Document Type : Articles


1 University of Calcutta

2 University of Burdwan

3 University of Kalyani


This paper analyzes and compares selected open access self-archiving policies of various repositories of elite organizations registered in OpenDOAR, ROAR, and ROARMAP databases to report a multi-faceted panoramic overview on open access archiving policy. This paper discusses three open-access policies, viz. archiving policies, version policies, and withdrawal policies against different parameters. These policies and related issues have been discussed based on existing scholarly literature and best practice guidelines available at the national and international levels. The purpose of this paper is to suggest best practice guidelines and to provide a roadmap for developing an institute-specific IDR (the institutional digital repository) in the line of global recommendations. A total of 161 repositories were selected after overlap checking and based on the selection parameters mentioned in the methodology section. All these policies mentioned above must be formulated properly as it is found that the majority of IDRs do not have such policy guidelines. Some of the key issues are not properly covered and missing in literature even within the policy. Finally, recommendations have been made against each policy to develop IDRs globally. The paper's outcomes will be useful to future researchers and policymakers who will set up IDRs or have already developed IDRs for their organization. The outputs/results of this study may be used as a guiding tool and helpful to the open-access advocates, including policymakers library professionals, in developing repository policy for their organization. The policy framework could also be adapted to any institution irrespective of size and geographic location.


