The Costs and Economics of PreservationObjectives –•   To introduce and describe some of the work that has been done to   ...
The LIFE ProjectUniversity College London (UCL) and British Library (BL)To develop a methodology to model the digital life...
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011HATII (DCC) – University of Glasgowhttp://www.dcc.ac.uk/projects/lifeUK Hig...
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)   Pilot Participant feedback …The Tool and the Interface      ...
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)    Pilot Participant feedback …Two key aspects were particular...
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)    Pilot Participant feedback …                               ...
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)  Pilot Participant feedback …Activity JournalsJournals were re...
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)46% of activity was categorised as ‘other’ work … i.e. not spec...
Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)                             Recommendations & ConclusionsThe a...
Keeping Research Data Safe (KRDS)Charles Beagrie Ltd. & various partners …To extend previous work on digital preservation ...
MAIN PHASES AND ACTIVITIES OF KRDS2 ACTIVITY MODEL(“LITE”)                                       Outreach   Pre-Archive Ph...
The Costs Observatory Study (2011)Scoping and Feasibility Study for an Information Management Costs ObservatoryKey Perspec...
The Costs Observatory Study (2011)What a Costs Observatory might do …•    Collect cost information•    Be a trusted broker...
The Costs Observatory Study (2011)   The ‘scope’ problem …   •     What size and shape should this ‘Observatory’ assume …?...
The Costs Observatory Study (2011)Why it might NOT be a good idea …•   Lack of demand (an idea ‘ahead of its time’?)•   Da...
The Costs Observatory Study (2011)Why it MIGHT BE a good idea …•   Stakeholders think there is a gap in existing provision...
The Costs Observatory Study (2011)The study concluded that the scope of information that any proposed ‘Costs Observatory’s...
The Blue Ribbon Task Force for Sustainable DigitalPreservation and Access (2008 - 2010) Objective To develop a set of econ...
A Draft Economic Sustainability Reference Model (2011)The challenges to effective sustainability (preservation) are:•    L...
Digital                                   AssetProperty 1                   Property 2                    Property 3      ...
Preservation                               ProcessProperty 4                   Property 5                    Property 6 … ...
Relationships
Next opportunity to think about and develop this model ...                     7th International Digital Curation Conferen...
Opportunities for international collaboration and join-upThe LIFE Model is currently the most sustained attempt in this fi...
Ipres 2011 The Costs and Economics of Preservation
Ipres 2011 The Costs and Economics of Preservation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Ipres 2011 The Costs and Economics of Preservation

339 views
289 views

Published on

To introduce and describe some of the work that has been done to help institutions and research groups understand both the costs and the economics of preservation

To describe ongoing phases of JISC-funded work that are attempting to further advance understanding and implement approaches in this area

To give some indication of where collective international effort may be of universal benefit.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
339
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ipres 2011 The Costs and Economics of Preservation

