Output – IncReASe: Case study: ePrints and RePEc

Title: Case study: ePrints and RePEc

Part of : https://rrtsynthesis.wordpress.com/2008/08/14/project-increase/

Number of pages or page numbers: Web page with linked documents


Date Released: October 2007

URI for Output: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/increase/eprints_repec.html

One view of the workflow has been written up as a Scenario http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/increase/RePEC_Scenario.pdf

Summary of contents:
This presents a case study of the process of setting up a repository to be harvested by RePEc – Research Papers in Economics (http://repec.org/)

RePEc uses a decentralised structure so does not require the redepositing of papers but requires the local (insititutional) repository to create a custom archive/file structure containing structured metadata about the archive, collections, and each paper.

IncReASe notes that creating the RePEc archive is not onerous but that the conversion of metadata for item records is timeconsuming The most time consuming element is the creation/ conversion of metadata for the individual items. ‘A DC – ReDIF export option from ePrints would be useful.’ The RePEc project provides illustrative example metadata/ rdf for the archive creation process.

Architecturally the RePEc archive could sit on a departmental database or with the Institutional Repository. IncReASe suggests that ‘Overall, a distributed architecture may be more feasible so that departments control – and have responsibility for updating – their information.’ They add that individuals may want to control their own information.


  • Good illustration of the cost of participation in a aggregator service.
  • Good illustration that desired services may not be using OAI-PMH.
  • Unsure of the viability of asking /expecting academics to do this themselves without supporting tools.

Update: see comment below


One Response

  1. Update:
    Project final report notes that, although IncReASe created their local RePEc archive manually, “converter scripts available for EPrints (and DSpace and Digital Commons)”


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: