Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Roles and Responsibilities in guaranteeing 
Permanent Access to the Scholarly Record 
APE2014: Berlin, 29th January 
Ensur...
The Internet & the Web have changed (many) things 
Author 
(article) 
Reader 
(article) 
Publisher 
‘Open Access’ 
article...
Our Shared Task … 
… is to ensure ease and continuity of access to 
the scholarly & cultural record 
• Good News J Improv...
Our Shared Task … 
… is to ensure ease and continuity of access to 
the scholarly & cultural record 
• Good News J Improv...
… some larger problems lurk 
1. Data, big & small – lots of numbers 
2. Audio-visual materials – lots of pictures & sounds...
The Internet & the Web have changed (some) things 
Author 
(article) 
Reader 
(article) 
learned 
society 
peer 
exchange ...
"We must all be archivists now" 
1. Who has the archival responsibility? 
² Who does ‘forever’? 
2. Do academic libraries...
A ‘global challenge’: trans-national action 
US.LoC 20% 
Researchers (and therefore libraries) in any one country 
are dep...
Seriality: Identify point of issue for scholarly content 
Non-trivial fraction of 
the Scholarly Record 
& important ‘mode...
Many Reports over past 10 Years … 
They highlighted risks in digital media & formats: 
• ‘digital decay’: format obsolesce...
Measured Progress with Serials 
An impressive number of archiving agencies 
① web-scale not-for-profit archiving agencies ...
Many archiving organisations is a Good Thing J 
“Digital information is best preserved by replicating it at 
multiple arc...
Measured Progress with Serials 
A continuing flow of Reports that update … 
• highlighting risks in digital media & format...
Now have a global Registry of e-journal archiving 
… to discover who is looking after what 
Enter title 
or ISSN 
to searc...
15 
… and discover details of its ‘archival status’ 
… but coverage 
of volumes is 
partial & patchy 
This e-journal is be...
What the Registry tells about progress? 
Progress, but still not ‘job done’ 
The Keepers Registry <thekeepers.org> reports...
Good News & Main Challenge? 
Good new s? 
• Most of the big publishers engage with archiving initiatives 
• Keepers Regist...
Do we need to agree a ‘priority list’ of titles? 
1. Should we only be interested in the c.30,000 ‘peer-reviewed’ 
scholar...
Looking from the user’s point of view … 
… with usage logs for the UK OpenURL Router 
• 10.4m full text requests in 2012; ...
Choice of future with 2020 Vision 
• Best Case scenario for IFLA 2020 (APE2020) 
– Libraries (& Publishers) have acted to ...
Ask a librarian in 2020: 3 possible answers 
1. "Yes, we have it (we've checked recently, both in the 
catalogue and in ac...
Sidebar note on monitoring The Keepers Registry: A cthtioenira pblreo Egvriedsesn c…e 
1. To assist publishers ‘do the rig...
Monitoring Preservation Progress: Serial Content 
http://thekeepers.org 
Thank you for 
listening 
http://thekeepers.blogs...
How to know who is looking after what & how? 
(and uncover what is still at risk) 
SERVICES: user 
requirements 
E-J Prese...
Sidebar note on National Libraries 
Should we wait upon Legal Deposit? 
– 94% of libraries have some form of legal deposit...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

0

Share

Download to read offline

Ensuring the Scholarly Record is Kept Safe: Measured Progress with Serials

Download to read offline

Delivered by Peter Burnhill at Academic Publishing in Europe 9, 29 January 2014. Our shared task is to ensure ease and continuity of access to the scholarly & cultural record.

  • Be the first to like this

Ensuring the Scholarly Record is Kept Safe: Measured Progress with Serials

  1. 1. Roles and Responsibilities in guaranteeing Permanent Access to the Scholarly Record APE2014: Berlin, 29th January Ensuring the Scholarly Record is Kept Safe Measured Progress with Serials Peter Burnhill EDINA, University of Edinburgh, UK http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
  2. 2. The Internet & the Web have changed (many) things Author (article) Reader (article) Publisher ‘Open Access’ article serial issue Licensed Online Access Institutional arrangement Library (serial) learned society peer Licence exchange peer exchange by free2web access Informal: ‘invisible college’ and the ‘gift economy’ Fo rma £ E c onomy ‘Open Access’
  3. 3. Our Shared Task … … is to ensure ease and continuity of access to the scholarly & cultural record • Good News J Improved Ease of Access: • What was once availably locally is now online & accessed remotely, anytime/anywhere
  4. 4. Our Shared Task … … is to ensure ease and continuity of access to the scholarly & cultural record • Good News J Improved Ease of Access: • What was once availably locally is now online & accessed remotely, anytime/anywhere • Bad News! L Challenge to Continuity of Access: • Academic libraries are no longer the custodians of the scholarly record – What’s on the Web one day is changed or has disappeared the next – We need to invest in good & reliable digital shelving!
  5. 5. … some larger problems lurk 1. Data, big & small – lots of numbers 2. Audio-visual materials – lots of pictures & sounds 3. Web-references (URIs) made in scholarly record Hiberlink.org, a joint UoE/LANL/EDINA (Mellon funded) project to investigate ‘Reference Rot’ – when what was cited ceases to say the same thing “or has ceased to be” E-journals should be the easier part of the problem: … but is the e-journals problem is being solved? … and what might help with the larger problems?
  6. 6. The Internet & the Web have changed (some) things Author (article) Reader (article) learned society peer exchange Licensed Online Access “The Library [Committee], which is made up of librarians and academics, .. want reassurance about long-term preservation before confirming a University policy of going e-only.” Big UK Library peer exchange by free2web access Libraries speak of ‘e-collections’ but in practice they have only ‘e-connections’ Informal: ‘invisible college’ and the ‘gift economy’
  7. 7. "We must all be archivists now" 1. Who has the archival responsibility? ² Who does ‘forever’? 2. Do academic libraries still wish to be the custodians of the scholarly record? 3. How can libraries/publishers ensure continuity of access? 4. Where are their digital shelving? ² What is on those shelves? ² What is missing? ² How do we know?
  8. 8. A ‘global challenge’: trans-national action US.LoC 20% Researchers (and therefore libraries) in any one country are dependent upon content written and published in countries other than their own UK.BL 10% ‘hidden’ e-journals: low % ISSN Netherlands & Germany: c. 4.5% each Brazil 4% %age of the 113,000 ISSN issued for e-serials
  9. 9. Seriality: Identify point of issue for scholarly content Non-trivial fraction of the Scholarly Record & important ‘model’
  10. 10. Many Reports over past 10 Years … They highlighted risks in digital media & formats: • ‘digital decay’: format obsolescence & bit rot and warned against single points of failure: • natural disasters (earthquake, fire and flood) • human folly (criminal and political action): hacking + risks associated with commercial events in the publisher/ supply chain • eDepot at Koninklijke Bibliotheek … as early archiving initiatives emerged • international significance (Elsevier & Kluwer) as well as national role for The Netherlands) • the LOCKSS project at Stanford University • from which came CLOCKSS [as library/publisher ‘dark archive’] • the Electronic-Archiving Initiative at JSTOR • from which came Portico [as service provider]
  11. 11. Measured Progress with Serials An impressive number of archiving agencies ① web-scale not-for-profit archiving agencies e.g. CLOCKSS Archive & Portico ② national libraries (with legal deposit in mind) e.g. e-Depot (Netherlands); British Library; DnB; & National Science Library of China etc ③ research libraries: consortia & specialist centres e.g. Global LOCKSS Network, HathiTrust, Scholars Portal, Archaeology Data Service
  12. 12. Many archiving organisations is a Good Thing J “Digital information is best preserved by replicating it at multiple archives run by autonomous organizations” B. Cooper and H. Garcia-Molina (2002)
  13. 13. Measured Progress with Serials A continuing flow of Reports that update … • highlighting risks in digital media & formats • warning against single points of failure • DPC Report lists 6 Use Cases to contrast 'Continuing Access' & 'Long-term Preservation’ 1. Library cancels a JOURNAL subscription 2. Library exits a Big DEAL 3. Back issues of journal become unavailable from publisher 4. Journal becomes 'orphan' as publisher goes out of business 5. Journal 'unavailable' as operation of publisher hits disaster 6. Library decides to remove / dispose print journals 3 to 5 are the Archivist’s ‘preservation’ Use Cases
  14. 14. Now have a global Registry of e-journal archiving … to discover who is looking after what Enter title or ISSN to search across metadata reported by leading archiving organisations *news* Library of Congress has now joined the Keepers Registry [& have high hopes for some others …]
  15. 15. 15 … and discover details of its ‘archival status’ … but coverage of volumes is partial & patchy This e-journal is being archived by 5 archiving agencies … Example search: ‘Origins of Life’
  16. 16. What the Registry tells about progress? Progress, but still not ‘job done’ The Keepers Registry <thekeepers.org> reports: A. 21,557 e-serial titles are being 'Preserved’ i.e. ingested by organisations with archival intent – (Many ‘missing volumes and issues’) B. 113,092 ISSN assigned to ‘online serials in ISSN Register Ø Progress with a key indicator: ratio of A/B = 19% – was 17% at close of 2011 (16,558 / 97,563)
  17. 17. Good News & Main Challenge? Good new s? • Most of the big publishers engage with archiving initiatives • Keepers Registry often show titles held by 3+ 'Keepers’ – typically CLOCKSS, e-Depot and Portico. Main challenge? • The long tail of smaller publishers – regardless of business model. • It is not about Open Access per se – DOAJ for content of 10,000 e-journals from 4,000 publishers • Lots of other (important/priority?) e-journal • Role of national libraries or library consortia?
  18. 18. Do we need to agree a ‘priority list’ of titles? 1. Should we only be interested in the c.30,000 ‘peer-reviewed’ scholarly journals? 2. Do we look only at on what individual libraries list? – In 2012 we checked ‘archival status’ for 3 large university libraries c.75% ‘at risk’ c.11% held by 3 or more • Two key indicators: %age (& number) of titles that are ‘at risk of loss’ %age (& number) of titles that are ‘preserved by 3 or more Keepers’. 3. Should we ask the audience? • The researchers and students who read online serials
  19. 19. Looking from the user’s point of view … … with usage logs for the UK OpenURL Router • 10.4m full text requests in 2012; ISSN-L to de-duplicate ISSN • 53,311 online titles requested by researchers & student from 108/160+ Analysis using the Keepers Registry: • Only 15% (7,862) are being kept by 3+ Keepers • Over two thirds (68%) held by none Ø 36,326 titles ‘at risk’ of loss L • Check robustness with UK logs for 2011 & 2013; Request logs for other countries (WorldCat) Ø So ‘preservation really is still a problem!
  20. 20. Choice of future with 2020 Vision • Best Case scenario for IFLA 2020 (APE2020) – Libraries (& Publishers) have acted to reduce that alarming 80% figure to near to zero J – They have ensured that all the e-journal content used by their researchers in 2013 has been preserved and can be successfully BREAKING used NEWS: in 2020, and US assuredly President beyond. J • Worst announces Case scenario 2014 to for be IFLA Year 2020 of Action (APE2020) – Libraries (& Publishers) have failed to act L – Important literature has been lost L – Citizens & scholars complain of neglect!
  21. 21. Ask a librarian in 2020: 3 possible answers 1. "Yes, we have it (we've checked recently, both in the catalogue and in actuality), and you can access it now" 2. "No, but we know some body that does (we trust), – so we can point you to (or arrange access to) it now/soon-ish" 3. "Sorry, we don't know … - perhaps nobody has it - it may be lost forever, altho' perhaps somebody somewhere ...” - That was true for the print world - Unfortunately, unless we do something now, the 3rd answer could become the common one for a lot of e-journal content
  22. 22. Sidebar note on monitoring The Keepers Registry: A cthtioenira pblreo Egvriedsesn c…e 1. To assist publishers ‘do the right thing’ – A showcase for the real heroes: the archiving organisations – provide libraries, publishers & archiving organisations with lists of titles that seem to be at risk of loss 2. To keep a close focus on volumes & issues Breaking News: New release (end of Q12014) Members Area: – Need to make sure all issued content is being kept safe 3. To assist collaboration for Keepers: ‘a safe places network’: Upload a list of ISSNs & get back archival status of Titles Access to API, to report archival status on 3rd Party websites many met at iPres 2013 in Lisbon this September 4. To assist the ISSN Network assign more ISSN – If it is worth preserving, it really should have an identifier 5. To recruit more archiving organisations as Keepers – The Registry is not an audit / certification authority but there are eligibility checks for integrity of ‘archival intent’
  23. 23. Monitoring Preservation Progress: Serial Content http://thekeepers.org Thank you for listening http://thekeepers.blogs.edina.ac.uk/
  24. 24. How to know who is looking after what & how? (and uncover what is still at risk) SERVICES: user requirements E-J Preservation Registry Service E-Journal Preservation Registry Piloting an E-journal Preservation Registry Service (b) Data dependency (a) ISSN Register ISSN Register at heart of the Data Model; ISSN-L as kernel field METADATA on extant e-journals METADATA on preservation action Digital Preservation Agencies e.g. CLOCKSS, Portico; BL, KB; UK LOCKSS Alliance etc. (Taken from Figure 1 in reference paper in Serials, March 2009)
  25. 25. Sidebar note on National Libraries Should we wait upon Legal Deposit? – 94% of libraries have some form of legal deposit for print. • Only 44% national libraries had legislation in 2011 for e-books or e-journals; expected to rise to 58% by June 2012. from presentation, CENL 2011 Survey by Lynne Brindley to CDNL Annual Meeting Puerto Rico, 15/8/11 • Only 27% [expected to rise to 37% by June 2012] actually ingesting via legal deposit Ø Total national libraries collecting = those 14 via legal deposit + 9 by other means (Netherlands, UK/BL, Switzerland voluntary deposit) Ø Only KB e-Depot, BL, NSLC (+ LoC) in The Keepers Registry Ø Only when the other 19 join will all know about their activity Ø Key point is not about call for ‘legal deposit’ but that on its own it is taking too much time

Delivered by Peter Burnhill at Academic Publishing in Europe 9, 29 January 2014. Our shared task is to ensure ease and continuity of access to the scholarly & cultural record.

Views

Total views

770

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

2

Actions

Downloads

2

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

0

×