Over the last twenty years, library publishing has emerged in higher education as a new class of publisher. Conceived as a response to commercial publishing practices that have strained library budgets and prevented scholars from openly licensing and sharing their works, library publishing is both a local service program and a broader movement to disrupt the current scholarly publishing arena. It is growing both in numbers of publishers and numbers of works produced. The commercial publishing framework which determines the viability of monetizing a product is not necessarily applicable for library publishers who exist as a common good to address the needs of their academic communities. Like any business venture, however, library publishers must develop a clear service model and business plan in order to create shared expectations for funding streams, quality markers, as well as technical and staff capacity. As the field is maturing from experimental projects to full programs, library publishers are formalizing their offerings and limitations. The anatomy of a library publishing business plan is presented and includes the principles of the program, scope of services, and staffing and governance requirements. Other aspects include production policies, financial structures, and measures of success.

Academic publishing appears to be the most important key of the academic functions (academic research, excellence in teaching and learning and community services). Selecting the right journal to publish research results is a challenge to academics. Yet, there is inadequate knowledge about a model specifically directed at the topic of the journal selection process with a mathematical certainty. The objectives of this research are: to identify the main factors that an author or researchers consider when selecting an academic journal for submitting a manuscript, and, to develop a mathematical algorithm of journal selection that provide the best journal choice with a mathematical certainty based on difficulty of each factor. Quantitative research through questionnaires has been applied as an appropriate instrument base to address the researcher’s identification of the factors that should be considered when selecting a journal. Questionnaire developed and emailed to academics in 31 public and private universities in the developing countries. Academics reported that the most important publication difficulty factors were publishing in reputable journals, and publishing in a journal that has an impact factor. However, the most least publication difficulty factors were found to be: number of issues per year and if the journal is an open access. The proposed mathematical algorithm of journal’s publication difficulty factors was developed and tested.

Based on the total scholarly article output of Norway, we investigated the coverage and degree of openness according to three bibliographic services 1) Google Scholar, 2) oaDOI by Impact Story and 3) 1findr by 1science. According to Google Scholar, we find that more than 70% of all Norwegian articles are openly available. However, degrees are profoundly lower according to oaDOI and 1findr, respectively 31% and 52%. Varying degrees are mainly caused by different interpretations of openness, with oaDOI being most restrictive. Furthermore, open shares vary considerably by discipline, with the Medcine and Health sciences at the upper and the Humanities at the lower end. We also determined the citation frequencies using Cited-by values as of Google Scholar, applying year and subject normalization. We find a significant citation advantage for open articles. However, this is not the case for all types of openness. In fact, the category Open Access journals was by far lowest cited, indicating that young journals with a declared open access policy still lack recognition.

Recently, more and more countries are entering the global race for university competitiveness. On the one hand, global rankings are a convenient tool for quantitative analysis. On the other hand, their indicators are often difficult to quickly calculate, they often contradict each other. We thought about using widely available indicators for a quick analysis of the University's publication strategy. We opted for the normalized citation indicators available in SciVal analytical tool, i.e. Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) and Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI). We have demonstrated the possibility of applying the correlation analysis to the impact indicators of a document and a journal on the sample of the social and humanitarian fields at Peoples' Friendship University of Russia. Particular attention was paid to the application of the results in practice.

Wikipedia, as "social machine", is a privileged place to observe the collective construction of concepts without central control. Based on Dahlberg's theory of concept, and anchored in the pragmatism of Hjørland - in which the concepts are socially negotiated meanings - the evolution of the concept of Semantic Web (SW) was analyzed in the English version of Wikipedia. An exploratory, descriptive and qualitative study was designed and we identified 26 different definitions (between 7-12-2001 and 12/31/2017) of which 8 are of particular relevance for their duration, with the latter being the two recorded at the end of the analyzed period. According to them, SW: "is a extension of the web"and "is a Web of Data"; the latter, used as a complementary definition, links to Berners-Lee's publications. In Wikipedia, the evolution of the SW concept appears to be based on the search for the use of non-technical vocabulary and the control of authority carried out by the debate. As a space for collective bargaining of meanings, the Wikipedia study may bring relevant contributions to a community's understanding of a particular concept and how it evolves over time.

This research work examined the various communication media used in the rural areas for the purpose of conveying messages to Adolescents in the selected communities in Obio/Akpor Local Government Area of Rivers State, Nigeria - Woji, Rumuigbo, Rumuola, Rumuokwuta and Elelenwo communities. The Taro Yammane Statistical formula for determination of sample size was used in drawing a sample of 363 respondents from a population of 3,630 Adolescents. The simple random sampling method was used in the distribution of the questionnaire to target respondents in the selected communities. Two hundred and eighty two (282) copies of the questionnaire were returned valid, and data from them was analysed and interpreted with the use of frequency tables and percentages. The result shows that traditional communication media is still relevant in the dissemination of information to rural dwellers in general and to Adolescents in particular. The agencies that make use of these media are; village authority, age groups, etc. The research work recommend among others that the government and rural dwellers should hold our traditional and cultural values in high esteem through the use of these media, harmonizing the use of traditional communication media and modern media for effective rural information service delivery.

