Discussion and Conclusion (week four)

The idea of open access is not new. Ever since publishing began there have been various movements to provide content for free or for the least possible expense to the widest possible audience. And there was no time wasted with the development of the World Wide Web. The beginnings of the open access movement include the statement on open access by the Budapest Open Access Initiative in 2002 (http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml) which was met with skepticism and ridicule, with people on both sides of the fence contesting the reliability and affordability of the content (Friend, 2005, p.244).

There are varieties of collection development decisions, which include stability, authoritativeness, and accuracy. An additional collection management decision involves whether or not to include for example, a database where only a percentage of the content is free. Do you add it to your collection if half the content is free? Do you add it if only a particular section, like the news article, is free? These are decisions that are still being made. Each resource has to be explored and examined with respect to all of these aspects. A collection development plan has to be developed and put into play.

While we'd like to say one of the beauties of open access is that it evades all issues with licensing agreements. However it is not always quite that simple. Some free resources require the library to sign an agreement. These are typically non-negotiated agreements where one size is hoped to fit all or most users, and of course one size does not fit all. An agreement suitable for a single user on her private computer at home may not work for an academic library, a public library, a museum, historical society, a digital library, etc. Each of these users would be potentially seeing very different use. These issues are still being worked out on a case-by-case basis. This is one of the many tasks that will require management.

There are varieties of tasks required simply to keep the content alive online somewhere. To name a few: maintaining servers, links, interfaces, organization of the material, interoperability, scalability and interactions with end-user applications. And of course if one is going to go to all that trouble wouldn't it make sense to gather some usage statistics? Usage statistics are a vital tool in projecting management costs, allocating required staff time and gaining support. Both content providers and libraries have to work to set in place a standardized way to gather, provide and maintain those.

Collectively these tasks add up to significant staff time. And this is time that will continue for the lifetime of the product and will grow as the number of items grows. There are negotiations, decisions and protocols that need to be made with respect to archiving resources. Determining how to best proceed with the managing of growing digital resources is an interesting quandary.

It would be nice to think that free access is free, however the only one for whom it is truly free is the user. One could even argue that it is not free to them either, in that staff members are devoting time toward managing free resources. The fact is the licensed resource unit will in some way be supporting the open access resources. When there is an access issue it has to be determined if this is being offered free to anyone, or if this is a resource we are paying for and should be getting access to according to our licensing agreement and payment history.

Many times the payment history has to be sought. Sometimes the free electronic resources are intermingled with paid and licensed resources through the same website.

If it is found to be a free resource and the access is not available it is often the case that the URL has changed and the linking system has to be adapted. Having links that don't work or misrepresent availability by giving incorrect access date ranges creates just as much hassle, confusion and lack of confidence in the library website as licensed resources with the same problems. From the user's perspective the hassle is all coming from the same place, the library. So the more you have a system where the links aren't working, the more you have a system that people don’t trust or understand, and don’t want to rely on.

Occasionally a library will pay for a resource it is also receiving for free. For example, a cross-search in the academic library may provide three links to the same content, where one of the links goes to a free resource, one to a direct subscription for the journal and a third to an aggregator. There are several reasons for this. Sometimes it is the case that each link provides access to different years. In the case of both the free link and the aggregator the length and degree of access may be temporary, changing or unknown. A licensed aggregator is not necessarily required to offer these details. The library pays for the direct subscriptions for reliable access to the content, for rights to archive and use the content in various ways that best fit the needs of their users.

Reference:
Friend, F. J. (2005). "The open access future." El Profesional de la Información, jul/ago, Vol. 14 Issue 4, p244-245.