERATIONS OF THE COUNCIL

• Importance of access and dissemination of scientific information

• Revolution on the way science is performed and communicated due to internet and other technologies

• Quality control of published science (peer review, …) is crucial to excellence of European Research

• Investments in information technologies for online accessibility of science have been performed

• Effective and long-lasting digital preservation of scientific information is fundamental

38

RECOGNITIONS OF THE COUNCIL

• Contribution of public organizations together with scientific publishers to science dissemination

• Internet-based dissemination has triggered a debate about access and dissemination of science

• Scientific libraries suffer from the rising of overall prices of scientific journals

• Importance of developing models for open access to scientific information for Europe

COUNCIL CONCLUSIONS ON SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE

39

THE COUNCIL UNDERLINES

• The need to ensure rapid and wide access to publicly funded research results

• The interest of Member Sates in an efficient scientific information system that maximizes the socio-economic impact on public investments in research

• The need of the publicly funded research to be available on the internet at no cost (delayed open access included)

• The cross-border nature of many research projects, their funds and dissemination channels

• The potencial of the better access to unprocessed data and repository resources for data and material that allows fresh analysis and issue beyond what the author of the data had envisaged

• The electronic communication has the potential to enable open access to scientific information and provides an opportunity for the open development of specific data mining, analysis and integration tools

• Policies and practices in the member states on access to and preservation of science and research are developing at different speeds

• The need of collaboration between funding agencies, researchers, research institutions and scientific publishers in relation to access, dissemination and preservation of science and research

COUNCIL CONCLUSIONS ON SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION IN THE DIGITAL AGE

40

THE COUNCIL TAKES INTO ACCOUNT

• Recent reports calling on the Commission to improve access to results coming from the research it funds

•Intention of the Commission to support further research on the scientific publication system, and to carry out a study of the economic aspects of digital preservation

41

1. Reinforce national strategies for access to and preservation and dissemination of scientific information, facing organizational, legal, technical and financial issues

Definining of ECONOMICALLY SUSTAINABLE policies promoting free access to results of publicly funded research (including delayed open access)

Assessing conditions affecting access to information

•how researchers exercise copyright on articles•level of investments in dissemination of science as compared to total investments in research•how to use financial mechanisms to improve access, such as refunding VAT for digital journal subscriptions to libraries

Ensuring that repositories of scientific information are sustainable and interoperable RECOLECTA project

Bringing together main stakeholders in the debate on scientific information (scientists, funding bodies, libraries, scientific publishers…)

THE COUNCIL INVITES THE MEMBER STATES TO

42

2. Enhance the co-ordination between Member states on access and dissemination policies and practices by:

Exploring the possibility for national funding bodies to define common basic principles on open access

Improving transparency of the contractual terms of “big deals” financed with public money and assessing the possibilities to achieve economies of scale by demand aggregation

Working towards the interoperability of national repositories of scientfic information in order to facilitate accessibility and searchability of scientific information beyond national borders

Contribution to an effective overview of progress at European level, informing the Commission of results and experiences with alternative models for the dissemination of scientific information

THE COUNCIL INVITES THE MEMBER STATES TO

3. Ensure the long term preservation of scientific information- including publications and data- and pay due attention to scientific information in national preservation strategies by

Defining a structured approach to the long term preservation of scientific information, incorporating it to national plans for digital preservation

Taking into account the specific characteristics of scientific information

43

THE COUNCIL INVITES THE COMMISION TO

1. Experiment with open access to scientific publications coming from projects funded by the EU Research Framework Programmes by:

Implementing concrete experiments with open access to scientific publications, included delayed open access

2. Support experiments and infraestructures with a cross-border added-value for access to and preservation of scientific information by:

Co-funding of research infraestructures, in particular by linking digital repositories at European level and co-funding research on digital preservation

3. Support experiments and infraestructures with a cross-border added-value for access to and preservation of scientific information by:

Bringing together concerned stakeholders in the debate of scientific information

Monitoring good practices in relation to open access to European Scientific production

44

ERC SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL GUIDELINES FOR OPEN ACCESS

MAIN CONSIDERATIONS- Peer review ensures hig-quality scientific research, so policies towards access to peer-reviewed papers must guarantee the ability of the system to maintain certification services based on scientific integrity

- Access to unprocessed data is needed for independent verification of results and secure preservation and fresh analysis and use of the data

- There are over 400 research repositories run by European Research Institutions and international discipline-specific repositories (PubMed Central, arXiv, etc..) to serve researchers

ERC SCIENTIFIC POSITION ON OPEN ACCESS

EUROPEAN RESEARCH COUNCIL (ERC)

Peer reviewed articles coming from ERC-funded research need to be deposited in an appropriate research repository and made open access within 6 months of publication

Primary data (nucleotide/protein sequences, etc) need to be deposited to the relevant databases as soon as possible, in any case later than 6 months after publication

45

www.recolecta.net

RECOLECTA

http://www.recolecta.net/

46

Simple and advanced search

Added value services about open access

RECOLECTA

•Copyright

• Alternative models for publication

• Information about related national and international proyects

• Information about interoperability standards

Spanish harvester for open access science

Platform architecture follows other similar projects (DRIVER*) to ensure interoperability and future integration (following council of the European Union Invitation)

RECOLECTA harvests from digital repositories keeping with OAI-PMH

Works with ARC (open source) (http://arc.cs.odu.edu)

* Digital Repository Infraetructure Vision for European Research

RECOLECTA CHARACTERISTICS

http://arc.cs.odu.edu/

http://arc.cs.odu.edu/

47

RECOLECTA

RECOLECTA MAIN OBJETIVES

Promote and facilitate the use of open access articles among scientific community

Increase visibility of open access science deposited on national repositories and thus its international impact

Establish technical and political guidelines to ensure interoperability of Spanish Repositories among themselves and with international projects.

Motivate repositories to work keeping the OAI-PMH as a basic protocol to ensure interoperability and developing of added value services

48

RECOLECTA

2008 ACTIONS ON RECOLECTA

Technical meeting with Spanish repositories and digital libraries to ensure interoperable platforms and optimal harvesting (correct labeling of documents, etc)

Definition of types of documents to harvest by RECOLECTA (peer reviewed articles, books, doctoral theses, congress communication, etc..)

Access to full text

Promote repositories as a mean of open access, dissemination and preservation of information among main stakeholders

Establish collaborations with national and cross-border projects

49

SOME OF THE MAIN REPOSITORIES IN SPAIN

Network of repositories not well developed yet

DIALNET :journals repositories with database.

MADROÑO (public universities in Madrid)

CBUC (thesis, journals and institutions from Catalunya)

Scielo Spain: concentrates in health research journals

RECyT : FECYT repository for top quality spanish journals

www.recyt.fecyt.es

50

Thank you for your attention.

José Manuel Báez Cristóbal

Head of R&D services Department

[email protected]

www.fecyt.es

mailto:[email protected]

1 Spanish Scientific Information Policies Presentation to UCLA Library Management Council 28th of...

Documents

Transcript of 1 Spanish Scientific Information Policies Presentation to UCLA Library Management Council 28th of...