  1. Armbruster, C. (2011). Open access policy implementation: first results compared. Learned Publishing, 24(4), 311–324. doi:10.1087/20110409
  2. Asamoah-Hassan, H. (2010). Alternative scholarly communication: management issues in a Ghanaian university. Library Management, 31(6), 420- 426.
  3. Aschenbrenner, A., & Kaiser, M. (2005). White Paper on Digital Repositories [White paper]. Retrieved from
  4. Ashworth, S., Mackie, M., & Nixon, W. J. (2004). The DAEDALUS Project, Developing institutional repositories at Glasgow University: The story so far. Library Review, 53(5), 259-264.
  5. Bailey, C. W., et al. (2006a). Institutional Repositories SPEC kit 292. Washington, D. C: Association of Research Libraries.
  6. Barton, M. R., & Waters, M. M. (2004-2005). Creating an institutional repository: LEADIRS Workbook . Cambridge, M. A: MIT.
  7. Baudoin, P., & Branschofsky, M. (2003). Implementing an institutional repository: the Dspace experience at MIT. Science & Technology Libraries, 24(1/2), 31-45.
  8. Berlin Declaration. (2003). Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. Retrieved from
  10. Bethesda Statement. (2003). Bethseda Statement on open access publication. Retrieved from
  11. Bjork, B.C., Roos, A., & Lauri, M. (2008). Global annual volume of peer reviewed scholarly articles and the share available via different Open Access options. In L.
  12. Chan & S. Mornati (Eds.), Open Scholarship: Authority, Community and Sustainability in the Age of Web 2.0: Proceedings of the International Conference of Electronic Publishing (June 25-27, Toronto, 2008) (pp.178-186). Canada:
  13. Bjork, B.C., et al. (2010). Open Access to the scientific journal literature: Situation 2009. PLoS ONE, 5(6). e11273. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011273
  14. BOAI [Budapest Open Access Initiative]. (2002). Read the Budapest Open Access Initiative. Budapest, Hungery: Open Society Institute, Soros Foundation. Retrieved from
  15. Cervone, H. F. (2004). The Repository Adventure. Library Journal, 129(10), 44- 46.
  16. Chan, D. L. H., Kwok, C. S. Y., & Yip, S. K. F. (2005). Changing roles of reference librarians: The case of the HKUST Institutional Repository. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 268-282.
  17. DINI. (2003). DINI-Certificate for Document and Publication Services. Retrieved from
  18. Gargouri, Y., et al. (2010). Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research. PLOS ONE, 5(10). e13636. Retrieved from
  19. Gibbons, S. (2004). Establishing an Institutional Repository. Library Technology Reports, 40(4), 1-68.
  20. Gibson, I. (2005). Overview of the House of Commons science and technology select committee inquiry into scientific publications. Serials, 18(1), 10-12.
  21. Graaf, M. V., & Eijndhoven, K. V. (2008). The European Repository Landscape. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
  22. Green, A., Macdonald, S., & Rice, R. (2009). Policy making for research data in repositories: a guide. Retrieved from
  23. Hajjem, C., Harnad, S., & Gingras, Y. (2005). Ten-Year Cross-Disciplinary Comparison
  24. of the Growth of Open Access and How it Increases Research Citation Impact. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin, 28(4), 39-47.
  25. Harnad, S. (2006a). Self-archiving should be mandatory. Research Information. ECS EPrints Repository. Retrieved from
  26. Harnad, S. (2006b). Optimizing OA Self-Archiving Mandates: What? Where? When? Why? How? Retrieved from
  27. Harnad, S. (2006c). Maximizing Research Impact Through Institutional and National Open-Access Self-Archiving Mandates. In K. Jeffrey (Ed.), Open Access Institutional Repositories: Proceedings of Current Research Information Systems (CRIS) (May 11-13, 2006, Bergen, Norway). Retrieved from
  28. HCSTCR [House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee]. (2004). Scientific publications: Free for all? Tenth Report. U. K: Science and Technology Committee, House of Commons. Retrieved from
  29. Johnson, R. K. (2002). Institutional repositories: partnering with faculty to enhance scholarly communication. D-Lib Magazine, 8(11). Retrieved from
  30. Jones, R., Andrew, T., & MacColl, J. (2006). The Institutional Repository. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.
  31. Kennan, M. A., & Kingsley, D. A. (2009). The state of the nation: A snapshot of Australian institutional repositories. First Monday, 14(2). Retrieved from
  32. Key Perspectives Ltd. (2005). Open access self-archiving: author study. Retrieved from
  33. Laakso, M. (2013). Journal publisher self‐archiving policies and the potential for growth in open access. Working paper, Hanken School of Economics: Helsinki, Finland. Retrieved from %20VersionGreenOa.pdf
  34. MedOANet. (2013). Guidelines for implementing open access policies for research performing and research funding organizations. Retrieved from
  35. Millington, P. (2006). Moving Forward with the OpenDOAR Directory. Talk presented at the 8th International Conference on Current Research Information Systems (May 11-13, 2006, Bergen). Retrieved from
  36. Nature Magazine. (2009). Open-access publishing gains another convert. Nature, 459 (7247), 627. Retrieved from 2009/090603/pdf/459627f.pdf
  37. OAIS [Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook]. (2012). Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook: Practical steps for implementing open access. Retrieved from
  38. Pappalardo, K., & Fitzgerald, A. (2007). A Guide to Developing Open Access Through Your Digital Repository. Version 2. Retrieved from files/OAK%20Law%20Project%20Repository%20Guide.pdf.
  39. Pickton, M., & Barwick, J. (2006). A Librarian's guide to institutional repositories. Loughborough University. Retrieved from
  41. Pickton, M., & McKnight, C. (2007). Is there a role for research students in an institutional repository? Some repository managers' views. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 39(3), 153-161.
  42. Pinfield, S. (2002). Creating institutional e-print repositories. Serials, 15(3), 261-264.
  43. Pinfield, S. (2004). Self-archiving publications. In G. E. Gorman & F. Rowland (Eds.), International yearbook of Library and Information Management 2004-2005: Scholarly publishing in an electronic era (pp. 118-145). London: Facet.
  44. Pinfield, S. (2005). A mandate to self archive? The role of open access institutional repositories. Serials, 18(1), 30-34.
  45. Probets, S., & Jenkins, C. (2006). Documentation for Institutional Repositories. Learned Publishing, 19(1), 57–71.
  46. Rieh, S. Y., et. al. (2008). Perception and Experiences of staff in the planning and implementation of IR. Library Trends, 57(2), 168-190.
  47. Rimkus, K., et al. (2014). Digital preservation file format policies of ARL member libraries: an analysis. D-Lib Magazine, 20(3/4). Retrieved from
  48. ROARMAP. (2020). Registry of Open Access Repository Mandates and Policies. Retrieved from
  49. Rowland, F., et al. (2004). Delivery, management, and access model for e-prints and open access journals. Serials Review, 30(4), 298-303.
  50. Roy, B. K. (2014). Designing Institutional Digital Repository for the University of Burdwan: A FLOSS Based Prototype. Doctoral dissertation.
  51. Roy, B. K. (2015). Institutional Digital Repository: From Policy to Practice. Germany: LAP.
  52. Sale, A. (2004). Comparison of content policies for institutional repositories in Australia. First Monday, 9(5). Retrieved from
  53. Sale, A. (2006a). Comparison of IR content policies in Australia. First Monday, 11(4). Retrieved from
  54. Sale, A. (2006c). The impact of mandatory policies on ETD acquisition. D–Lib Magazine, 12(4). Retrieved from
  55. Sanchez-Torrago, N. (2007). El movimiento de acceso abierto a la informacion y las politicas nacionales e institucionales de autoarchivo. ACIMED, 16(3). Retrieved fromϭsci_arttext&pidϭS1024-94352007000900005
  56. Shearer, K. (2005). CARL Institutional Repositories Project. Retrieved from
  57. Shearer, K. (2005). Institutional Repositories: The Evolution of Scholarly Communication. Retrieved from
  58. Swan, A., & Brown, S. (2005). Open Access Self-Archiving: An Author Study. Technical Report (pp. 1-104). U. K: Key Perspectives Ltd. Retrieved from
  59. Swan, A. (2006). The culture of Open Access: researchers’ views and responses. In N. Jacobs (Eds.), Open Access: Key Strategic, Technical and Economic Aspects (pp. 52-59). Oxford: Chandos.
  60. Swan, A., et al. (20015). Open access policy: numbers, analysis, effectiveness. Retrieved from
  61. UK Data Archive. (2008). Data Formats and Software. Essex: University of Essex. Retrieved from
  62. UGC [University Grants Commission], India. (2005). UGC (Submission of Metadata and Full-text of Doctoral Theses in Electronic Format) Regulations. Retrieved from
  63. Ware, M. (2004). Publisher and Library/Learning Solutions (PALS): Pathfinder Research on Web-Based Repositories: Final Report. Bristol: Mark Ware Consulting Ltd. Retrieved from
  64. Xia, J. (2009). Library Publishing as a New Model of Scholarly Communication. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 40(4), 370-383. doi: 10.3138/jsp.40.4.370