RePEc is also proving to be a valuable resource for further data and research, with some of these developments surfacing on the RePEc blog, including the role RePEc can play in the broader Open Access debate.
Downloads vs. Citations: Relationships, Contributing Factors and Beyond uses RePEc data, as well as Google Scholar and SSCI citations and “finds that top downloaded documents are used in various degrees when citation is regarded as an indicator of usage”.
Andy Powell over at eFoundations posted an interesting and provocative article on the role of repositories and questions whether institutional repositories are relevant to how scholars work in communities of practice.
Andy may well approve of the RePEc model as being more in touch with how academics choose to work and while I largely agree with the rest of his comments, I also wonder:
- How important the continuing rising price of journals has been in pushing institutions down the repository route?
- Is the metadata communities seemingly endless debates about standards and technologies – RDA, FRBR, REST, OAI-PMH, SRW/SRU, OpenURL etc. – just as irrelevant to academic communities of practice, as trying to get them to archive in institutional repositories as opposed to subject based ones?
- What effect will the change from the Research Assessment Exercise method of evaluation to metrics (whatever form that takes) have on the rise of Open Access and the relationship with ‘traditional’ academic publishers?
In the meantime ways of pulling these repository silos together are being explored.