| Internet access to electronic preprints in
| Internet access to electronic preprints in
15 March 1999
| The first electronic Economics preprint appeared in
||1993. Since then the growth has been dramatic as the use of the World Wide
||Web has exploded. RePEc has been instrumental in facilitating access to
||Economics preprints and in bringing order to the chaos that the WWW
||frequently represents. In a related effort S-WoPEc provides user friendly
||tools for adding data to the RePEc system. While this is significant in
||itself it has also been instrumental in fulfilling S-WoPEc's second
||goal--to provide increased exposure to Swedish Economics research.
|Electronic dissemination of Economics working papers can be traced back to
||April 1993 and the start of the Working Papers in Economics
||project. By March 1999 this single archive has grown into an
||interconnected network of over 60 archives holding over 13,000 downloadable
||papers and over 50,000 descriptions of offline papers from close to 1,000
||series, as well as data about over 4,000 academic Economics department and
||research institutes. We call this network of archives Research Papers in
||Economics or RePEc for short. All archives operate independently. There are
||several end user services in the form of databases and current awareness
||e-mail reports. RePEc will soon register authors and work towards a
||relational database that describes the output of the discipline.
RePEc archives range in size and scope from small departmental archives
|providing a single working paper series to national initiatives providing
||data about working papers from several universities and research
||organisations. Swedish Working Papers in Economics,
||S-WoPEc is an example of such a national initiative.
||The aim of S-WoPEc is to give exposure to Swedish Economics research by
||acting as a facilitator for organisations' provision of electronic working
||papers. S-WoPEc operates a web site giving access to Swedish Economics
||working papers, provides tools for entering and maintaining the
||bibliographic data about working papers and optionally hosts the full text
||files. This approach to promoting electronic publication has proven quite
||successful and Sweden has one of the highest participation rates in RePEc.
The remainder of the paper is organised as follows. In Section
|2 we describe the historical background
||before the foundation of RePEc. In Section 3 we discuss
||some important aspects of RePEc. Section 4
||S-WoPEc, and Section 5
||concludes the paper.
2: Historical Background
|RePEc is essentially an initiative of the NetEc project. The NetEc project
||was founded in February 1993, by Thomas Krichel. At the outset NetEc was
||conceived as a collection of projects to help the distribution of research
||results in Economics via the Internet. Economists had been exchanging
||preprints or "working papers" as they are more commonly known for a long
||time in printed form. There were no electronic working papers at the time
||when NetEc was founded. However a donation of Fethy Mili of Université
||de Montréal made bibliographic data about 250 working paper series
||available. The data for some series went back as far as 1988. The first
||gopher servers allowed to store data in a way that an uninitiated user
||could easily retrieve it. Manchester Computing Centre donated disk space
||and CPU time. Geoff Lane, their system administrator, managed to build a
||facility for WAIS database queries on the gopher system soon after the
||start of the project. This was a state of the art system at the time.
||However this medium was not much used. The main usage of the data came
||through mailing current awareness data to the
||(yes, a bitnet address) mailing list for academic economists. The project
||dealing with printed papers was called
||BibEc. BibEc was NetEc's first
In April 1993, "MatClass: a Matrix Class for C++" by Chris Birchenhall
|became the world's first electronic Economics working paper. This single
||paper would have been lost in the over 5,000 items strong dataset about the
||printed papers. A separate name WoPEc was invented for the collection of
||downloadable papers. On the gopher screen the presentation of WoPEc was
||quite primitive. Each paper was represented by two lines. The first line
||showed the name of the author(s). Selecting that line lead to the
||bibliographic information. That would be the author, title, sometimes
||abstract, Journal of Economics Literature (JEL) classification, etc. The
||second line showed the title of the paper and when the user hit this line
||the full text of the paper was delivered to her machine.