  1. 1. The Costs and Economics of PreservationObjectives –• To introduce and describe some of the work that has been done to help institutions and research groups understand both the costs and the economics of preservation• To describe ongoing phases of JISC-funded work that are attempting to further advance understanding and implement approaches in this area• To give some indication of where collective international effort may be of universal benefit. Neil Grindley – JISC Programme Manager (Digital Preservation)
  2. 2. The LIFE ProjectUniversity College London (UCL) and British Library (BL)To develop a methodology to model the digital lifecycle and calculate the costs ofpreserving digital assets over a period of years. http://www.life.ac.uk/3 phases of workLIFE 1 (2005-2006) – A review of existing models to produce a 6 stage digital objectlifecycle model; incorporating a generic preservation model; and 3 test case studies.Web Archiving (BL); e-Journals (UCL); Voluntary deposited electronic publications (BL)LIFE 2 (2007-2008) – 3 further case studies: Digitised newspapers (BL); SHERPA-LEAPrepositories; SHERPA DP digital preservation services. Model refinements. Anindependent economic review. Analysis of paper vs. digital costs.LIFE 3 (2009-2010) – Further refinements. Another case study. Storage costs survey.Development of a web-based tool based on the LIFE model spreadsheet (with HATII –University of Glasgow/DCC)
  3. 3. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011HATII (DCC) – University of Glasgowhttp://www.dcc.ac.uk/projects/lifeUK Higher Ed Institutional repositories were invited to take part in two strands ofactivity:• Review the LIFE web tool and provide feedback via a survey Survey Questions• Keep an activity journal for a month to assist with evaluation of the LIFE model An Activity Journal
  4. 4. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC) Pilot Participant feedback …The Tool and the Interface The LIFE ModelSplit opinions about usability (3 yes 4 no) Inability to deal with mixed contentSlow and uninformative interface ‘Video’ content type missingUser interface layout and procedure issues Difficult to assess accuracyApparent figure rounding errors ‘Basic input’ page too basicLack of information about fields & units ‘Refine’ pages too detailed‘Refine’ pages difficult to use Apparent figure rounding errorsAlternative ways of grouping values req’d Lack of information about fields & units Alternative ways of grouping values req’d
  5. 5. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC) Pilot Participant feedback …Two key aspects were particularly identified as parameters that users needed to be ableto modify easily:• Staffing• Infrastructure and policy (specifically – storage and backup)Also good to have …• Costs over time as well as across the lifecycle on the output page (costs vary over the course of a project)• More visible inflationary factors• Some form of graphical representation on the output page• Reporting functionality
  6. 6. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC) Pilot Participant feedback … Activity JournalsCONSTRAINTS• Very small number of users – short timescale (1 month) … inadequate assessment of a highly complicated series of activities.• Journals only covered staff effort and not capital costs• Extensive use was made of the ‘other activity’ fields• Participants generally didn’t add any notes about their logged activities• Difficult to map the specified lifecycle phases onto the LIFE model• Institutions dealing with a variety of content (rather than a homogenous collection)• Participants not necessarily dealing with ALL repository activity• Staff costs not entered coherently across all participants
  7. 7. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC) Pilot Participant feedback …Activity JournalsJournals were returned by 12 repository staff from 3 different repositories. They recordedactivity data over the course of a month. Activity was mapped against an adapted versionof the UKRDS Responsibilities Spreadsheet Research Life Cycle Phase ANDS Verbs Responsibilities Write the data plan / responsibility for meeting good standards practice Aid in experimental design and planning (and execution, contributing own Idea/Study Concept/Design Conceptualise insights) Conceptualisation of data Other Idea/ Study Concept/ Design activity Advice on funder requirements Funding Other Funding activity Metadata creation, its format, documentation etc. Set internal data management policy Research Activity: Data Create/receive IPR, legal issues Gathering/Collection Gathering data Other Research Activity: Data Gathering/ Collection activity 8 categories in total … 44 activities in total
  8. 8. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)
  9. 9. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)
  10. 10. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC)46% of activity was categorised as ‘other’ work … i.e. not specifically categorisable bythe chosen schema … and subsequently not easily mapped onto any particular partof the LIFE Model.The principle activity that was significant and could be mapped was …• Metadata creation, its format, documentation, etc. - Included in the ‘Ingest’ section of the LIFE ModelThe second most significant specific activity was …• Aid in experimental design and planning (and execution, contributing own insights) - But this couldn’t be mapped … this is more to do with the ongoing work required of a repository officer: LIFE is optimised to focus on a single bounded projectOther items on the list were also of this type
  11. 11. Piloting the LIFE Costs Tool in UK HEI’s - 2011 (HATII/DCC) Recommendations & ConclusionsThe architecture of the Web Tool and its database dependency needs careful considerationThe user interface of the Web Tool needs to be de-coupled from the Spreadsheet ToolAlternative ways of displaying outputs should be consideredMore consideration needed for how users might want to modify details of the modelMake the various economic factors influencing estimates more visibleInclude provision for expressing the maturity of an organisation & its existing resourcesCurrently, the LIFE Model is only really applicable to a certain type of projectThe LIFE Model will require ongoing maintenance, data input and refinement And lastly …This type of work is VERY difficult and still represents a huge challenge forinstitutions and for funders
  12. 12. Keeping Research Data Safe (KRDS)Charles Beagrie Ltd. & various partners …To extend previous work on digital preservation costs, but focus on research data. Toidentify long-lived datasets for the purpose of costs analysis.http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2008/keepingresearchdatasafe.aspxVarious phases of workKRDS1 (2008) – List of key cost variables and units of record. Activity model. Major costcategories. Case StudiesKRDS2 (2009) – Survey of cost information. Refined model. Benefits framework.KRDS Dissemination (2010) – Fact sheet, user guides, summary activity modelI2S2/KRDS (2011) – Integration of the KRDS Benefits framework with the I2S2 ValueChain Analysis Modelhttp://www.beagrie.com/krds.php
  13. 13. MAIN PHASES AND ACTIVITIES OF KRDS2 ACTIVITY MODEL(“LITE”) Outreach Pre-Archive Phase Initiation Creation The detailed KRDS2 Activity Model is twelve pages long. Acquisition Disposal But perhaps the most significant conclusion from KRDS … Ingest Archive Storage which also aligns with the LIFE Project Archive Phase conclusion … Preservation Planning First Mover Innovation Is that examining, gathering and Data Management analysing relevant cost information needs to keep on happening into the Access future … Administration Support Services Common Services Estates
  14. 14. The Costs Observatory Study (2011)Scoping and Feasibility Study for an Information Management Costs ObservatoryKey Perspectives Ltd. (UK)Value to JISCTo judge whether it is a worthwhile investment of time and money to try and create a‘Costs Observatory’The Costs Observatory Concept• To provide verifiable and evidence-based guidance to UK HEI’s about the likely cost over time (the whole life-cycle cost) of managing, preserving and providing access to their digital assets• To influence the strategic planning and policy formation within institutions and enable them to make wiser, more realistic and cost effective decisions about managing information Final Report available at: http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/4921/
  15. 15. The Costs Observatory Study (2011)What a Costs Observatory might do …• Collect cost information• Be a trusted broker• Analyse the data and produce reports and recommendations• Support the UK HE sector• Monitor and identify relevant economic, legislative and environmental issues• Liaise and co-ordinate with relevant service and information providers
  16. 16. The Costs Observatory Study (2011) The ‘scope’ problem … • What size and shape should this ‘Observatory’ assume …? • What types of information should it address? • To what extent is it being done already?Agency PurposeHESA Higher Education Statistics Agency (submission to HESA mandatory for UK HEI’s)heidi Higher Education Information Database for institutions (subscription web-based service from HESATRIBAL Benchmarking service that collects data on costs across the institution, including all financial data across a range of categoriesEducause (US) Gathers cost data over a range of IT-related operations in HEIs and makes them available through its Core Data ServiceGartner Inc. (Global) Provides a wide range of services across the business world, including gathering cost data on IT operations that HEIs use for benchmarkingUCISA Provides IT-related information in the form of periodic reports on particular issuesSCONUL Statisitics Collects data over a range of library activities on an annual basis and virtually all UK HEI libraries submit data to this service. It is light on activity-based costs
