Library Management Digital preservation strategies at Colorado State University Libraries Beth Oehlerts Shu Liu

Article information:

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

To cite this document: Beth Oehlerts Shu Liu, (2013),"Digital preservation strategies at Colorado State University Libraries", Library Management, Vol. 34 Iss 1/2 pp. 83 - 95 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01435121311298298 Downloaded on: 14 February 2015, At: 08:54 (PT) References: this document contains references to 7 other documents. To copy this document: [email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1359 times since 2013*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded: Juan Voutssas, (2012),"Long-term digital information preservation: challenges in Latin America", Aslib Proceedings, Vol. 64 Iss 1 pp. 83-96 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00012531211196729 Amanda Kay Rinehart, Patrice-Andre Prud'homme, Andrew Reid Huot, (2014),"Overwhelmed to action: digital preservation challenges at the under-resourced institution", OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, Vol. 30 Iss 1 pp. 28-42 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/OCLC-06-2013-0019 Priscilla Caplan, (2010),"The Florida Digital Archive and DAITSS: a model for digital preservation", Library Hi Tech, Vol. 28 Iss 2 pp. 224-234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07378831011047631

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 273599 []

For Authors If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-5124.htm

Digital preservation strategies at Colorado State University Libraries Beth Oehlerts and Shu Liu University Libraries, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA

Digital preservation strategies 83 Received 26 April 2012 Accepted 14 August 2012

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide an account of digital archiving and preservation practices and processes successfully implemented at an academic institution. Design/methodology/approach – This case study chronicles the planning and actions taken to identify, select, package, and archive local digital assets for long-term access and migration. It includes a literature review and offers selected resources as a starting point for other institutions investigating digital preservation tools and practices. Findings – Digital preservation is a broad, evolving, and important facet of digital asset management, yet often overlooked by library administration and understated in library operations. Collaborative approaches should be considered in implementing digital preservation tools and processes with limited resources. Practical implications – What is successfully in operation at CSUL may be learned by other institutions. An effective preservation plan and established workflows will give an organization the capability to maximize limited funds and staff time. Originality/value – The majority of the current literature provides theories, technologies, conceptual models, and large-scale collaborations, with relatively little describing needs, practices, operations, and experiences at a specific academic library. This paper will contribute to the literature by discussing digital preservation from actual experience, based on the work we perform, the needs we face, and the solutions we reach within our current environment. Keywords Colorado State University Libraries, Digital archive, Digital collections, Digital preservation, Library operations, Academic libraries, United States of America Paper type Case study

Introduction Digitization activities, including participating in collaborative digitization projects and creating digital collections, began at Colorado State University Libraries (CSUL) in early 2000s. Many of the first materials digitized were photographic materials, accompanied by textual documents and sound recordings. With the inauguration of the CSU Digital Repository[1] in March 2008, university publications, faculty papers, theses and dissertations, student research posters, archival images and documents are now also available online. Documents and images submitted by faculty and students are usually born digital; many others are digitized in-house; and occasionally we outsource our projects. In addition to providing access for research and scholarship, CSUL are committed to archiving and preserving these materials for perpetual access. CSUL, which experienced a major flood disaster in 1997, is particularly aware of disaster recovery and risk management issues (Lunde and Smith, 2009). The institution now incorporates disaster planning, recovery, and preservation in all aspects of project

Library Management Vol. 34 No. 1/2, 2013 pp. 83-95 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0143-5124 DOI 10.1108/01435121311298298

