The Leiden Manifesto under review: what libraries can learn from it
| Published date | 13 November 2017 |
| Pages | 324-338 |
| Date | 13 November 2017 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-01-2017-0004 |
| Author | Sarah K. Coombs,Isabella Peters |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,Library technology,Records management & preservation,Information repositories |
The Leiden Manifesto under
review: what libraries can
learn from it
Sarah K. Coombs
Saxion University of Applied Sciences –Saxion Bibliotheek,
Enschede, The Netherlands, and
Isabella Peters
ZBW Leibniz Information Center for Economics, Kiel, Germany
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical discussio n of the Leiden Manifesto for
libraries already engaged in bibliometric practi ces. It offers practical recommendations based on the work
of the European Association for Research Libraries ( LIBER) Working Group on Metrics. This work is in the
beginning phase and summarizes literature on the topi c, as well as the experiences of the members of the
Working Group. The discussion reflects today’s growi ng popularity of (quantitative) research assessment
which is seen in enthusiasts introducing ne w metrics (i.e. altmetrics) and by critics demanding responsible
metrics that increase objectivity and equity i n evaluations.
Design/methodology/approach –This paper is the result of the Working Group on Metrics of the
European Association for Research Libraries (LIBER) that critically discussed the practicalityof the Leiden
Manifestofor libraries.
Findings –Full compliance with the Manifesto is time-consuming, expensive and requires a significant
increase in bibliometric expertise with respect to both staffing and skill level. Despite these apparent
disadvantages, it is recommended that all libraries embrace the Manifesto’s principles. To increase
practicality, it is advisedthat libraries collaborate with researchers, managementand other libraries at home
and aroundthe world to jointly design and provide servicesthat can be reused within the library community.
Originality/value –Libraries have increasingly been confronted with questions about research
assessment, responsible metrics and the role of digital products in evaluations and funding decisions.
Although a wide range of recommendations and initiatives are available (e.g. DORA San Francisco
Declaration on Research Assessment), many recommendations are not straightforward enough to be
implemented from a library perspective. This paper provides assistance for libraries to implement these
principlesby acknowledging the heterogeneous backgroundsthe libraries may stem from.
Keywords Bibliometrics, Altmetrics, Libraries, Leiden Manifesto, Research evaluation,
Responsible metrics
Paper type Viewpoint
Recently, there has been increased interest in the assessment of research products and
researchers. Some of the interest stems from the enthusiasm of having new countable items
(such as data sets) and data sources (such as Twitter) available, whereas the other is a
reaction to criticism of bibliometrics. Enthusiasts have embraced the field of altmetrics
The authors would like to thank Helen Coombs for editing the text and the LIBER Working Group on
Metrics whose expertise has led to the recommendations outlined in this article: Kasper Abcouwer,
Isidro F. Aguillo, Nathalie Cornée, Ellen Fest, Juan Gorraiz, Stefanie Haustein, Kim Holmberg, Najko
Jahn, Peter Kraker, Ania López, Marc Martinez, Alenka Princic, Susan Reilly and Birgit Schmidt.
DLP
33,4
324
Received 8 January 2017
Revised 19 February 2017
Accepted 21 February 2017
DigitalLibrary Perspectives
Vol.33 No. 4, 2017
pp. 324-338
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2059-5816
DOI 10.1108/DLP-01-2017-0004
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2059-5816.htm
To continue reading
Request your trial