[Fwd: [SIGMETRICS] Fwd: OA policies and their "weight"]

[Zaida Chinchilla Rodr?guez]

a propósito del oa...


---------------------------- Mensaje original ----------------------------
Asunto: [SIGMETRICS] Fwd: OA policies and their "weight"
Desde:  "Stevan Harnad" <harnad at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK>
Fecha:  2010.07.15 2:40 pm
A:      SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


** Cross-Posted **

Forwarding new OA policy evaluator from CSIS

For raw data on OA mandates, see also ROARMAP
http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/policysignup/

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Remedios Melero <rmelero at iata.csic.es>
> Date: July 15, 2010 3:14:19 AM EDT
> To: boai-forum at ecs.soton.ac.uk, SPARC-OAForum at arl.org
>
> Good mornig!
> In the last Open Repositories Conference which was held last week in
Madrid (http://or2010.fecyt.es/publico/Home/index.aspx ) was presented
in the poster session the project called MELIBEA.
> MELIBEA (http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/)  is a directory and  a
validator of institutional open-access (OA) policies regarding
scientific and academic work. As a directory, it describes the existing
policies. As a validator, it subjects them to qualitative and
quantitative analysis based on fulfilment of a set of indicators (
http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/politicas_estructura.php) that
reflect the bases of an institutional policy.
>
> Based on the values assigned to a set of indicators, weighted according
to their importance, the validator indicates a score and a percentage of
fulfilment for each policy analyzed. The sum of weighted values of each
indicator is converted to a percentage scale to give what we have called
the “validated open-access percentage” (see how i t is calculated: 
http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/default.php?contenido=acerca ).
>
> The types of institution analyzed include universities, research
centres, funding agencies and governmental organizations.
>
> MELIBEA has three main objectives:
>
> 	• 1. To establish indicators that reveal the strong and weak points
of institutional OA polices.
> 	• 2. To propose a methodology to guide institutions when they are
drawing up an institutional OA policy.
> 	• 3. To offer a tool for comparing the contents of policies between
institutions.
> The aim is not to be a ranking, but to offer a tool where to aanlyse and
visualize the weaknesses or strenghts of an institutional OA policy
based on its wording. It seems something trivial  but accomplishment of
a policy is based on its terms.
> Please if you detect any mistake or you would like to make a comment,
contact me. I will be pleased if you could check your policy, if any, to
analyse our approach.
> Best wishes
> Reme
>
>
> R. Melero
> IATA, CSIC
> Avda Agustín Escardino 7, 46980 Paterna (Valencia), Spain
> TEl +34 96 390 00 22. Fax 96 363 63 01
> E-mail rmelero at iata.csic.es
> http://www.accesoabierto.net


-- 
Zaida Chinchilla Rodr�guez
http://www.scimago.es/zaida/

CSIC, Instituto de Pol�ticas y Bienes P�blicos
http://www.iesam.csic.es/

Grupo SCImago
http://www.scimago.es
http://www.scimagojr.com
http://www.scimagoir.com
http://www.atlasofscience.net