The text of the paper, usually in PostScript format, was not necessarily
|held on the Manchester site. Instead it could have been on any other
||machine. Although WoPEc started off as collection of papers--simply
||because it was the first collection of its kind to open--it has
||focused on the collection of metadata about papers rather than the papers
||themselves. This shift of activity became more prominent since July
||1993 when the "Economics Working Paper Archive" opened at
||http://econwpa.wustl.edu sponsored by Washington University in
||St. Louis. As suggested by the name, this site claimed to be a central
||archive for working papers in Economics. This vision was imported from High
||Energy Physics, where the
||XXX Archive collects
||all papers on a central site. To establish the same degree of coordination
||among economists seems to be more difficult, there are nowadays (early
||1999) several hundreds of web and ftp servers with online working
||papers. (Some are homepages of authors, others are organised by
|| academic departments or research centres. In some rare cases we find
|| common catalogues of participating institutions, for example the US
|| Federal Reserve have the Fed in Print catalogue of publications issued by
|| the regional banks.) Our theory is that economists have a built-in
||distrust of monopolies. In their book of tales, there are numerous accounts
||of the welfare losses caused by monopoly supply. They may also be afraid
||of the power accumulated by a person who controls a hard disk where the
||complete output of the discipline is stored. That is why a centralised
||system has problems to reach broad acceptance. That does not only hold for
||an archive that stores papers, it also affects the collection of metadata
||about holdings on local sites, i.e., the work WoPEc was primarily concerned
||with. Right from the start Thomas Krichel believed that a distributed
||database protocol was the way of the future in order to allow a many
||institutions to contribute to WoPEc without need for extensive
||coordination. In that way each institution would keep its own papers on its
||own server, and a user would be able to query many servers. Such a
||protocol started to appear in 1994 with the whois++ protocol. In Summer
||1995, José Manuel Barrueco Cruz
||and Thomas Krichel converted the dataset
||to the format proposed by the Internet Anonymous Ftp Archive (IAFA) working
||group of the Internet Engineering Task Force. These were meant to be
||compatible with the whois++ protocol. The IAFA data was converted to static
||web pages. These web page were indexed with WAIS.
In the spring of 1995 the US mirror of BibEc
|and WoPEc appeared at Washington University of
||St.. Louis, and a
||Japanese mirror at
||Hitotsubashi University Tokyo
||was added in the autumn of that year. In
||1996, WoPEc was awarded funding by the Joint Information Systems Committee
||(JISC) of the UK Higher Education Funding
||Councils. José Manuel Barrueco Cruz, who was working on the project as a
||volunteer before, took the post of project manager. The objectives of the
||JISC funding where two-fold, first to raise the total stock of papers in
||WoPEc above the 1,000 papers held before the start of the funding period,
||and second to increase the participation of UK universities. For the first
||objective the project was very successful, by the middle of the following
||year, the stock had increased to 4,500. But the response from UK
||institutions was sluggish. In late 1996, Thomas Krichel initiated contacts
||between the Royal Library of Sweden and Sune Karlsson that lead to the
||initial funding of the S-WoPEc project. In early 1997, the Dutch
||DEGREE working paper publishing
||consortium agreed to participate in the exchange of working paper data.
||With three institutions working together, it was felt that a protocol
||should be established that would allow the participants to exchange data
||without need for extensive coordination. Another aim was to separate the
||collection of data and the implementation of the data in user services. A
||set of archives would provide data on papers. The full text of these papers
||would live in the archives or on other publicly accessible computer
||systems, or simply be offline. Robot software was to be written to mirror
||these archives. Thomas Krichel prepared draft protocols. These were
||adopted at a meeting on between DEGREE, S-WoPEc and WoPEc in Guildford on
||12 May 1997. These protocols--with very minor
||modifications--are still used by RePEc today.
|The nature of RePEc is not precisely defined, but RePEc is most commonly
||understood as referring to three things. First it is a collection of
||archives that provide data about Economics. Second it is the data that is
||found on these archives. Third, it is often also understood to represent the
||persons and institutions building archives and providing the data. RePEc
||has no formal management structure.