  17. 17. The Costs Observatory Study (2011)Why it might NOT be a good idea …• Lack of demand (an idea ‘ahead of its time’?)• Data collection will be a sizeable and rather challenging task, requiring considerable resourcing both by the Observatory and the participating institutions• Whether the required data can be adequately defined and whether sufficiently accurate data can be arrived at by participants• In the specific case of research data, accurate and representative cost data may be extremely difficult to collect within universitiesperhaps the – overarching issue for the Observatory is how to handle comparability …It would need to:• Clearly define the cost data elements needed• Ensure that these costs are pieces of informaton that all types of institution could come up with• Ensure that the collection and submission of information was not too onerous for institutions
  18. 18. The Costs Observatory Study (2011)Why it MIGHT BE a good idea …• Stakeholders think there is a gap in existing provision• A Costs Observatory covering research information management and preservation costs would complement existing services• Research data management is becoming more important to institutions• Other benchmarking services are well-used and considered useful. There is growing emphasis on evidence-based decision-making, and evidence from authoritative and trusted sources is valued• Libraries generally enjoy a culture of information-sharing• Research offices are generally positive about participation, as long as there is clear value in it• The REF (in the UK) may act as a strong driver for the service, as it has for the development of repositories and CRIS in UK HEIs• The market need not be confined to the UK and indeed there are good business reasons for considering this as a potential international service
  19. 19. The Costs Observatory Study (2011)The study concluded that the scope of information that any proposed ‘Costs Observatory’should focus on is:• The institutional research repository and associated operations• The institutional research data repository (where present)• The institutional research information system (RIS) and associated operations• Any additional archiving operations and systems for research outputs or informationSome assertions… “most institutions in the UK now appear to be settling on a formula that can be simplydescribed as ‘research repository + data archives + CRIS’ “ …… ”the repository is, in some universities at least, regarded as the third most importantmanagement information tool after the finance and student records systems” …… “future REFs* will continue to influence record-keeping *…+. A Costs Observatory thuswould be a natural part of this ecology” …*Research Excellence Framework – a periodic assessment of the quality of UK HE research that also helps to determine levelsof funding for research in UK universities
  20. 20. The Blue Ribbon Task Force for Sustainable DigitalPreservation and Access (2008 - 2010) Objective To develop a set of economically viable recommendations to catalyze the development of reliable strategies for the preservation of digital information. Final report (February 2010) http://brtf.sdsc.edu/ Big detailed report focusing on economics … some synthesis required?
  21. 21. A Draft Economic Sustainability Reference Model (2011)The challenges to effective sustainability (preservation) are:• Long time horizons• Diffused stakeholders• Misaligned or weak incentives• Lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities among stakeholders• Difficulty in valuing or monetizing the costs and benefits of digital preservationThree principal actions are required for sustainability:• Articulate a compelling value proposition• Provide clear incentives to preserve in the public interest• Define roles and responsibilities among stakeholders to ensure an ongoing and efficient flow of resources to preservation throughout the digital lifecycleBrian Lavoie (OCLC) and Chris Rusbridge (Consultant) came up with the idea oftrying to turn the Blue Ribbon Task Force conclusions into some form of referencemodel.
  22. 22. Digital AssetProperty 1 Property 2 Property 3 Derived Depreciable Non-Rival in Demand & Durable ConsumptionSustainability Condition 1 Sustainability Condition 2 Sustainability Condition 3 Value Ongoing Incentives Proposition Investment
  23. 23. Preservation ProcessProperty 4 Property 5 Property 6 … is a stream of … is path-dependent … has finite resourcesdecisions over timeSustainability Condition 4 Sustainability Condition 5 Sustainability Condition 6 Finite Planning Evaluate Opportunity Horizons Cost of Inaction Selection
  24. 24. Relationships
  25. 25. Next opportunity to think about and develop this model ... 7th International Digital Curation Conference Bristol, UK, 5 - 7 December 2011 Thursday 8th December 2011 http://www.dcc.ac.uk/events/idcc11/workshops
  26. 26. Opportunities for international collaboration and join-upThe LIFE Model is currently the most sustained attempt in this field to work out thelong-term cost of preservation.• who is using it and how?• how can it be improved?• if it needs ongoing input and maintenance, how should it be sustained?The KRDS Framework has been influential and the management of research data isnot a problem that is going away any time soon – for anyone!• what is the best way of using this knowledge?Should both of these initiatives inform a service that would specialise in thefinancial aspects of the long-term management of digital information in theresearch/teaching domain?• might this usefully be underpinned by an economic reference model?

×