LM 34,1/2

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

84

planning including digitization. The Libraries currently have several departments involved in digital preservation: Metadata and Preservation, Digital Repositories, Archives and Special Collections, with assistance from the University’s Academic Computing and Network Services (ACNS). We have a digital unit devoted to in-house digitization and a working group that oversees the management and planning of digital projects. Our long-term digital preservation policies are being revised as we examine emerging national and international standards and best practices. Much in the literature discusses models, theories, technologies, and large-scale collaborations for digital preservation, with little focus on its operations at a specific institution. This paper describes digital preservation practices at CSUL. The information presented will be applicable to institutions of a comparable size and facing similar needs for digital preservation. Digital archiving is generally considered the placement of the master digital object file, its accompanying metadata, and other pertinent information, in a secure and separate environment from the access copy. Digital preservation is the conscious effort to maintain the integrity and authenticity of the master digital object and its accompanying files by creating a preservation plan and periodically reviewing the digital files to identify and correct any degradation. Digital preservation includes, but is not limited to, mitigating any degradation by providing multiple copies of the original; monitoring format and technology changes that may require the migration of the digital masters to another format; and including all stakeholders in the preservation decision-making processes. Literature review The goals of preserving digital materials share similarities with the preservation of other formats in deciding what to preserve and where the content will reside for the long term. Preservation of digital content differs dramatically in how it is accessed. As Hitchcock and Tarrant (2010) point out, digital preservation plans should allow for changes in access and usage over time. To accommodate all digital content, preservation plans will have to include the content management of multiple formats and multiple versions of formats. Ideally, digital preservation plans must allow for format flexibility, i.e. the ability to expand and preserve all known and future formats. Before we can begin to anticipate formats and format migrations, CSUL will have to develop a preservation plan that is flexible enough to change and grow in order to meet future needs. In our “CSU Digital Repository Deposit Agreement for Content Contributors”, we require them to agree that we have the right to convert their work(s) to any medium or format for preservation purposes in order to ensure future accessibility. Salo (2008) points to the challenges facing libraries operating under the current institutional repository models when they anticipate the added task of preserving research data. The “many and vexing difficulties caused by their variability [. . .]” will prove a daunting task for most institutional repository staff. At the present, there are several research projects and initiatives at CSUL initiating investigations into data management and curation. Library Trends fall 2008[2], a theme issue on institutional repositories (IR), includes several articles on IR role in data management and curation. Fundamental to effective digital preservation is the ability to retain the authenticity of the digital content and guarantee access to that content. Sustaining these components over time requires an audit process or an accountability review, as Becker

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

and Rauber (2011) note. They advocate continuous auditing of the entire preservation process, including preservation planning, to guarantee effective long-term preservation. Other challenges facing digital preservation at comparable institutions include developing digital preservation policies and securing sustainable funding and adequate staffing (Li and Banach, 2011), and identifying or developing preservation systems in order to automate the process (Iglesias and Meesangnil, 2010). In the review, we have identified the following prominent national and international initiatives and standards that may guide or assist our local digital preservation decisions: United States Library of Congress. In December 2000, US Congress appropriated $100 million to the Library of Congress to lead the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP)[3]. The mission of this program is “to develop a national strategy to collect, preserve and make available significant digital content, especially information that is created in digital form only, for current and future generations”. To date, the Library has built a preservation network of over 130 partners from across the nation and is working with them on a variety of initiatives. As an NIDPP effort, the Library with California Digital Library and Stanford University developed a tool for digital preservation called “BagIt”[4], a specification for the packaging of digital content for the purpose of automating the content’s receipt, storage, and retrieval. The Library also hosts a web site listing tools for preservation metadata implementation[5]. RLG & OCLC. In early 2000, RLG (Research Libraries Group) and OCLC (Online Computer Library Center, Inc.) began discussing a collaborative effort to create infrastructures for digital archiving. As a result, a report on the attributes and responsibilities of trusted digital repositories was produced in May 2010 by an international group of experts. The report[6] lists eight “must” expectations of a trusted digital repository, which emphasize organizational responsibility, sustainability, system evaluation, reliability, standards, metrics, policies, and fiscal commitment. The report refers to the “Open Archival Information System (OAIS) Reference Model” as a critical framework for establishing and enhancing digital archiving services, and recommends a framework for certification of trusted digital repositories. Following activities led to TRAC (Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification)[7], hosted by the Center for Research Libraries. NISO. NISO (National Information Standards Organization) published a special theme issue on digital preservation in its quarterly print magazine, Information Standards Quarterly (ISQ)[8]. In addition, the organization offers webinars and sponsors forums on the topic. Australia and New Zealand The National Library of Australia. As one of several preservation strategies, the National Library of Australia has drafted the Digital Preservation Directions Statement 2008 to 2011[9]. The statement is supported by the Library’s Digital Preservation Policy and emphasizes the importance of incorporating preservation planning in all aspects of digitization. The Library currently houses its digital collections on

