Report on Disciplinary Repositories

I've been doing some work with MPOW's Repository - just assisting with the data entry and checking, and therefore getting to know the software we are using.
I always like to know a little about what I'm doing beyond the bare basics, so I found this report very interesting.

We (obviously) have an institutional repository and it has been enthusiastically embraced by some researchers, but virtually ignored by others. As I know that research output is vitally important both financially and for kudos for both our institution and our researchers, I didn't really understand this. The report explains that there are numerous types of repositories (Institutional, disciplinary, those run by a funding body, the journal publisher, or a national focus). The report specifically looks at disciplinary repositories and shows why they are often more attractive and a natural fit for researchers than that of their own institution.
Disciplinary repositories are here to stay and the report raises a number of questions and gives hints on how Libraries can use the situation for the best benefit of their researchers.


Erway, Ricky. 2012. Lasting Impact: Sustainability of Disciplinary Repositories. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC Research. http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2012/2012-03.pdf.