250 likes | 338 Views
Print Backfiles in the Age of JSTOR. Presented by John Kiplinger JSTOR Director of Production Rebecca Kemp Serials Supervisor, UNC Wilmington. FIFTEENTH NORTH CAROLINA SERIALS CONFERENCE: Crystal Clear? Today’s Libraries, Tomorrow’s Library Users Friday, March 31, 2006
E N D
Print Backfiles in the Age of JSTOR Presented by John Kiplinger JSTOR Director of Production Rebecca Kemp Serials Supervisor, UNC Wilmington FIFTEENTH NORTH CAROLINA SERIALS CONFERENCE: Crystal Clear? Today’s Libraries, Tomorrow’s Library Users Friday, March 31, 2006 The William and Ida Friday Continuing Education Center Chapel Hill, NC
Presentation Structure • The Impact of Digital Archives on Legacy Print Serials Collections: A Look at the JSTOR Paper Repository Experience • Libraries’ Responses to the JSTOR Digital Archives: Individual and Collective Decisions
The Impact of Digital Archives on Legacy Print Serials Collections: A Look at the JSTOR Paper Repository Experience John Kiplinger JSTOR Director of Production
Context • Libraries/librarians encountering an ever-pressing space crunch with, typically, little or no funds available for additional physical storage space • Legacy print is being digitized at an accelerating pace by a growing number of organizations • Digital archiving principles (for both digitized print and born-digital content) still evolving • JSTOR tends to be recognized for the increased accessibility and searchability of the content, and not so much because of its preservation mission
Why Should JSTOR Save Paper? • Three Elements of JSTOR’s Digitized Print Archiving Strategy • Maintenance of the digital files • Preservation of original source (print) • JSTOR’s initial disposition of paper volumes • JSTOR’s evolving policy • Third-party stewardship of both digital and paper archival versions
Why Should JSTOR Save Paper? • Post-digitization, the paper artifact (particularly in the case of journal literature) has several roles: • Preservation of original format/context of content (which can be essential for format migration in digital preservation) • Disaster recovery • Other factors (e.g., aesthetic and/or historical value, marginalia, library’s mission, rarity)
Why Should JSTOR Save Paper? • JSTOR’s “migration” of digital files is a preservation methodology that requires access to the paper source issues. • The need for collection of all the paper issues was recognized, but how would it be done? • Could we rely on major research libraries to hold the paper version for us? • Could JSTOR maintain its own paper repository? • Could JSTOR partner with libraries or other organizations to do this?
Moving Toward a Paper Repository • JSTOR Bound Volume Surveys (1999-2003) • http://www.jstor.org/about/bvs2003.html • All survey results reveal that libraries are thinking and acting on remotely storing and de-accessioning paper volumes for JSTOR titles • In the 2003 survey, respondents for the first time specifically raised the idea of collaborative retention programs for these volumes
Moving Toward a Paper Repository • Center for Research Libraries • JSTOR and CRL discuss possible collaboration • CRL begins to build its own onsite repository of paper versions of all JSTOR titles (May 2000). As of January 6, 2006, 76% of all publicly available volumes are archived – http://www.crl.edu • CRL implements Mellon funded distributed archive plan (2002-2003)
Moving Toward a Paper Repository • JSTOR Paper Repository Advisory Group (Sept. 2002) identified needed characteristics for a paper repository: • Dark archive • Centralized • Environmentally-controlled • Validation at page-level • Acceptable price tag • In late 2004, JSTOR signed agreements with both Harvard University and University of California/California Digital Library to archive all JSTOR titles publicly released through October 2003.
Current Status? • Both libraries are on track for compiling the requisite back runs by February 2007 • Rejections of volumes for inclusion in the repository because of damaged/missing pages are being experienced, so the rigorous validation processes have been justified • Collaborative approaches to problem resolution (e.g., locating replacement pages, finding rare issues) are being found • Repository validation processes are turning up some issues not previously known to JSTOR, so the digital archive is being improved as well!
What’s next, both near and long term? • JSTOR staff audits of UC and Harvard paper repository work • Completion of compilation of back runs for initial 353 titles • First successful use of repository materials by JSTOR, their return to the repository and re-validation • Negotiation of agreements for next round of titles • Work with other interested libraries, institutions and organizations on setting up their own repositories
Libraries’ Responses to the JSTOR Digital Archive: Individual and Collective Decisions Rebecca Kemp Serials Supervisor University of North Carolina Wilmington
Many libraries have decided to discard their print volumes • Many messages posted on SERIALST and other listservs regarding decisions to de-accession • Informal study: 17 SERIALST posts, originating Dec. 5, 2002 and April 04, 2005 • Messages not necessarily representative of whole library population, but telling
Many libraries have decided to discard their print volumes (cont.) • Of 17 respondents • 3 keeping print back-volumes in the collection; 1 library also moving some back materials to off-site storage • 2 moving to off-site storage • 2 part of collaborative print-sharing groups • 11 discarding; one institution retaining volumes with important illustrations, one institution retaining “standards in the fields”
Many libraries have decided to discard their print volumes (cont.) • Motivations for discarding • Space concern • Serving remote populations • Moving to online-only • Motivations for retaining: • Space not a concern (We should all be so lucky!) • Faculty and students not accepting JSTOR • Unpredictability of digital archiving (per McKinzie, Steve, “Troubling Choices: Full-text Access and the Old Hard Copy Back Runs,” Against the Grain 17.1(2005):60-61.)
Cooperative Endeavors: Having our cake and eating it, too? • Best of both worlds for e- and print access? • Another informal study: what distributed print depositories or centralized consortial depositories exist for housing JSTOR volumes? • 9 projects reported • 6 centralized (with 2 also allowing for non-centralized storage), 3 distributed depositories
Centralized Depositories Most fully developed: • UC Southern Regional Library Facility (in conjunction with JSTOR) • Five Colleges, Inc. (Massachusetts) • Five Colleges (Ohio) – CONSTOR (although they allow storage at individual facilities as well) In the works: • Northwest Ohio Regional Book Depository • Northeastern Ohio Cooperative Regional Library Depository • North Carolina Triangle Libraries
Distributed Depositories Examples • CRL/JSTOR efforts • Utah Academic Library Consortium • Swedish University Libraries • Western North Carolina Library Network
Embarking upon collaborative endeavors - Best Practices from Schottlaender, Brian, “ ‘You say you want an evolution...’ The emerging UC libraries shared collection,” Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services 28 (2004): 13-24. • Distinguish between necessary and unnecessary redundancy • Different service “layers:” local, regional, national; bright, dim, dark
Best Practices (cont.) from Arthur, Michael A., “Developing a Distributed Print Depository System: Challenges and Opportunities,” The Serials Librarian48.3/4(2005):343-348. • Designate purpose of the collection (dark archive / light?) • Have written, legal agreements regarding responsibilities
Best Practices (cont.) from Center for Research Libraries, “Towards a national hard copy strategy,” Focus 21.3(2002):1-7. • “Build on existing infrastructure and structures” • Voluntary • “Proper governance and transparency” • Disclose responsibilities, agreements, statistics, policies, reports, minutes • Economically sustainable
What would it take a build a statewide network in NC? • Building blocks: WNCLN, Triangle Libraries • Cooperation among ULAC libraries? • Bigger things: a national distributed repository system? • Feedback?
Thank you! Presenter Contact Information John Kiplinger JSTOR Director of Production 301 E. Liberty, Suite 310 Ann Arbor, MI 48104-2262 jkip@jstor.org Rebecca Kemp, Serials Supervisor UNC Wilmington Randall Library 601 S. College Rd. Wilmington, NC 28403 kempr@uncw.edu