Digital preservation strategies 85

LM 34,1/2

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

86

Pandora[10], the web archive they developed for the preservation of their digital content. Pandora uses the PANDAS archiving system[11]. The National Library of New Zealand. The National Library of New Zealand preserves its digital collections in the National Digital Heritage Archive[12]. The Library’s working mandate is to preserve New Zealand’s digital heritage in perpetuity. Archives New Zealand developed a proactive approach to digital preservation in creating the first national digital preservation plan, the Digital Continuity Action Plan[13]. The plan is an “all-of-government approach” to preservation. The National Library is partnering with Archives New Zealand in implementing the Plan. Europe Digital Curation Center (DCC). The DCC[14], begun in the UK in 2004, is a resource for information on tools, processes, and developments in digital curation and preservation. As part of the DCC Principles, the DCC “advocate that repositories, archives, data centers and other preservation services, identify, collect and share the data and information structures (representation information), that will be needed to render archived data in a form understandable over the long-term to its user communities (for example, in a Representation Information Registry Repository such as RRORI).” DigitalPreservationEurope (DPE). The DPE[15] is an organization that fosters collaboration between many national and international initiatives across the European Research Area. DPE works to pool the expertise of many in order to “secure effective preservation of digital materials.” The organization defines digital preservation as “a set of activities required to make sure digital objects can be located, rendered, used and understood in the future.” nestor. nestor is a German competence network for digital preservation[16], with four working groups working on various subject areas of digital preservation to design criteria for trusted digital repositories, called a criteria catalog[17]. Nestor’s criteria catalog is based on the principles of adequacy, measurability, documentation, and transparency. European Commission Information Society and Media Directorate-General. Some of the issues raised at a meeting of the European Commission Information Society and Media Directorate-General[18] were the lack of a set of widespread Best Practices in digital preservation; a skills base of digital preservation is developing, but slowly; it is important to link a digital preservation policy to both financial and technological planning to ensure sustainability. Ross King, senior scientist at the Austrian Institute of Technology, feels there should be a shift of research focus from the techniques of digital preservation to the appraisal of materials to be preserved. SCAPE Project- Scalable Preservation Environments. This project[19] will develop an infrastructure and tools for scalable preservation actions; provide a framework for automated, quality-assured preservation workflows; and integrating these with a policy-based preservation planning and watch system. International initiatives and services ISO (International Organization of Standardization). ISO 14721:2003[20] specifies a reference model for an open archival information system (OAIS), of which the purpose is to establish a system for archiving information. The model addresses preservation functions such as ingest, archival storage, data management, access, and

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

dissemination; and issues such as data migration, data models, software role, and information exchange. The foundation of an OAIS is Information Package (IP), consisting of digital object(s) and their associated metadata. IP variants, based on its life cycle, include Submission Information Package (SIP), Archival Information Package (AIP), and Dissemination Information Package (DIP). TRAC (Trusted Repositories Audit & Certification). The program provides criteria for building a trusted repository. TRAC [7] is managed by the Center for Research Libraries and was designed as a set of criteria for the certification of a digital repository. The audit criteria can also be used for preservation planning to ensure long-term access to valued materials. LOCKSS/CLOCKSS. LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe)[21] is a digital preservation infrastructure that accepts all formats. It is OAIS-compliant, designed to preserve digital content for the long-term. LOCKSS participants have perpetual access to their materials. CLOCKSS (Controlled Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe)[22] is a “decentralized, geographically disparate preservation model that ensures that the digital assets of the community will survive intact. Additionally, it satisfies the demand for locally situated archives with 12 archive nodes planned worldwide by 2010.” Archivematica. Archivematica[23] is a comprehensive open source digital preservation system in development. The goal of the project is to “give archivists and librarians with limited technical and financial capacity the tools, methodology, and confidence to begin preservation digital information today.” The system implements a “micro-service” approach and is in compliance with the ISO-OAIS functional model and other standards and best practices. The project has also established an agile software development methodology to deal with the constantly changing environment. Portico. Created in 2002, Portico[24] is a digital preservation and electronic archiving service provided by ITHAKA, a non-profit organization to help the academic community use digital technologies. The mission of Portico is to build a sustainable digital archive to preserve scholarly digital content for publishers and libraries. Kirchhoff (2009) shared lessons learned from Portico services in the past two and half years and pointed out that “responsiveness to community needs is key to successful preservation.” Current practices Digital preservation at CSUL is a collaborative effort. The Digital Repositories Matrix Team, consisting of department coordinators, creates our preservation policies. The Digital Project Management Plan Working Group (DPMP Working Group), whose membership consists of a small number of faculty and staff from participating Libraries’ departments, monitors digital operations. Members of the Group perform the final review and preparation activities associated with digital preservation, working closely with ACNS. The team approach works well by distributing tasks among several people, and has the added value of providing a quality control review of all preservations actions, including the following: Digital content We acquire and create selected digital content that represents and highlights the University’s research and scholarship for ingest into the CSU Digital Repository. Our

