27,646 research outputs found
UK Research Information Shared Service (UKRISS) Final Report, July 2014
No full textThe reporting of research information is a complex and expensive activity for research organisations (ROs). There is little alignment between funders of the reporting requests made to institutions and requests made to individual researchers about their research outputs and outcomes. This inevitably results in duplication and increased costs across the sector, whilst limiting the potential sharing and reuse of the information. The UK Research Information Shared Service (UKRISS) project conducted a feasibility and scoping study for the reporting of research information at a national level based on CERIF (Common European Research Information Format), with the objective of increasing efficiency, productivity and quality across the sector. The aim was to define and prototype solutions which are compelling, easy to use, have a low entry barrier, and support innovative information sharing and benchmarking. CERIF has emerged as the preferred format for expressing research information across Europe. To date, CERIF has been piloted for specific applications, but not as a format for reporting requirements across all UK ROs. The final report presents the work carried out by the UKRISS project, including requirements gathering, modelling and prototyping, as well as recommendation for sustainability. UKRISS was divided into two phases. Phase 1, mapping the reporting landscape, ran from March 2012 to December 2012. Phase 2, exploring delivery of potential solutions, began in February 2013 and ended in December 2013
The dark side of onward migration: Experiences and strategies of Italian-Bangladeshis in the UK at the time of the post-Brexit referendum
No full textDrawing on multisited qualitative research in Italy and the UK, this paper documents the dark side of onward migration and the experiences faced by Italian-Bangladeshis in the UK after the Brexit referendum. The findings show that compared to their position in Italy, Italian-Bangladeshis experienced a downgrading in symbolic, identity-related, and, specifically, socio-economic and cultural aspects in the UK society. The paper also uncovers the potential strategies that Italian-Bangladeshis intend to adopt in case they lose the special rights provided to them by EU citizenship after Brexit. Since the majority of them have moved to the United Kingdom to build a future for their children, they find themselves forced to further reconfigure their strategies and reactivate different degrees of mobility in order to avoid the loss of social rights (access to welfare, the status of citizens) and material resources (housing and better working conditions) that they have long assumed
For the Future of the Children? The Onward Migration of Italian Bangladeshis in Europe
No full textIn this study, we analyse the reasons for the onward migration of Bangladeshis in Italy to the UK after they obtain Italian citizenship. The findings of 51 in‐depth interviews and participant observation with Bangladeshi migrants with Italian citizenship in three cities of north‐eastern Italy and two cities of the UK indicate that Italian Bangladeshis move to the UK, not only for economic reasons, but also, to better manage the cultural and social reproduction of their family, particularly the second generation. This is indicative of the centrality of colonial legacy from a cultural and economic point of view. Since the UK has the biggest Bangladeshi diaspora, there are more opportunities for reproducing Bengali traditions and religious upbringing for their children. Additionally, Italian Bangladeshis also mentioned that providing British education to the next generation can increase their social status in their home country
The Europeanization of Interest Representation: A Strategic Decision-Making Analysis of UK Business and Environmental Interests
No full textThe point of departure for this paper is that the European Union (EU) has affected national politics, policies and polities. This process, labelled Europeanization, has led to changes in two interconnected political dimensions. First, it has led to modifications in the relationships between state and non-state actors within the national arena. Second, it has changed the interactions between the sub-national, national and supranational actors (state and non-state). To explore these propositions the paper conducts an analysis of the interest representation patterns exhibited by non-state actors. The paper compares firms (in the telecommunications, gas and electricity sectors) and environmental groups (focused on nature conservation or biodiversity policy), both based in the United Kingdom (UK), in order to determine how, to what extent and why Europeanization has affected their interest representation behaviour. The activities displayed by the two sets of interests are compared and contrasted in terms of chosen lobbying targets (i.e. national government departments and EU institutions), routes and allies (i.e. direct contact or via intermediaries such as Euro-groups) and the timing and character of the contact. Ideas and tools drawn from management science (i.e. strategic decision making analyses) are employed to assist in deriving the causal explanations for the Europeanized patterns of behaviour. It is argued that a combination of the three strategic decision making factors (i.e. internal organizational resources, objectives (and perceived rewards) and external political environments explain the contrasting behaviour of the firms and environmental groups
OAPEN-UK: an Open Access Business Model for Scholarly Monographs in the Humanities and Social Sciences
No full textThis paper presents the initial findings of OAPEN-UK, a UK research project gathering evidence on the social and technological impacts of an open access business model for scholarly monographs in the humanities and social sciences
IRUS-UK: making scholarly statistics count in UK repositories
No full textIRUS-UK is a new national standards-based statistics aggregation service for institutional repositories in the UK. The service processes raw usage data from repositories, consolidating those data into COUNTER-compliant statistics by following the rules of the COUNTER Code of Practice - the same code adhered to by the majority of scholarly publishers. This will, for the first time, enable UK repositories to provide consistent, comparable and trustworthy usage data, as well as supporting opportunities for benchmarking at a national level. This article provides some context to development, benefits and opportunities offered by the service, an institutional repository perspective and future plans
UK report recommends author payments for library ebook lending
No full textAn article on changes to the Public Lending Right for the lending of ebooks and its impact upon public libraries
Tilting at Windmills : BLDSC and the UK Higher Education Community
No full textPurpose - To provide an overview of, the relationship between the British Library and higher education libraries in the 1990s, with particular relation to document supply. It also goes on to explore current developments in scholarly communication. Design/methodology/approach - The author played a role in several of the events described and uses the available literature to enlarge on a personal view of that decade. Findings - The paper shows that the relationship was a strained one caused in part by a mismatch of resources, but is in any case dwarfed by the larger external forces and changing opportunities and technologies for scholarly communication. Originality/value - Provides a record of the period
Open access self-archiving: An author study
No full textThis, our second author international, cross-disciplinary study on open access had 1296 respondents. Its focus was on self-archiving. Almost half (49%) of the respondent population have self-archived at least one article during the last three years. Use of institutional repositories for this purpose has doubled and usage has increased by almost 60% for subject-based repositories. Self-archiving activity is greatest amongst those who publish the largest number of papers. There is still a substantial proportion of authors unaware of the possibility of providing open access to their work by self-archiving. Of the authors who have not yet self-archived any articles, 71% remain unaware of the option. With 49% of the author population having self-archived in some way, this means that 36% of the total author population (71% of the remaining 51%), has not yet been appraised of this way of providing open access. Authors have frequently expressed reluctance to self-archive because of the perceived time required and possible technical difficulties in carrying out this activity, yet findings here show that only 20% of authors found some degree of difficulty with the first act of depositing an article in a repository, and that this dropped to 9% for subsequent deposits. Another author worry is about infringing agreed copyright agreements with publishers, yet only 10% of authors currently know of the SHERPA/RoMEO list of publisher permissions policies with respect to self-archiving, where clear guidance as to what a publisher permits is provided. Where it is not known if permission is required, however, authors are not seeking it and are self-archiving without it. Communicating their results to peers remains the primary reason for scholars publishing their work; in other words,
researchers publish to have an impact on their field. The vast majority of authors (81%) would willingly comply with a mandate from their employer or research funder to deposit copies of their articles in an institutional or subject-based repository. A further 13% would comply reluctantly; 5% would not comply with such a mandate
RoMEO Studies 4: An analysis of Journal publishers' Copyright Agreements
No full textThis article is the fourth in a series of six emanating from the UK JISC-funded RoMEO Project (Rights Metadata for Open archiving). It describes an analysis of 80 scholarly journal publishers’ copyright agreements with a particular view to their effect on author self-archiving. 90% of agreements asked for copyright transfer and 69% asked for it prior to refereeing the paper. 75% asked authors to warrant that their work had not been previously published although only two explicitly stated that they viewed self-archiving as prior publication. 28.5% of agreements provided authors with no usage rights over their own paper. Although 42.5% allowed self-archiving in some format, there was no consensus on the conditions under which self-archiving could take place. The article concludes that author-publisher copyright agreements should be reconsidered by a working party representing the needs of both partie
- …
