0.3 Executive summary  (Page 3/4)

Chapter 1 makes the case for the transformative potential of an improved cyberinfrastructure withrespect to the preservation and availability of our cultural heritage. A coordinated effort to build cyberinfrastructure for thehumanities and social sciences, the Commission argues, will benefit the public and the specialist alike by providing access to thebreadth and depth of the cultural record.

Chapter 2 explores the constraints that must be overcome in creating such a cyberinfrastructure—insufficienttraining, outdated policies, unsatisfactory tools, incomplete resources, and inadequate access. These constraints are notprimarily technological but, instead, cultural, economic, legal, and institutional. They include:

●the loss, fragility, and inaccessibility of the cultural record;

●the complexity of the cultural record;

●intellectual property restrictions on the use of the cultural record;

●lack of incentives to experiment with cyberinfrastructure in the humanities and social sciences;

●uncertainty about the future mechanisms, forms, and economics of scholarly publishing and scholarlycommunication more generally;

●insufficient resources, will, and leadership to build

cyberinfrastructure for the humanities and social sciences.

Chapter 3 provides a framework for action. It first articulates five goals for an effective cyberinfrastructure,namely, that it should

• be accessible as a public good;
• be sustainable;
• provide interoperability;
• facilitate collaboration;
• support experimentation.

In chapter 3, the Commission also recommends the following measures necessary to achieve these goals (and tomeet the challenges described in chapter 2):

1. invest in cyberinfrastructure for the humanities and social sciences, as a matter of strategic priority.

Addressed to: Universities; federal and private funding agencies

Implementation: Determine the amount and efficacy of funding that now goes to support developingcyberinfrastructure for humanities and social sciences from all sources; through annual meetings and ongoing consultation,coordinate the goals this funding aims to achieve; and aim to increase both funding and coordination over the next five years,including commercial investments that are articulated with the educational community’s agenda.

2. develop public and institutional policies that foster openness and access.

Addressed to: University presidents, boards of trustees, provosts, and counsels; university presses; fundingagencies; libraries; scholarly societies; Congress

Implementation: The Association of American Universities, in collaboration with other organizations such as theNational Humanities Alliance, the Scholarly Publishing and Research Coalition, and the National Academy of Arts and Sciences, shouldtake a leadership role in coordinating the engagement of the humanities and social sciences with issues of informationpolicy.

3. promote cooperation between the public and private sectors.

Addressed to: Universities; federal and private funding agencies; Internet-oriented companies