RePEc has two aims. The "library aim" is to provide a complete
|description of the Economics discipline that is available on the Internet.
||The "publishing aim" is to provide free
||access to Economics
||resources on the Internet. (These aims are sometimes conflicting.
|| For example, assume that a certain amount of money is available for
|| cataloguing purposes. Then the library objective might be best served by
|| using these funds to gather information about a high-quality toll-gated
|| journal resource, whereas the publishing objective would be better served
|| by considering a collection that is on the Internet and may not be of the
|| same quality since it has not yet been extensively peer-reviewed.) By
||"free" we mean that the provider, rather than the
||RePEc has no peer-reviewing aim, however it can be used to support peer
RePEc is based on the following principle
|| ---> One dataset
|| ---> Many services
The collection of material within RePEc is decentralised. Each
|participating provider provides an archive on a http or ftp server that
||will allow the storage of structural data about objects relevant to
||Economics, and possibly the storage of some of the objects themselves. We
||will examine the structure of an archive in
Robot software is used to unite the various archives. The key concept here
|is the "site", which is a unification--on a single
||machine--of a local archive and one or more remote archives that are
||mirrored. If a site mirrors all archives known to RePEc then it has access
||to the complete RePEc dataset. The contents of the RePEc archives forms a
||single dataset, where each component is identified. Therefore a relational
||structure can be put in place. We will detail the basic logical structure
||of the relational model in Subsection 3.2. Some details of that structure have yet to be
RePEc sites are used to build user services. There is no official user
|service for RePEc. We will look at some user services in Subsection
3.1: The structure of an archive
RePEc stands on two pillars. First, a template format inspired by the IAFA
|templates called ReDIF. This acronym stands for something like
||Research Documentation Information
||Format but it is best understood as a literal. ReDIF defines a
||number of templates. Each templates has a set of allowable fields, some are
||mandatory, and some may be repeated. The second pillar is the Guildford
||protocol. It fixes rules how to store ReDIF in an archive. It is possible
||to deploy ReDIF without using the Guildford protocol. But in the following
||we will ignore this conceptual distinction, because it is easiest to
||understand the structure and contents of an archive through an example.
RePEc identifies each archive by a simple identifier or handle. Here we look
|at the archive RePEc:sur which lives at
||ftp://www.econ.surrey.ac.uk/pub/RePEc/sur. On the root directory of
||the archive, two files are mandatory. The file surarch.rdf
||contains a single ReDIF archive template.
|Template-type: ReDIF-Archive 1.0
||Name: University of Surrey Economics Department
||Description: This archive provides research papers from the
|| Department of Economics of the University of Surrey, in the U.K.
||In this file we find the basic information about the archive. The other
||mandatory file is surseri.rdf. This must contain one
||or more series templates.
|Template-Type: ReDIF-Series 1.0
||Name: Surrey Economics Online Papers
||Publisher-Name: University of Surrey, Department of Economics
||Maintainer-Name: Thomas Krichel
||The papers for the series RePEc:sur:surrec are confined to a directory
||surrec. It may contain files of any type. Any file ending in
||".rdf" is considered to contain ReDIF templates.
||Let us consider one of them,
|| suppress the Abstract: field to conserve space.)
|Template-Type: ReDIF-Paper 1.0
||Title: Dynamic Aspect of Growth and Fiscal Policy
||Author-Name: Thomas Krichel
||Author-Name: Paul Levine
||Author-WorkPlace-Name: University of Surrey
||Classification-JEL: C61; E21; E23; E62; O41
||The pair (File-URL:, File-Format:) could be repeated any
||number of times. An additional File-Function: field may be added to indicate
||the status of the file within the paper. Note that in this example the full
||text of the paper is located within the archive directory structure itself.
||Therefore the full text is mirrored together with the bibliographic data.
||Services can then link to a mirrored copy of the full text. If the URL of
||the paper would point to a place outside the archive structure, the link to
||the full text would always point to that location.
There is a central archive RePEc:all, that mirrors all the
|???arch.rdf and ???seri.rdf files from all archives. It
||also contains the software that allows sites to mirror archives. RePEc:all
||also provides reading and checking software for templates as well as
||general RePEc documentation. This archive lives at
3.2: The relational structure
RePEc views the discipline as a set of four basic elements that are in
|relation to each other. The basic model can be represented in the following
Here the "paper" can be a preprint or a "published" article, a book,
|piece of software, a dataset etc. The types most frequently found now are
||preprints and articles, but there are already some software components in
||the RePEc dataset. The "collection" can be any set of papers grouped
||together. At the moment the collection definition as used in RePEc
||comprises preprint series and journals of "published" articles. Note
||that each of the papers is initially part of a single series. In principle
||the collection concept could be used to allow for peer review by placing the
||works that are reviewed in a separate collection. However it would also be
||possible to add a review type in the relational framework.
