Risk Area: Policy

Policy and risk mitigation development

Findings from the literature review and online survey carried out by the Working Group showcase that few institutions have comprehensive policies in place to address risks associated with open access, such as data misuse, ethical considerations, and copyright breaches. Respondents emphasized the need for clearer policies and procedural workflows to manage these challenges effectively, and minimize the risks of harm or misrepresentation.

“We are not placing all our collections out there to be available due to lack of procedural workflow in obtaining permissions to digitize and display collection items. This is a missed opportunity.”

Library, United States of America

Below, you will find the key policy risks identified, actionable strategies to mitigate these risks, tools to support the implementation of the recommended actions, and good practices to get inspired.

Key Risks

• Lack of formal policies for managing risks associated with open access.

• Insufficient workflows for handling copyright, ethical, technical and financial challenges.

Mitigation Strategies

• Create a comprehensive open access policy: Draft a policy that outlines legal, ethical, and technical guidelines for open access. Include clear procedures for rights management, community consultation, and user guidelines.

• Establish a takedown procedure: Develop a formal procedure for handling requests to remove or restrict access to certain items.

• Adopt a risk assessment checklist: Regularly assess risks and update policies to reflect changing needs, resources, or cultural sensitivities.

Tools & Resources

• Open access policy templates: Available from Creative Commons or GLAM organizations, providing frameworks for developing open access policies.

  • Terms of Use Policy template by the 2024 Policy Template Working Group of the Creative Commons Open Culture Platform [coming soon]

  • GLAM-E Lab’s External Open Access Policies document containing a model open access policy designed to be adopted by cultural institutions and organizations and posted on their publicly facing websites.

  • GLAM-E Lab’s Internal Open Access Policies document setting out policies based on laws in the United States and United Kingdom that will help you identify works in your collection that may be good candidates for your open access programme.

• Takedown policy template: Customize a takedown policy template for handling requests to restrict access.

  • Takedown policy template by the 2024 Risk Management Working Group of the Creative Commons Open Culture Platform

  • D-CRAFT’s Writing a Takedown Policy

• Risk assessment template: Use and adapt a risk assessment template to evaluate potential risks before making new materials publicly accessible.

  • Risk assessment template by the 2024 Risk Management Working Group of the Creative Commons Open Culture Platform.

Good Practices

• Open Access at The Met

• Open Access at the Cleveland Museum of Art

• Wellcome Collection: Policies and Plans

• Wikimedia Foundation: Open Access Policy | Licensing policy

• Yale University Open Access Policy

• Bethel University Library: SPARK Policies | Author Copyright Guidelines for SPARK (Digital Commons Institutional Repository)

• Open Access @ Rhodes University Library

• Griffith Open Research Statement

• German Archaeological Institute: Publication Strategy | Data Protection Information

• University of Wyoming Libraries: Digital Collection Policies

• Emory University: Open Access Policy

• The Courtauld: The Courtauld Gallery Collection Online | Copyright Strategy for Publishing The Witt Library

For more inspiration, check the Open GLAM Survey version 1.0 and version 2.0, as well as the Open GLAM Medium Publication.

Use cases

Collection managers don’t make certain items open access, because there is a lack of clear procedural workflows for obtaining permissions. This can result in legal and copyright issues, impacting the institution’s ability to share its full range of collections effectively.

Curators at smaller, understaffed institutions don’t make all their collections open access, because they lack the resources and trained personnel to manage rights and permissions accurately. This could lead to mismanagement of copyright information, affecting the institution’s credibility and the quality of its publicly accessible collections.

Institutional decision makers don’t make collections open access, because there is no unified policy or clear leadership direction. This results in inconsistent approaches to monetization and accessibility, impacting the institution’s ability to maintain a cohesive strategy for sharing and protecting its collections.