BDTD – Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações ETD2012

Ana Pavani Member IEEE Laboratório de Automação de Museus, Bibliotecas Digitais e Arquivos Departamento de Engenharia Elétrica Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro Lima, Peru – Sep 13, 2012

12 years of ETDs in Brasil BDTD

BRAZIL

Population: million (UNDP Report 2010) Language: Portuguese

North: 7.95% pop 45.25% area North East: 7.95% pop 45.25% area Center West: 5.85% pop 18.8% area South: 14.53% pop 6.77% area South East: 42.33% pop 10.86% area Fed Distric: 1.33% pop 0.07% area

LITERACY MAP IN 2000

Why 2000? Because the first meeting to establish BDTD, the Brazilian National ETD Consortium, was held in January 2001.

What can we see in the maps? (1) Brazil is very big. (2) Brazilian regions are very different in terms of areas and of populations; (3) They are also very different in terms of educational levels.

Why is this important? It helps understand the beginning of BDTD and it shows how BDTD was important in terms of disseminating ETDs, digital publishing, IPR issues, etc.

ETDs IN BRAZIL

Before 2001

UFSC – Univ Federal de Santa Catarina USP – Universidade de São Paulo PUC-Rio – Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro

2001 & 2002

Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações ( Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações ( Created and run by IBICT – Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia ( Created and run by IBICT – Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia (

Main events:  Definition of a metadata set and a XML schema  First union catalog (Dec 2001)  Choice of the OAI-PMH – Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting ( to gather metadatahttp://

 Choice of the OAI-PMH – Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting ( to gather metadatahttp://  First union catalog using OAI-PMH (Dec 2002) – there were two additional institutions and between 1,700 and 2,000 metadata records  Development of the TEDE system for free and open distribution  Implementation of a training program

December 2004

Number of ETD programs: 10 Number of ETDs: 5,394

Nordeste: 18.18% proj 0.463% ETDs Sul: 18.18% proj % ETDs Sudeste: 45.46% proj % ETDs Distrito Fed: 18.18% proj 1.187% ETDs

In two years: (1) Number of ETD programs: 3  10; (2) Number of ETDs:  2,000   5,500;  2,000   5,500; (3) Number of regions: 2  4. (3) Number of regions: 2  4.

September 2012

Number of ETD programs: 96 Number of ETDs: 200,216

North: 6.1% proj 0.6% ETDs North East: 19.4% proj 12.8% ETDs Center West: 5.1% proj 2.1% ETDs South: 21.4% proj 18.3% ETDs South East: 44.9% proj 62.6% ETDs Fed District: 3.1% proj 3.6% ETDs

Dec 2004Sep 2012% Growth Programs ETDs5,394200,2163, There are ETD programs in all regions!!

Some characteristics of BDTD:  10% of the members hold 66.95% of the collection  The top 3 institutions hold 44.71% of the collection  The top 2 institutions have more than 30K ETDs  18.75% of the institutions have less than 100 ETDs

Some benefits BDTD brought:  The culture of ‘digital libraries’ was spread all over the (huge) country  Topics in IPR, restrictions and Open Access were addressed  The offer of references to researchers and graduate students increased  Brazilian T&D became more visible

 A metadata set for Brazilian ETDs was created  Brazilian institutions matured and became ready to introduce IR – Institutional Repositories and go beyond ETD (make available scholarly communications in general)

SOME ISSUES

Current

 Poor quality of metadata  Institutions whose collections grow at a very slow pace  Digital preservation  Lack of a common set of statistic to allow comparisons among collections  Commitment from institutions to keep programs and services

Near future

 Review of metadata model – is under discussion at the moment  Migration from TEDE to DSpace – some institutions  Repositories with multilingual interfaces

ETD CONSORTIA Pavani & Southwick (ETD2004)

Goal & Requirements

Goal:  To create a collaborative environment to promote interoperability and increase the availability of ETDs on networked digital libraries Requirements:  Partnership  Participation

Objectives

 Help each other start and maintain ETD programs  Share experiences and SW solutions  Find new ways of enhancing programs and ETDs themselves  Discuss and create standards to allow interoperability  Create union catalogs of metadata records

Elements

 ETDs!!!!  Coordination  Cooperation  Integration

Questions to Answer

 Is it worthed to build a consortium?  What are the benefits you expect from a consortium?  Would you help build a consortium?  Would your institution join a consortium? Why? Why not?

THANK YOU! ¡MUCHAS GRACIAS! OBRIGADA!

Maps in slides 5 and 6 are colored versions of a mapa-mundi from IBGE – Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística