Digital preservation activity

1. Digital Preservation Activity:Issues for the creation of a digitalEuropeDr Paul AyrisDirector of UCL Library Services and UCL Copyright OfficerPresident of LIBER (Association of European Research Libraries)p.ayris@ucl.ac.uk

2. Contents1. The European Information Landscape2. Blue Ribbon Task Force on Economically-Sustainable Digital Preservation3. LIBER and APARSEN4. LIFE project on digital preservation costing5. Next Steps  European Infrastructures6. Conclusions

4. Local VRE/VLE/ Student/UCL Library Prescribed core readings holdings local web systems and textbooks Paper and e-Research collaborations; Pay fees; book residences; Books/Journals/ Primary data; Group pay fines; see course and Core textbooks (STM); AV/Digital Collections project work; Learning exam marks; see loans Digital readings (AHSS) and Archives interface information E-Journals, E-Books, YouTube, FaceBook, Flickr Global resources - free mass digitisation Digital Preservation Google interface to External contentSocial networking tools Internet subscribed and free

6. Digital Preservation US-UK Blue Ribbon Task Force on Economically-Sustainable Digital Preservation laid out the conditions that should prevail in order for the scholarly outputs of researchers to be digitally preserved for the long term  See http://www.jisc.ac.uk/brtf A number of scenarios looked at the level of preparation of various communities to undertake digital preservation  Scholarly Discourse  Research Data  Commercially-owned Cultural Content  Collectively-produced Web Content

7. Digital Preservation Academic libraries were amongst the best prepared of the stakeholders surveyed US Film Industry, by contrast, was not  Jon Landau, the producer of Avatar, was honest in saying that no arrangements had been made for the digital preservation of his film  Not clear whose responsibility to undertake that work it was

8. Digital Preservation Economically-sustainable digital preservation requires:  Recognition of the benefits of digital preservation on the part of key decision-makers  Incentives for the decision-makers to act in the public interest  A process for selecting digital materials for long-term preservation  Mechanisms to secure an ongoing, efficient allocation of resources to digital preservation activities  Appropriate governance of digital preservation activities

9. Digital Preservation Scenarios: Scholarly Discourse Recommendation 1  Libraries, scholars and professional societies should develop selection criteria for emerging digital genres in scholarly discourse, and prototype preservation and access strategies to support them Recommendation 2  Publishers reserving the right to preserve should party with third- party archives or libraries to ensure long-term digital preservation

10. Digital Preservation Recommendation 3  Scholars should consider granting non-exclusive rights to publish and preserve, to enable decentralized and distributed preservation of emerging scholarly discourse Recommendation 4  Libraries should create a mechanism to organise and clarify their governance issues and responsibilities to preserve monographs and emerging scholarly discourse along lines similar to those for e-journals

11. Digital Preservation Recommendation 5  All open-access strategies that assume the persistence of information over time must consider provisions for the funding of preservation

12. Digital Preservation Scenarios: Research Data  Recommendation 1  Each domain, through professional societies or other consensus-making bodies, should set priorities for data selection, level of curation and length of retention  Recommendation 2  Funders should impose preservation mandates, when appropriate. When mandates are imposed, funders should also specify selection criteria, funds to be used, and responsible organizations to provide archiving

13. Digital Preservation Scenarios: Research Data  Recommendation 3  Funding agencies should explicitly recognize ‘data under stewardship’ as a core indicator of scientific effort and include this information in the standard reporting mechanisms  Recommendation 4  Preservation services should reduce preservation and archiving costs by leveraging economies of scale where possible

14. Digital Preservation Scenarios: Research Data  Recommendation 5  Agreements with third-party archives should stipulate processes, outcomes, retention periods, and handoff triggers

16. APARSEN 30 partners, led by the Science and Technology Facilities Council Envisaged Outcomes  Integration of the majority of the research activities in digital preservation within a common vision, terminology and evidence standard  Common agreement of the services needed for preservation, access and most importantly re-use of data holdings over the whole lifecycle  Embedding of legal and economic issues, including costs, governance issues and digital rights in digital preservation  Discipline of data curators with appropriate qualifications recognised across Europe, and well defined support services

17. LIBER and APARSEN LIBER will look at the level of preparation in Europe to adopt the Blue Ribbon Task Force’s recommendations  Work package led by Austrian National Library / University of Patras LIBER will survey key stakeholders with an interest in digital preservation 4 stakeholder categories  Research Data  Scholarly Discourse  Collectively-created Content  Commercially-owned Cultural Content The National and International agencies category of stakeholders identified by the Blue Ribbon report will also be contacted Result will be a comprehensive Report on the situation in Europe