Digital preservation strategies 87

LM 34,1/2

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

88

digital content comes from electronic submissions, in-house materials, and occasionally outsourced digitization, funded by grants; the latter constitutes the majority of our digital content (approximately 80 percent). The content consists of a variety of types such as text, photographs, glass plate negatives, film, slides, negatives, and audio and video files. We work with individuals and departments on campus to receive electronic submissions such as theses and dissertations, university publications, faculty papers and artworks, conference proceedings, and student research papers and posters. Methods of receiving such submissions include email, computer networks, and transfer of digital media (CDs, DVDs, flash drives). We digitize materials in-house for one of three categories of materials: medium or large-scale planned projects (including grant-funded), institutional repository projects, and special requests. Planned projects are usually materials selected from the University Archives and Special Collections, such as maps, posters, photographs, slides, etc. Institutional Repository projects are usually university publications, CSU theses and dissertations, faculty papers, conference proceedings, etc. Special requests come to us from individuals via the University Archives and Special Collections Department and vary in scale and material type. Our digitization principles are based on national and international standards and best practices as listed in the literature review, including scanning materials once, creating the highest-quality archival representations whenever possible, and recording as much technical metadata (through both automation and manual recording) as possible. File formats Archival file formats are normally widely used, stable, and publicly documented. Accessibility, interoperability, and sustainability are the criteria for choosing archival file formats. Our archival formats, in most cases, are TIFF for images and textural materials scanned in house. Tagged Image File Format (TIFF) files have been widely used and supported in scanning and desktop publishing for many years, and availability of the format is now public. Beside TIFF, we are examining the possibility of using RAW as an archival format for images[25]. For documents submitted electronically, we convert them to PDF/A whenever possible for preservation. We archive metadata in TXT (equivalents may be CSV or XML) files because they are independent of software update or obsoleteness. In addition, we have a small number of audios archived in AIFF and WAV, and videos archived in VOD. The Technical Registry PRONOM[26], hosted by the National Archives of the UK, is a great resource to help understand file formats and acquire information on format migration and related technologies. Several digital preservation systems or programs use PRONOM as their knowledge base of file formats, such as Rosetta (by Ex Libris) and Archivematica. At CSUL, archival file formats are given the “greatest” level of preservation support, including: assigning persistent identifiers and preservation metadata to support these files’ access and management over time; providing secure storage and backup; periodic refreshment to new media as necessary; performing regular fixity checks using the proven checksum method; strategic monitoring of format changes and developments using automated services such as listserv and RSS; and migrating to succeeding formats upon format obsolescence. As Li and Banach (2011) pointed out, assuring quality of content and collecting content in formats that can more easily be preserved is another area of consideration.

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

To address this concern, libraries and digital repositories should have a preservation and format support policy that is readily available to staff and end users. We are not one of the pioneers who developed such a policy. Based on existing examples, we created our own policy to guide repository content submission and acquisition[27]. Despite the policy, we do not make preservation decisions based on file format, but on the material’s content or value. We are dedicated to keeping up with technologies and performing necessary migrations as new formats emerge. Metadata Preservation metadata is essential to the management and future access of digital assets. It normally includes the following information of a digital object: provenance, authenticity, preservation activities, technical environment, and rights management. The PREMIS Data Model[28] defines five interrelated semantic units in between which preservation metadata may be needed: Intellectual Entities, Objects, Events, Agents, and Rights. Preservation metadata is sometimes considered as a subset of technical or administrative metadata: at CSUL, this is created both automatically by systems whenever possible (DigiTool offers an automated technical metadata extraction capability); and manually recorded by staff for information such as scanning software, imaging software, scanner, computer, and operation system used for creating and editing archival masters that cannot be captured by any system or software. In addition to preservation metadata, we also preserve structural and descriptive metadata of our digital assets in TXT format, independent of digital content management systems in use, for the purpose of system migration. We have developed a practice of creating and using data dictionaries since 2007[29], in order to ensure metadata consistency across collections. A data dictionary normally includes lists of descriptive and administrative metadata elements required for the collection, with their input guidelines. Creating and preserving metadata is an ongoing process that we work to streamline and perfect over time. Systems and technologies We currently operate two digital asset management systems, CONTENTdm by OCLC and DigiTool by Ex Libris. Migration of digital content from CONTENTdm to DigiTool began in 2010 in order to reduce maintenance costs. CONTENTdm is our legacy system that hosts around 5,000 digital objects and provides online access to quite a number of digital collections until 2010[30]. DigiTool was acquired in May 2007 as the system for the University’s institutional repository, developed and maintained by the Libraries. DigiTool is a complex digital asset management system that supports the submission, ingest, management, and delivery of digital content including images, documents, videos, and audios of various formats. While DigiTool has the capability of converting TIFF to JPEG2000 during ingest process and store TIFF as a preservation format, we decided at an early point that we only ingest JPEG2000 for image materials because of the large amount of server space and time ingesting TIFF entails. DigiTool also has the capability of extracting technical metadata during and after ingest process, which is very useful given the effort involved otherwise. For its technical metadata extraction, DigiTool incorporates available open-source standards and utilities such as JHOVE and MIX; and records the important checksum information. Since we do not currently ingest archival file formats into DigiTool, we use a separate

Digital preservation strategies 89

LM 34,1/2

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

90

offline archival server with a capacity of roughly 3.5 terra bytes to date. After ingest is complete, we review collections and items on a “staging” server, where we temporarily store files; and then move content for preservation to the offline archival storage servers. Content in offline archival storage is secured and backed up daily. It is read-only and retrievable only by staff members that have authorized access. In addition, we have been examining and considering adoption of Ex Libris’ “Rosetta” digital preservation system. Rosetta offers many and much more robust features of digital preservation[31]. Since NSF and NIH released their requirements for a data management plan and a data sharing policy, assisting faculty and researchers to conform to these requirements becomes a challenge and an ongoing topic of discussion in the Libraries and on campus. To address the inadequacy of existing data storage and the need of managing and providing access to rapidly growing research data, ACNS, the Libraries, and other IT departments on campus are discussing the possibility of implementing a storage virtualization project that provides many advantages such as robust capabilities, bigger fault tolerance, non-disruptive data migration, improved utilization, and fewer points of management. Storage virtualization requires a substantial one-time capital expense at $100,000 per site and yet benefits significantly the long term. We are also very interested in and have begun exploring collaborative opportunities for digital preservation, such as participation in MetaArchive, LOCKSS, and DuraCloud. Starting 2011, five other libraries in the region, including Auraria Library, University of Colorado Health Sciences Library, University of Colorado Colorado Springs (Shu – this has to be one word, without “at”) Kraemer Family Library, University Libraries of the University of Colorado at Boulder, and William A. Wise Law Library of the University of Colorado at Boulder, joined our institutional repository service using DigiTool. As part of the shared service agreement, CSU shares storage costs with these institutions. Because of this collaboration, we have started a discussion on a shared preservation strategy. Workflow and documentation Regardless of the type of the digitization project, every digitization request at CSUL is submitted through a “Request for Digital Scanning” online form. The form provides us with detailed information about the project: a description of the materials; how the materials should be handled and how the digital images should be captured; what deliverables are needed; and to which collection the materials belong. If the staff requesting digitization needs assistance, a project-planning meeting is held to assistant them with identifying what is needed. All of this information helps us determine whether the files generated and metadata created will be archived; and if the decision favors archiving, the information helps us prepare the files for preservation. Digital preservation at CSUL begins prior to the first digital scan. Project spreadsheets are constructed to contain condition assessment information about the materials; scanning instructions; information on deliverables; and descriptive and technical metadata needed. Consideration is given to how these master files may be accessed in the future. Organization of the files is determined first by collection, and each digital collection is assigned a four-letter code. By organizing materials logically by collection, we can retrieve everything quickly using the collection code. For example, Colorado State University (CSU) theses and dissertations are organized in a

