Re: Institutional repositories and digital preservation

[Steve Hitchcock <sh94r@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

On 14 Aug 2010, at 20:16, Stevan Harnad wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Richard Poynder wrote:
>
>> [1] Should institutional repositories [IRs] be viewed as 
preservation tools?
>
> Not primarily. IRs' primary function should be to provide open 
access
> [OA] to institutional research article output.

Yes. We may have witnessed a golden age of digital preservation 
tools, and some of these have been built into repository software 
interfaces. To explore the practical application for 
repositories, see our structured and fully documented KeepIt 
course on digital preservation tools for repository managers:

Source materials http://bit.ly/afof8g
Blog http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/keepit/tag/keepit-course/

The underlying philosophy of the course is to enable users to 
evaluate the appropriate degree of commitment, responsibility and 
resource for preservation that is consistent with the aims and 
objectives of the institution and repository at a given time and 
looking forward. It follows that answers can range from high to 
low, even to nothing, providing the analysis has been thorough, 
the results documented and the decisions and consequences are 
fully understood.

Without commenting on priorities here, IRs are much wider than OA 
papers. For IR preservation it's this broad scope that matters, 
then how policy deals with the specifics, rather than simply OA 
concerns.

>
>> [2] Should self-archiving mandates always be accompanied by a
>> "preservation mandate"?
>
> Definitely not. (But IRs can, will, should and do preserve 
their
> contents.) For journal articles, the real digital preservation 
problem
> concerns the publisher's version-of-record. Self-archiving 
mandates
> pertain to the author's-draft.

Not an additional mandate, agreed, and it's important that 
institutional and repository policy, such as OA mandates, precede 
preservation policy and provide the basis for it. But it's 
interesting to ask whether OA mandates, since at the moment these 
are the most prominent form of repository policy, should make 
some reference to preservation. It's notable that research funder 
OA policies are more likely to make some brief reference to 
preservation than institutional policies.

To Stevan the answer may seem obvious in the particular case of 
OA, but the question is whether such policies would benefit from 
such a reference. Or more broadly, whether repository policies 
need to demonstrate some degree of reciprocity, not just 
preservation, for the demands they appear to make of authors. 
Given the weight of an institution's repository policy, it will 
have to address this at some stage, and omission, even from an OA 
mandate, since IRs are wider than OA, could begin to look curious 
and raise questions. The wider context is what repositories can 
offer in terms of responsible content management for access now 
and longer-term access. It will do no harm to sprinkle policies 
with features that will appeal to authors, where repositories can 
take practical steps to implement these. Stevan says IRs should 
and do preserve their contents; in which case, IRs simply need to 
specify and demonstrate what this means in practical terms, where 
possible, and policy is one !
  prominent place to do this.

In this case return to [1] above, but first see conditions in [3] 
below.
>
>> [3] Should Gold OA funds be used to enable preservation in 
institutional
>> repositories?
>
> Funds committed to Gold OA should be used any way the 
university or
> research funder that can afford them elects to use them (though 
does
> seem a bit random to spend money designated to pay for 
publishing in
> Gold OA journals instead to preserve articles published in
> subscription journals).
>
> But on no account should commitment to fund either Gold OA or 
digital
> preservation of the version-of-record be a condition for 
mandating
> Green OA self-archiving.
>
>> More, including an interview with digital preservation 
specialist Neal
>> Beagrie, here: http://bit.ly/dur5EP

Stevan has long been concerned about costs and distractions, 
including preservation, to the core OA aim. Economics are the 
primary driver here. As Neil Beagrie said in the interview: 
'digital preservation is 'a means to an end': the benefit and 
goal of digital preservation is access for as long as we require 
it'. This can work for open access too. My experience is that 
repositories are not wasting time and effort on preservation 
where it may be unnecessary, e.g. empty repositories. On this 
basis, it is too stark for Richard Poynder to say: 'Nevertheless 
it is hard not to conclude that there is a potential conflict 
between OA and preservation.'

For others the problem may be the opposite, of turning concern 
into action. There is emerging evidence that repositories will 
take the necessary actions on preservation where the tools are 
available and when the circumstances support this, e.g. these 
repositories:

NECTAR and the Data Asset Framework ? first thoughts 
http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/keepit/2010/02/07/nectar-and-the-data-asset-framework-first-thoughts/
Digital Preservation, Risk Management, and UAL Research Online 
http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/keepit/2010/06/11/digital-preservation-risk-management-and-ual-research-online/
Digital Collections Risk Assessment at LSE: Using DRAMBORA 
http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/keepit/2010/07/19/digital-collections-risk-assessment-at-lse-using-drambora/

To try and gauge what circumstances might convert concern over 
preservation into action by repositories I recently proposed this 
rough metric
http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/keepit/2010/07/22/conditions-for-digital-preservation/

When these conditions apply, again, return to [1] above.

I've made the case before that the issue between support for 
green and gold OA, from an institutional perspective, is one of 
chronology, and it's the same for IRs and preservation.

Steve Hitchcock
KeepIt Project Manager
IAM Group, Building 32
School of Electronics and Computer Science
University of Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK
Blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/keepit/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/jisckeepit
Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/SteveHitchcock

KeepIt course http://bit.ly/7PRDhq
Twitter #dprc http://twapperkeeper.com/dprc/