19. LIFE Collaboration between British Library and UCL  Developed a generic lifecycle costing formula (v2) See http://www.life.ac.uk/

20. LIFE Model v2

21. Case Study 1: Burney Newspapers Curation costs for the British Library’s Burney newspapers Burney Digital Collection and Legal Deposit Newspaper Collection were used to obtain digital and analogue costs

22. Case Study 1: Burney Newspapers Headline conclusion  Same lifecycle model can be used to cost analogue AND digital preservation Too simplistic to say that digital preservation is cheaper that analogue preservation  More Studies needed

23. Case Study 2:SHERPA-LEAP Open Access repositories SHERPA-LEAP is a consortium of Open Access repositories in London Year 1 Repository Lifecycle costs per entity

24. Case Study 2:SHERPA-LEAP Open Access repositories Variations in costings can be attributed to a number of factors  Staff on different staffing grades  Goldsmiths manages a large number of complex digital materials and this raises the handling costs per object After Year 1, main costs are associated with Preservation

25. Case Study 3: SHERPA-DP Distributed Repository Environment For Digital Preservation of Content  See http://www.sherpadp.org.uk/ Headline conclusion  Costs of Digital Preservation do not vary significantly according to quantities  as automated processes have been established Largest cost area was in Bit Stream preservation  Included staff elements for system administration and technology monitoring, as well as for storage provision

26. Case Study 3: SHERPA-DP Summary of total costs from SHERPA-DP Case Study

27. Headline Repository Findings SHERPA-DP Case Study shows that cost-effective 3rd party digital preservation solution is possible for the UK Costing figures are not yet robust enough to allow generic conclusions to be reached Most libraries/repositories find it a challenge to undertake lifecycle costings Digital Preservation is not yet embedded in the Higher Education community

29. EU Infrastructures EU Consultation on Access to, and Preservation of, Scientific Information took place in Luxembourg on 31 May 2011  LIBER’s Statement is available at http://www.libereurope.eu/news/llber- statement-at-the-public-hearing-on-access-to-and-preservation-of- scientific-information-l Statement covers:  Open Access  Copyright reform  Digital Preservation Fair dealing exemptions should also cover format shifting to allow libraries and memory institutions to preserve digitally for the long term the digital content that European researchers use and need EU will be consulting further with a view to issuing an EU Directive

30. EU Infrastructures European research needs sustainable infrastructures for long-term access to digital materials Key Questions to be addressed  Roles and Responsibilities  Does everyone need to undertake digital preservation, or can it be left to a chosen few?  What infrastructure is needed to deliver long-term access?  Who will pay?  How much will it cost?  How does copyright legislation at the EU and Member State level need to change?

31. EU Infrastructures LIBER wishes to undertake a Study to  Identify what provision currently exists for the digital preservation of commercial e-journals, e-books and European cultural content  Propose a solution for the creation of a sustainable digital preservation service to solve these issues for European researchers, including the high-level technical requirements of such a service  Evaluate possible technical solutions, based either on a single platform/service provider or on a series of networked, inter-linked platforms around Europe

32. EU Infrastructures  Define the licence models and legal framework in which such a service would operate  Identify whether such a service would best be run by one or more European institutions or be put out to contract to a commercial supplier  Identify the costs of developing such a solution for European researchers and the economic sustainability of such a service  Identify the roles and responsibilities of all relevant stakeholders for the provision of the service, including governance structures

33. E-Depot UK curation German curation Other curation Netherlands Node(s) Node(s) Node(s) Registry 1 Registry 2 Registry 3 Registry etc. Consolidated Registry from Partners UsersIdeal European architecture for Digital Preservation infrastructure

34. Conclusions European Information landscape needs to be underpinned by long- term access to its resources Blue Ribbon Task Force has defined what needs to be in place for economically-sustainable digital preservation to exist and has made recommendations  To be tested in Europe by LIBER in APARSEN Projects such as LIBER’s LIFE project have identified tools and costs for digital preservation Infrastructure to deliver sustainable digital pan-European preservation services is now required

35. If you have been… Thanks for listening Happy to discuss further

Digital preservation activity

LIBER Europe

Digital preservation activity