At the time of writing the personal information is built into the templates
|of the papers. There are however efforts being made to allow for the separation
||of personal information. Soon we will see things like
|Template-Type: ReDIF-Person 1.0
||Name: Thomas Krichel
||and we can replace the author information for the first author in the paper
||template for RePEc:sur:surrec:9601 by
|Author-Name: Thomas Krichel
||The benefit of this system are clear. There is a much reduced load on
||administration of the system. When the phone number of an author changes,
||this change has to be registered at only one point in the system. A
||pervasive use of these relational features will allow the resolution of
||current author information through the current person template of the
||author. The user of a RePEc service would therefore find the author of the
||paper, even though the contact information on the papers' title
||may no longer be current.
Finally the institution can be thought of as a set of persons just like the
|collection is a set of papers. Author registration services will use the
||institution data that RePEc has already collected.
3.3: User service
The implicit ability and explicit intention to allow for many user services
|at a time is a key features of RePEc. The disadvantage of this approach is
||that RePEc is a more abstract concept to understand than say an archive
||like XXX where storage and user service are linked together. However this
||provides an important selling point once a potential provider understands
||that submitting data to RePEc means submitting the data to all the user
||services at once. Here we list the most important user services in order of
| provide static html pages for all working papers that are only
||available in print (BibEc) and all papers that are available electronically
||(WoPEc). Both datasets use the same search engines. There are three search
||engines, a full text WAIS engine, a fielded search engine based on mSQL and
||a ROADS fielded search engine. Both are mirrored in the United States and
||Japan as part of the NetEc project.
| provides a browsable index of the institution data
||in RePEc. This service is also mirrored by NetEc.
| provides an Excite index of static html pages that represent all
||Paper, Article and Software templates. This is by far the most popular RePEc
|NEP: New Economics Papers|
| is set of reports on new additions of papers to RePEc.
||Each report is edited by subject specialists who receive information on all
||new additions and then filter out the papers that are relevant to the
||subject of the report. These subject specialists are PhD students and young
||researchers. They work as volunteers.
|provides an index of RePEc data, but also allows a simultaneous search
||in indexes of other web pages related to Economics.
Finally note that a Z39.50 server for all downloadable papers in RePEc is
|available at dbiref.kub.nl:9997. The database name is "repref". The
||attribute set is Bib-1, and the record syntax supported are USmarc, SUTRS,
||GRS-1 (only string tags, tag type 3).
S-WoPEc and it's sister site S-WoBA have two basic and complimentary aims.
|The first is give exposure to and increase the awareness of Swedish
||research in Economics and Business Administration. The second is to
||facilitate and encourage participation in RePEc.
By combining these two features participation in S-WoPEc becomes
|very attractive. A university department or research institute gets
||assistance in putting its research output online and at the same time gets
||enhanced exposure. As a result all major and many minor Swedish Economics
||research organisations participate in S-WoPEc less than two years after the
||launch of the site. S-WoBA has recently been launched and the participation is
||considerably lower. Similarly to S-WoPEc we expect this to change rapidly.
4.1: Making research visible
Towards the first aim RePEc end user services featuring the Swedish
|contribution to RePEc are provided at http://swopec.hhs.se/ and
||http://swoba.hhs.se/. Compared to the old paper based distribution
||system for preprints these sites are extremely successful, averaging
||between two and three thousand unique downloads of full text files a
||month. The synergy effects from participating in S-WoPEc and S-WoBA are
||obvious. Very few organisations can provide the richness of material
||available at S-WoPEc on their own. By participating an organisation adds to
||the attractiveness of the site and benefits from the large number of
||visitors attracted by the critical mass of the site.
In addition, the data about the papers are automatically included in the
|S-WoPEc or S-WoBA RePEc archives and are thus locatable through RePEc
||services such as WoPEc, IDEAS and NEP.
