University of Glasgow Publications Policy

Approved by Senate on 5 June 2008


The University’s ambition as stated in its strategic plan, “Building on Excellence” and Research Strategy 2006-2010 is be one of the world’s Top 50 research intensive universities.

In 2006 the Government announced its intention to replace the existing RAE with the Research Excellence Framework (REF), an assessment based on metrics, including bibliometrics in the form of citations to papers. HEFCE states that:

‘The REF will consist of a single unified framework for the funding and assessment of research across all subjects. It will make greater use of quantitative indicators in the assessment of research quality than the present system, while taking account of key differences between the different disciplines. Assessment will combine quantitative indicators - including bibliometric indicators wherever these are appropriate - and light-touch expert review. Which of these elements are employed, and the balance between them, will vary as appropriate to each subject.’ [1]

Following a recent consultation HEFCE have decided that future assessments will include some form of metrics-based assessment, including bibliometrics, as well as peer review for all (not just STEM) subjects.

The University recognises that research publications, as one of the main outputs of research, are a key asset. As such, they should be managed in a way that ensures that they provide maximum value both to individual members of the academic community, whose research output they represent, and collectively to the institution. The academic community has an essential role to play in the generation and publication of research publications while the University has an important role to play both to support and assist academic staff, and as the curator of the assets.

The objectives of this policy are:

  • To increase the visibility of research publications produced by staff employed by or associated with the University of Glasgow
  • To ensure that research outputs are prepared and curated in a way which helps maximise the value that they have for the university in terms of the external use of bibliometric data e.g. league tables, post-2008 RAE.


1. The University will maximise the impact of University publications in bibliometric analyses by ensuring that all research outputs are accurately recorded as being produced by University of Glasgow staff. There is some lack of consistency in the addresses used by authors.

The following addresses are examples of this. Taken from the Web of Science, one of the preferred bibliographic tools for the REF, these addresses appear on recent publications by University academic staff:

    BHF Glasgow Cardiovasc Res Ctr, Glasgow, Lanark Scotland
    Department of Medical Cardiology, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.

It is imperative, for the REF, that all University of Glasgow publications can be easily identified and retrieved from bibliographic databases such as the Web of Science, and therefore Senate is asked to require Glasgow University staff, when submitting work for publication, to use an address in the form below. If publishers place constraints on the amount of space given for addresses, the phrase “University of Glasgow” must be prioritised. If this causes difficulties staff are asked to report these to Susan Ashworth in the Library ( so that pressure can be applied on publishers to accommodate institutional requirements.

Dr. A. N. Other,
Department (or Division) of X,
Faculty of Y - University of Glasgow,
Other address details

2. A key element in the University’s plans to maximise the impact of peer-reviewed research publications is the need to make such publications as widely available as possible. It is the University’s policy to develop and implement a comprehensive publications database recording bibliographic information and providing access to, where possible, the full text, for all peer-reviewed, published research outputs produced by university staff. As research assessment moves towards bibliometric based metrics, this will support internal bibliometric analysis.

At present, the University strongly encourages authors to deposit copies of their peer-reviewed published work into the University’s Institutional Repository, Enlighten, and while this has had some effect on increasing the number of full text papers made available it is only a fraction of the University’s potential research output. The University is also intending to use Enlighten as the platform for its publications database. Bibliographic details of all peer-reviewed and published research outputs will now be added to this database, with links to the full text where available.

In order to achieve these objectives Senate is asked to approve a policy requiring staff to deposit:

  • electronic copies of peer-reviewed journal articles and conference proceedings
  • bibliographic details of all research outputs, and to encourage staff to provide the full text of other research outputs where appropriate.

Publications will be made available within Enlighten (

Staff are asked to deposit a copy of peer-reviewed, published journal articles and conference proceedings into Enlighten, where copyright allows, as soon as possible after publication. Other research outputs such as book chapters and books can also be deposited if desired by authors. Where a publisher has placed an embargo on making an item openly available, the item will not be made publicly visible until the embargo period has expired.

Staff are asked to provide the version of their papers that is as close as possible to the published version. An overwhelming number of publishers, including Elsevier, Springer and Blackwell, already allow authors to deposit their own “ author final version” of their work in institutional repositories such as Enlighten. Staff will only be asked to provide copies of publications where publisher agreements permit deposit in online repositories. Repository staff will check publishers’ copyright agreements to ensure that deposit is permitted. Under no circumstances will staff be required to make publications available in contravention of UK copyright law.

Many of the major funding bodies such as the Wellcome Trust, etc. already have in place open access policies that require authors to deposit an ‘author final version’ of their papers in a repository so acceptance of this version of a paper is widespread. Repository staff can check funders’ Open Access policies and where staff are already required by their funders to deposit in a subject based repository such as UK PubMed Central, repository staff will ensure that links are made from Enlighten to the relevant repository. There will therefore be no requirement for staff to deposit in more than one repository.

Staff, or their representatives, can easily deposit items themselves via Enlighten or can email items directly to repository staff who will deposit them. Items deposited into Enlighten should normally be in PDF format, although other formats can be discussed with repository staff. There are full instructions on how to self-deposit at Alternatively staff have the option of sending publications as an e-mail attachment to to be uploaded by repository staff.

This change in policy will enable staff to take full advantage of the permissions granted by publishers and to assist them with compliance with funding bodies. Senate is asked to approve the implementation of such a policy from the beginning of the 2008/2009 academic session.

Research Planning and Strategy Committee