Sustaining Scholarly Infrastructures through Collective Action: The Lessons that Olson can Teach us

Authors

  • Cameron Neylon Centre for Culture and Technology, Curtin University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5334/kula.7

Keywords:

infrastructure, financing, governance, collective action, scholarship

Abstract

The infrastructures that underpin scholarship and research, including repositories, curation systems, aggregators, indexes and standards, are public goods. Finding sustainability models to support them is a challenge due to free-loading, where someone who does not contribute to the support of an infrastructure nonetheless gains the benefit of it. The work of Mancur Olson (1965) suggests that there are only three ways to address this for large groups: compelling all potential users, often through some form of taxation, to support the infrastructure; providing non-collective (club) goods to contributors that are created as a side-effect of providing the collective good; or implementing mechanisms that lower the effective number of participants in the negotiation (oligopoly).

In this paper, I use Olson’s framework to analyse existing scholarly infrastructures and proposals for the sustainability of new infrastructures. This approach provides some important insights. First, it illustrates that the problems of sustainability are not merely ones of finance but of political economy, which means that focusing purely on financial sustainability in the absence of considering governance principles and community is the wrong approach. The second key insight this approach yields is that the size of the community supported by an infrastructure is a critical parameter. Sustainability models will need to change over the life cycle of an infrastructure with the growth (or decline) of the community. In both cases, identifying patterns for success and creating templates for governance and sustainability could be of significant value. Overall, this analysis demonstrates a need to consider how communities, platforms, and finances interact and suggests that a political economic analysis has real value.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Cameron Neylon, Centre for Culture and Technology, Curtin University

Cameron Neylon is a one-time biomedical scientist who has moved into the humanities via Open Access and Open Data advocacy. His research and broader work focusses on how we can make the institutions that support research sustainable and fit for purpose for the 21st century and how the advent of new communications technology is a help (and in some cases a hindrance) for this.

References

Addgene. n.d. ‘Addgene: How to Order.’ Addgene. Accessed March 2017. https://www.addgene.org/ordering/. Archived at: https://perma.cc/2YZ4-8AC8.

Bastow, Ruth, and Sabina Leonelli. 2010. ‘Sustainable Digital Infrastructure.’ EMBO Reports 11(10): 730–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2010.145

Berman, Helen M. 2008. ‘The Protein Data Bank: A Historical Perspective.’ Acta Crystallographica Section A: Foundations of Crystallography 64(1): 88–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S0108767307035623

Berman, Helen M., Gerard J. Kleywegt, Haruki Nakamura, and John L. Markley. 2012. ‘The Protein Data Bank at 40: Reflecting on the Past to Prepare for the Future.’ Structure 20(3): 391–96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2012.01.010

Bilder, Geoffrey, Jennifer Lin, and Cameron Neylon. 2015. ‘Principles for Open Scholarly Infrastructures-V1.’ Figshare. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.1314859

Bollier, David, and Silke Helfrich. 2015. ‘Overture.’ In: Patterns of Commoning, edited by David Bollier and Silke Helfrich, 1–12. Amherst, MA: Levellers Press.

Bruno, Ian, and Suzanna Ward. 2016a. ‘Sustaining Access to Research Data through Value-Added Services and Software.’ In SciDataCon. Denver. http://www.scidatacon.org/2016/sessions/45/paper/148/.

Bruno, Ian, and Suzanna Ward. 2016b. ‘Witness Statement – CCDC.’ SciDataCon Session: Witness Statements on Repository Business Models. http://wiki.codata.org/w/images/wiki.codata.org/8/8d/SciDataCon-45-Business_Models-CCDC_statement.pdf.

Buchanan, James M. 1965. ‘An Economic Theory of Clubs.’ Economica 32(125): 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2552442

Byrd, R. Andrew, Helen M. Berman, Stephen K. Burley, Gerard J. Kleywegt, John L. Markley, Haruki Nakamura, and Sameer Velankar. 2016. ‘Economics and Impact of the Protein Data Bank (PDB) Archive.’ In: SciDataCon. Denver. http://www.scidatacon.org/2016/sessions/45/paper/91/.

Crossref. 2009. ‘The Formation of Crossref: A Short History.’ https://www.crossref.org/pdfs/CrossRef10Years.pdf.

Crow, Raym. 2013. ‘Sustainability of Open Access Services. Phase 3: The Collective Provision of Open Access Resources.’ Knowledge Exchange. http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/6206/1/Sustainability%2BOA%2BServices%2Bphase%2B3.pdf.

Ember, Carol, and Robert Hammisch. 2013. ‘Sustaining Domain Repositories for Digital Data: A White Paper.’ ICPSR. http://datacommunity.icpsr.umich.edu/sites/default/files/WhitePaper_ICPSR_SDRDD_121113.pdf.

Europe Pubmed Central. n.d. ‘Joining Europe PMC.’ Europe Pubmed Central. Accessed March 2017. https://europepmc.org/Joining. Archived at: https://perma.cc/4Z53-U9QX.

Europe Pubmed Central. 2016. ‘Europe PMC Annual Report 2015.’ Hinxton: European Bioinformatics Institute. https://europepmc.org/docs/Europe_PMC_Annual_Report_2015.pdf.

Europe Pubmed Central, Europe. 2015. ‘Europe PMC: A Full-Text Literature Database for the Life Sciences and Platform for Innovation.’ Nucleic Acids Research 43(D1): D1042–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku1061

Greenhouse Associates. 2004. ‘Business Impact of the Digital Object Identifier (DOI).’ http://www.greenhousegrows.com/publications/#id_of_div6.

Groom, Colin R., Ian J. Bruno, Matthew P. Lightfoot, and Suzanna C. Ward. 2016. ‘The Cambridge Structural Database.’ Acta Crystallographica Section B: Structural Science, Crystal Engineering and Materials 72(2): 171–79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2052520616003954

Haak, Laurel L., Martin Fenner, Laura Paglione, Ed Pentz, and Howard Ratner. 2012. ‘ORCID: A System to Uniquely Identify Researchers.’ Learned Publishing 25(4): 259–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1087/20120404

Hartley, John, and Jason Potts. 2014. Cultural Science. London: Bloomsbury 3PL.

Helfrich, Silke. 2015. ‘Patterns of Commoning: How We Can Bring about a Language of Commoning.’ In: Patterns of Commoning, edited by David Bollier and Silke Helfrich, 1–12. Amherst, MA: Levellers Press.

Huala, Eva, Tanya Berardini, Donghui Li, Robert Muller, Leonore Reiser, and Emily Strait. 2016a. ‘TAIR’s Successful Transition to a Sustainable Business Model.’ SciDataCon 2016. http://www.scidatacon.org/2016/sessions/45/paper/51/.

Huala, Eva, Tanya Berardini, Donghui Li, Robert Muller, Leonore Reiser, and Emily Strait. 2016b. ‘Witness Statement – TAIR.’ SciDataCon 2016 Session: Witness Statements on Repository Business Models. http://wiki.codata.org/w/images/wiki.codata.org/2/2f/Witness_statement-TAIR.pdf.

Kamens, Joanne. 2015. ‘The Addgene Repository: An International Nonprofit Plasmid and Data Resource.’ Nucleic Acids Research 43(D1): D1152–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku893

Larivière, Vincent, Stefanie Haustein, and Philippe Mongeon. 2015. ‘The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era.’ PLOS ONE 10(6): e0127502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127502

Lawson, Stuart. 2017. ‘Access, Ethics and Piracy.’ Insights 30(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.333

Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Reprinted edition of 1971. Princeton, NJ: Harvard University Press.

Ostrom, Elinor. 1991. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ostrom, Elinor. 2005. Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Paglione, Laura. 2016. ‘2016: The Year in Review.’ ORCID Blog. December 29, 2016. https://orcid.org/blog/2016/12/29/2016-year-review. Archived at: https://perma.cc/8PS6-EWCN.

Reiser, Leonore, Tanya Z. Berardini, Donghui Li, Robert Muller, Emily M. Strait, Qian Li, Yarik Mezheritsky, Andrey Vetushko, and Eva Huala. 2016. ‘Sustainable Funding for Biocuration: The Arabidopsis Information Resource (TAIR) as a Case Study of a Subscription-Based Funding Model.’ Database 2016 (January). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baw018

Smith, Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. London: W Strahan and T Cadell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oseo/instance.00043218

Star, Susan Leigh, and Karen Ruhleder. 1996. ‘Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces.’ Information Systems Research 7(1): 111–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.7.1.111

Wilson, David Sloan, Steven C. Hayes, Anthony Biglan, and Dennis D. Embry. 2014. ‘Evolving the Future: Toward a Science of Intentional Change.’ The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 37(4): 395–416. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X13001593

Downloads

Published

2017-12-27

How to Cite

Neylon, Cameron. 2017. “Sustaining Scholarly Infrastructures through Collective Action: The Lessons That Olson Can Teach Us”. KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies 1 (1):3. https://doi.org/10.5334/kula.7.

Issue

Section

Research Articles