At S-WoPEc and S-WoBA the abstract of each paper is presented a as static html
|page generated from metadata stored as a ReDIF template. Where available,
||the abstract page links to full text files stored locally on the S-WoPEc
||server or a server maintained by the participating organisation. A fielded
||search facility is implemented using meta tags in the html pages.
|4.1.1: Dublin Core|
S-WoPEc and S-WoBA make heavy use of Dublin
|Core. Where applicable the meta tags used for the
||fielded search are based on Dublin Core. Most of the metadata is, in fact,
||stored in the html documents using Dublin Core meta tags. This allows
||Dublin Core aware search engines to extract structured data and provides
||for more precise searches.
As of yet there are relatively few Dublin Core aware search engines but we
|expect this to change as the use of Dublin Core increases. A notable
||example of a Dublin Core aware search engine is
||which indexes research related html pages on
||the webservers of Swedish universities including the S-WoPEc and S-WoBA
||servers. The research of participating organisations is thus included in
||SAFARI without any extra effort on the organisations' part.
|4.1.2: Library systems|
In addition to being searchable in various RePEc services and Internet
|search engines, the papers contributed to S-WoPEc and S-WoBA are catalogued
||in LIBRIS, the union catalogue of Swedish research libraries. The LIBRIS WWW
||interface is available at http://www.libris.kb.se. When using the WWW
||interface the user can directly access the abstracts and downloadable files
||at S-WoPEc and S-WoBA through links.
4.2: Facilitating participation in RePEc
Running a RePEc archive can, depending on the resources and technical
|know-how available, be a daunting proposition. To facilitate the
||contribution of data to RePEc, S-WoPEc and S-WoBA provides a streamlined
||process for entering or modifying data about preprints and uploading full
||text files to the servers.
The user interface is implemented using html forms and Perl CGI scripts and
|is thus platform independent. Data is entered in simple forms and is
||validated to ensure that syntactically correct ReDIF templates are written.
||In this process we distinguish between two types of users, authors and
||working paper coordinators (WP-coordinator). Authors as well
||WP-coordinators can submit data about a paper to S-WoPEc or S-WoBA but the
||author submitted papers must be approved by the participating
||organisation's WP-coordinator before the data about the paper is made
||available. This is to safeguard against papers being added to the wrong
||series by mistake. Some organisations choose to disable author submission
||of data and delegate this work to a few persons within the organisation.
In the description of the process we will take S-WoPEc as an example. The
|procedure is identical for S-WoBA.
|4.2.1: Collecting working paper metadata|
This script lives at
|series is the RePEc series identifier). When MetaData.pl (as well as
||Update.pl and Upload.pl) is called without the s=series argument the
||user is presented with a form where the series can be selected.
The script reads the configuration file for the series and presents a html
|form for collecting the basic metadata about the paper. At this stage a
||WP-coordinator can enter his/her password and the number of the working
||paper. On submit, the information is checked and the submitter can correct
||erroneous data and add missing required information. When there are no
||remaining errors, the information is pretty printed back and the user is
||given the opportunity to correct any mistakes or commit the data. If a
||WP-coordinator is submitting the information there are buttons for providing
||data for additional papers and uploading files for the paper. The latter
||takes the WP-coordinator directly to the upload form.
When the information is committed the script takes the following actions:
| Assigns the author access code to the paper.
|| Writes a ReDIF paper template for the paper
| If the submitter is not a WP-coordinator:
| Writes the collected information to a temporary ReDIF paper template
||with a name based on the author access code for the paper.
|| E-mails the collected information to the WP-coordinator and asks for
||verification of the paper. This verification is provided by replying to the
||e-mail with the text of the original e-mail quoted and adding the WP-number
||to the appropriate line of the quoted text. If the paper does not belong to
||the series the WP-coordinator indicates this by entering 'delete' on the
|| If the submitter is a WP-coordinator:
| Writes the collected information to a permanent ReDIF paper template
|| E-mails the WP-number and password for the paper together with
||instructions for uploading the paper and updating the information about the
||paper to the submitter and optionally the authors for which we have an
|| The writing of an abstract html file and update of the appropriate
||index page is scheduled by sending an e-mail which is later read by the
||scheduled script MailCheck.pl.
The ReDIF paper template A few non-standard fields are added to the ReDIF paper template
|X-MyEmail: e-mail of submitter
||X-PW: author access code assigned to WP
||X-Series-Code: the RePEc series identifier
If a WP-coordinator submits the data all fields for which data is available
|are written to the template file. (The scripts doesn't allow committing
||data until there is data for all required fields.)
When an author submits data, the number of the working paper isn't available
|and the Number: and Handle: fields are not written to the temporary template
||file. The temporary template file is promoted to a permanent template and
||the paper is added to the archive when the Working Paper Coordinator assigns
||a number to the paper by replying to the e-mail in 2.a.ii.
|4.2.2: Scheduled processing|
The script MailCheck.pl runs at regular intervals, currently on the hour
|from 08:00 to 22:00, and reads incoming mail. This incoming mail signals
||actions that MailCheck.pl should take. There are currently three actions
||that MailCheck.pl recognises.
| Promote a temporary template to a permanent one.
This is signalled by the Working Paper Coordinator replying to an e-mail
|sent from the script account (2.a.ii above).
The information needed to locate the temporary template file and the number
|assigned to the paper is extracted from the e-mail and verified. If the
||data is valid a permanent template file is written, html files are
||generated for the paper and a notification mail to the submitter and
||authors is sent. Otherwise a new mail is sent to the WP Coordinator asking
||for correct data or (depending on the type of the error) the e-mail is
||forwarded to an S-WoPEc administrator for human intervention.
|| Reject a paper
This occurs when the word delete is added on the Number: line instead of a
|number for the working paper.
||The temporary paper template is deleted and the submitter is notified by
|| Generate html files for a working paper.
A html for the abstract of the paper is written and the index html file
|for the year of the working paper is updated.
|4.2.3: File upload|
This script provides the forms interface for uploading full text and other
|files for the working paper. In the notification e-mail sent to authors
||upload instructions and a http URL providing transparent validation of the
||uploader is included. There is a similar URL for the WP coordinator giving
||access to the series, after access is granted the WP-coordinator can specify
||the number of the paper to work with.
Files can be uploaded using http file upload or the URL for files stored on
|the organisations own server can be supplied. In the latter case S-WoPEc
||links to the organisations server and does not keep a copy of the file on
||the S-WoPEc server.
When working with file uploads we divide the files in two groups: ''full
|text'' files which provide content corresponding to the printed
||version of the working paper. This may be a single Word document, a Word
||document together with a file containing Excel charts, a LaTeX file and so
||on. The second group is ''additional files'' containing supplemental
||material such as datasets and source code for computational routines used
||in the paper. This is a distinction not present in ReDIF itself
||and the purpose is mainly to provide more information to the users of
Apart from the name of the s the upload script gives the user the
|opportunity to provide some additional information about the files; a
||description of the content and the type (format) of file (e.g. a Word
||document or a SPSS dataset).
When this information is submitted it is added to the paper template as the
File-X-Desc: description of content supplied by uploader
File-X-FileFormat: type/format of the file
In addition we ask for the e-mail address of the uploader and this will
|replace the previous content of the X-MyEmail: field in the paper template.
Linking to other servers
When the user provides a URL for a file on a non S-WoPEc server the URL is
|first verified by the script. If it is correct the URL is
||added to the paper template and a new abstract html page with a link to the
||downloadable file is written.
HTTP file upload
With HTTP file upload it is not practical to enforce that the description
|of the content of the file and the type of file is supplied. When no e-mail
||address is supplied this is replaced with the IP number of the uploader,
||thus providing some means of identification. On the other hand we will know
||when the file is uploaded and we know the names of the files. In addition,
||the browser will in most cases provide us with the MIME type of the
||uploaded file. This give us essentially the same information as when the
||uploader provides information about the type/format of the file.
With http file upload we will thus add three more fields to the paper template:
|File-X-OrgName: name supplied by uploader
||File-X-LocalName: Name of file as stored on the server
||File-X-MIME: MIME type as supplied by the browser
||On a successful upload the uploaded files and their file sizes (providing a
||minimal check on the success of the upload) are printed back to the uploader
||and a summary of the available files is given.
||If a failure is detected any uploaded files are discarded, an error message
||is printed and the upload form is presented again.
Finally an e-mail notification about the uploaded files is sent to the
|archive administrator. S-WoPEc staff then convert the uploaded full text
||files to postscript and pdf as appropriate and package the additional files
||into a ZIP archive. The files are moved to the series online file directory
||on the web server. When this is completed File-URL:, File-Format: and
||possibly File-Function: fields are written to the template and the publicly
||available template in S-WoPEc's RePEc archive is updated.
Removing online files
In order to comply with copyright restrictions when a working paper is
|published, the author or WP-coordinator must be able to remove the full
||text online files if this is needed.
Upload.pl and Update.pl list the available online files when the script is
|first called and offer the option to remove files. Files are removed in
||groups, i.e. all the full text files can be removed or all the additional
||files can be removed (this should never be necessary). When removing the
||files the corresponding fields in the paper template are removed and files
||on the web site are deleted. A notification e-mail is then sent to the
||authors and the submitter, informing them that online files have been
|4.2.4: Revising the metadata and adding publication information|
The script Update.pl provides means for updating the working paper metadata
|and adding information about published versions of the paper. As for
||Upload.pl there is a transparent http URL in the e-mails sent to authors
||and submitters of data and the WP-coordinator has access to the script
||using the coordinator password for the series.
After the user has been validated the scripts presents the available
|information about the paper; the metadata about the working paper, any
||uploaded files and publication information. The user is given the options
||to revise available information, upload new files, remove current on line
||files and to add or revise publication information.
The are currently three types of publications; Article for journal articles,
|Book and Chapter for publications in proceedings volumes, reprint volumes
||and other collections of papers. The processing follow the same lines as for
||the original submission or revision of metadata. The data are saved to
||Article, Book and Chapter templates.
|4.2.5: Feedback to authors|
As the success of S-WoPEc and RePEc in general depends on the willingness
|of authors and organisations to contribute data it is important that they
||are made fully aware of the exposure and value added provided by S-WoPEc
||and RePEc. To this end we gather access statistics on a per paper basis
||from the http logs and send monthly e-mails to the authors and
||WP-coordinators summarising the accesses for each paper or organisation. In
||our experience this feedback is appreciated and has a tendency to arouse
||the authors' competitive spirits.
The decentralised RePEc model for providing data about research related
|activities has proved to be extremely successful in Economics. In the short
||time span of 2 years it has gained wide acceptance within the discipline
||and is now the premier source of information about recent research in
||Economics. This is in contrast with the monolithic xxx.lanl.gov model of
||Internet-based preprint distribution which has failed to catch on in
||Economics. The xxx model, represented by EconWPA, still play a useful role
||in Economics as it provides one way of adding data to the RePEc system.
||But our experience suggests that different models suit different
||disciplines, depending on the traditions of the discipline.
RePEc is broader in scope than other initiatives we are aware of.
|Distribution of preprints is just one--though
||important--aspect of the research process that RePEc collects data
||about. In addition, RePEc promotes innovation in the area of end user
||services. Any participating archive can use the data to provide it's own
||brand of end user service with unique capabilities, user interface or
||criteria for which material to include.
Participating in RePEc is not without effort although it should be clear
|that the benefits more than compensate for the effort. Still, the efforts
||required for the initial set up and maintenance of a RePEc archive may be
||viewed as too large by some organisations. S-WoPEc demonstrates one
||successful way of lowering the threshold for participating in RePEc by
||providing a streamlined process for entering metadata and relieving
||organisations of the requirement to run their own archive.
| discussed here has received financial support by the Joint
|| Information Systems Committee of the UK Higher Education Funding
|| Councils through its Electronic Library Programme
|| (RePEc/WoPEc) and the Swedish Royal Library through its BIBSAM office
|| (S-WoPEc). The authors are grateful for comments by Bob Parks.