Finding out about the preservation of e-journals: the PEPRS Project P iloting an E -journals P reservation R egistry S ervice Fred Guy, Project Manager, EDINA, University of Edinburgh [email_address] Internet Librarian International Conference 2010 15 th October 2010
So What’s the Problem with E-journals?
96.1% of Science journals are online
86.5% of Arts and Humanities are online
2006-2007 – 102,000,000 downloads
Up 21% from previous year
17% usage is at the weekend
Source . E-journals: their use, value and impact. Research Information Network. UK April 2009.
Publication of E-Journals
Trends in the finances of UK higher education libraries: 1999-2009 . RIN 2010. p. 17
Why Worry About Digital Preservation?
Worries that all that is now digital may not always be available, for a variety of reasons.
Publishers ceases publication with no transfer
Publisher goes out of business with no transfer
Publisher taken over
Works well with print via legislation and national libraries.
Countries with legislation enacted (or ‘in train’) for e-materials include: Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, UK
But , not all countries (notably USA) and in UK the legislation supports voluntary deposit, with restrictions of mode of access
Why a Preservation Registry?
Many schemes emerging to meet challenge
But who is doing what?
How can libraries & policy-makers assess which e-journals are being archived, by what methods, and under what terms of access?
JISC commissioned a scoping study for an e-journals preservation registry
the idea had been mentioned in the literature
Scoping Study for a Registry
Scoping Study Report Precedes PEPRS
Rightscom / Loughborough University, 2007
Confirmed expressed need among libraries and policy makers
Warned of potential burden on digital preservation agencies
an e-journals preservation registry should be built
UK Union Catalogue of Serials (SUNCAT) or SHERPA (Open Access) get involved
SUNCAT is hosted and managed at EDINA
Phase 1 funded by JISC (Preservation Programme) from August 2008 – July 2010
EDINA, University of Edinburgh, grant recipient
Project partner – ISSN International Centre, Paris
Evaluation carried out by Charles Beagrie Limited for the JISC in February 2010
Digital Preservation Agencies in the Pilot
* Two 3 rd Party Organisations
CLOCKSS ( C ontrolled L ots O f C opies K eeps S tuff S afe)
* Two National Libraries (c.f. legal deposit)
British Library (BL) British Library e-Journal Digital Archive
Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB e-Depot ) KB, National Library of the Netherlands
* One library cooperative
UK LOCKSS ( L ots O f C opies K eeps S tuff S afe) Alliance
Data from the agencies e-Depot XML e-Depot XML UKLOCKSS sourceforge.net + spreadsheet CLOCKSS sourceforge.net + spreadsheet Portico spreadsheet Perl script to parse the data ISSN Register PEPRS Database
ISSN Register - steps
Step 1. Extract a record for each record from an agency
Step 2. Take the ISSN-L from each record
Step 3. Parse the Register to map from the ISSN-L to the associated ISSNs
Step 4. Load the records into a PEPRS database and link using the ISSN-L to the table with the records from the agencies.
Example: a search on ISSN* ‘ International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications’ * ISSN-L is used within the system to allow entry of either e-ISSN or p-ISSN
Finds the agencies looking after e-journal, and the volumes being preserved
What happens when print ISSN is entered? Key role for ISSN-L subfield
This displays what one of the archiving agencies, does in terms of access
This allows a list of e-journal titles to be checked
We are exploring the standards to use for m2m use of the registry servuce
Issues identified in Phase 1
ISSNs used by agencies
Holdings information supplied by the agencies
Vocabulary used by the agencies
ISSNs missing in some agency records and some not in ISSN Register
Some duplicate records
Some p-ISSNs used as e-ISSNs
Some p-ISSNs linked via a common ISSN-L to a number of e-ISSNs but which one is correct?
Some were incorrect
Holdings information - variation e-Depot : Preserved: v. 1 - 36, 38 - 46. UK LOCKSS Alliance : Preserved: v. 42 - 45. In progress: v. 46, 47. Portico : Preserved: (2002-2009) v.40, v.41, v.42, v.43, v.44, v.45, v.46, v.47 .
Terms used by preservation agencies
Key recommendations from evaluation carried out in February 2010
Should be funding for 2 further years with an initial 6 month phase and then if reviewed successfully for another 18 months
Need to resolve with the agencies currency and updating of agency statements, archiving status and fields and terms to use in display.
Continue with the development platform until the end of 2010
Establish a governance structure
PEPRS Phase 2
Funding provided from August 2010 – July 2012
Beta service – late 2010
Full service – late 2011?
Involve international users in testing
PEPRS Phase 2: key stages
Involvement with international initiatives
Print Archives Program of the Center for Research Libraries – “ CRL is working with consortial partners to plan a prototype print archives framework to link existing print archiving efforts. has developed a searchable Print Archives Registry of information about print-archiving initiatives, including:
Serial Holdings .
HATHITrust – “…. is committed to preserving the intellectual content and in many cases the exact appearance and layout of materials digitized for deposit. HathiTrust stores and preserves metadata detailing the sequence of files for the digital object” .