Can the smart city provide a new perspective for public and academic libraries? How does the smart city impact the libraries as cultural and scientific assets? And how can libraries contribute to the development of the smart city? An overview of recent library models, like the learning center or the green library, reveals affinities with the concept of the smart city, especially regarding the central role of information and the integration of technology, people and institution. From this observation, the paper develops the outline of a new concept of the smart library which can be described on four dimensions, i.e. smart services, smart people, smart place and smart governance. However, the smart library concept does not constitute a unique model or project but a process, a way how to get things done, less linear, less structured, more creative and innovative. Also, smartness may not be a solution for all library problems.

Different from national systems of innovation, a knowledge-based economy is grounded in the volatility of discursive knowledge enabling us to specify expectations. Expectations can be improved by testing against observations. Furthermore, expectations can differently be codified; for example, in terms of market perspectives and technological opportunities. The Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations provides first a (neo-)institutional model. However, three functions are recombined at the systems level in each instantiation: wealth generation (by industry), novelty production (academia), and legislation and regulation (government). The Triple-Helix synergy indicator enables us to use the institutional arrangements as instantiations of the knowledge-dynamics and thus to assess the generation of options and reduction of uncertainty in information-theoretical terms. The Fourth Industrial Revolution entails the transition to the reflexive entertaining of expectations in terms of models as increasingly the sources of innovations.

Gigantic particle accelerators, incredibly complex detectors, an antimatter factory and the discovery of the Higgs boson – this is part of what makes CERN famous. Only a few know that CERN also hosts the world largest Open Access initiative: SCOAP3. The Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics (SCOAP3) started operation in 2014 and has since supported the publication of 19,000 Open Access articles in the field of particle physics, at no direct cost, nor burden, for individual authors worldwide. SCOAP3 is made possible by a 3,000-institute strong partnership, where libraries re-direct funds previously used for subscriptions to ’flip’ articles to ’gold Open Access’. With its recent expansion, the initiative now covers about 90% of the journal literature of the field. This article describes the economic principles of SCOAP3, the collaborative approach of the partnership, and finally summarizes financial results after four years of successful operation.

Researchers, journals, and universities want to receive more citations for their scholarly publications. However, a paper citations depend on its quality, visibility and author’s online profile. Research support documents (unpublished papers, white papers, project reports, datasets, software, posters, online resources and teaching materials) can be additional source for increasing the author’s visibility. To enhance research visibility and impact, the full range of scholarly output should be available online on the open access platform. With open access platform, key research findings are made accessible immediately to the scientific community. Therefore, the publicly available research support documents may result in receiving more citations in addition to the published papers. In this paper we conducted a simplified three stages study on the benefits of research support documents publications on open access platform. We also elaborated on approaches of improving your research visibility and impact through these document.

The number of citations that a paper has received is the most commonly used indicator to measure the quality of research. Researchers, journals, and universities want to receive more citations for their scholarly publications to increase their h-index, impact factor, and ranking respectively. In this paper, we tried to analyses the effect of the number of available Google Scholar versions of a paper on citations count. We analyzed 10,162 papers which are published in Scopus database in year 2010 by Malaysian top five universities. Then we developed a software to collect the number of citations and versions of each paper from Google Scholar automatically. The result of spearman correlation coefficient revealed that there is positive significant association between the number of Google Scholar versions of a paper and the number of times a paper has been cited.

How much is the h-index of an editor of a well ranked journal improved due to citations which occur after his/her appointment? Scientific recognition within academia is widely measured nowadays by the number of citations or h-index. Our dataset is based on a sample of four editors from a well ranked journal (impact factor – IF – greater than 2). The target group consists of two editors who seem to benefit by their position through an increased citation number (and subsequently h-index) within journal. The total amount of citations for the target group is bigger than 600. The control group is formed by another set of two editors from the same journal whose relations between their positions and their citation records remain neutral. The total amount of citations for the control group is more than 1200. The timespan for which citations’ pattern has been studied is 1975-2015. Previous coercive citations for a journal benefit (increase its IF) has been signaled. To the best of our knowledge, this is a pioneering work on coercive citations for personal (editors’) benefit. Editorial teams should be aware about this type of potentially unethical behavior and act accordingly.