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

main folder named “University Publications”. This folder contains a subfolder named “CSU_Theses_Dissertations”. Within this subfolder are two subfolders: one named “Dissertations”, and the other “Theses”. Under “Dissertations” and “Theses”, folders are organized by the year of graduation and the semester, such as “1994_Summer_Semester”. Within the semester subfolders are subfolders named for each student, again starting with the year and semester of graduation, and followed by the student’s last name, first name, and middle initial if available. As we process CSU theses and dissertations and upload them into DigiTool, the corresponding archival files are added to the Digital Archive. For security purposes, access to the offline digital archive is limited to a small number of CSUL faculty and staff who have “read-only” access to its contents. Read-only access allows these individuals to make copies of the files when needed. Two senior members of ACNS are the only individuals who have authorization to delete or move files stored in the digital archive. When a project is complete, a final review is given to all the components of the project and an AIP is created. A project AIP normally contains archival masters, technical metadata, rights metadata, descriptive and structural metadata, and any accompanying information about the collection. ACNS staff is then asked to store the AIP on the digital archive. ACNS backs up all digital files daily at locations on and off campus. Once a project is archived, all DPMP Working Group members receive a notification. When archival masters are requested post archiving, authorized staff may access the digital archive and copy the requested master files (see Figure 1).

F. Risk management Like many academic libraries, CSUL spends a large amount of faculty and staff time and expertise creating digital collections. Based on our experiences in recovering from earlier water disasters, CSUL periodically reviews its disaster preparedness and recovery guidelines for print materials. A strategy for risk assessment is an important component of digital preservation planning, and we are in the process of creating a plan to protect our digital content from future disasters. CSUL keeps second copies of digital files and metadata at a location off-campus and we are reviewing additional off-site options for long-term preservation including a private LOCKSS system, possibly in collaboration with libraries in the DigiTool Shared Service group. Digital preservation assessment programs, such as CARDIO, DRAMBORA, TRAC, can assist with mitigating risks by guiding organizations through the preservation planning process. Several large cultural heritage institutions have implemented risk management programs. Some of these are the British Library, the Library of Congress, the National Library of Australia and the National Library of New Zealand. Many use a lifecycle approach to risk management, with an emphasis on treating all digital content in a consistent fashion and identifying actions needed to reduce the risk of loss or degradation of digital content. The Library of Congress’s NDIIPP has developed a national stewardship network for sustainable preservation. The focus is on four goals: stewardship; building a national digital collection plan to preserve at-risk content; building a shared technical platform for preservation; and developing a public policy to encourage preservation[32].

Digital preservation strategies 91

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

LM 34,1/2

92

Figure 1. Archiving workflow

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

Lessons learned Experience has taught us that planning for digital preservation should be a component of initial digitization project planning. Prior to digitization, we examine materials in hand and determine the best archival format(s) to use. We then create project spreadsheets and plan file organization. It is determined that for ease of discovery and retrieval, our digital files and metadata will be logically arranged by collection. From our experience, we also identified the need for close collaboration between librarians and IT professionals. These two groups have differing expertise that may complement each other in a very beneficial way. Digital preservation is a collaborative effort and frequent communication is essential in a collaborative environment. The nature of digital preservation and its demand for automation generate the need for “hybrid librarians” who possess or are willing to learn the necessary programming, data mapping and transformation, and database management skills in order to implement and maintain digital preservation systems. Rights management will extend to post-migration content and the CSU IR Deposit Agreement gives us the right to alter user-submitted content in order to conform to new formats during future format migrations. Development of a long-term digital preservation policy is an ongoing process evolving over time as needs change, thus libraries need to remain aware and flexible. Planning for long-term preservation should be an audit process of your digitization activities policies and procedures, revealing what you have and what may be lacking. From the literature review, we find that our current digital preservation processes need to be significantly automated. This may require an adoption of a digital preservation system, either open source or proprietary, that provides the functionalities of deposit, management, access, data verification, and format update and migration of digital assets. These robust digital preservation capabilities can possibly become a component of our future digital asset management system. Last, we feel that we lack staff time and commitment in this area because of the existing high workload among staff, while we face the challenge of keeping up with rapidly evolving technology, practices, and standards in the field. Conclusions Long-term digital preservation is a broad and evolving facet of digital asset management, yet often overlooked by library administration and understated in library operations. Many institutions with growing digital collections and institutional repositories are in need of addressing this topic. The issues CSUL faces are, in some ways, not particular among similar-size academic institutions. We share an environment of limited resources and rapidly expanding preservation needs. Despite the challenges, CSUL are dedicated to working towards meeting these needs. Notes 1. See http://digitool.library.colostate.edu/R (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 2. See http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/toc/lib.57.2.html (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 3. See www.digitalpreservation.gov/ (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 4. See www.digitalpreservation.gov/tools/#b (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011).

Digital preservation strategies 93

LM 34,1/2

5. See www.loc.gov/standards/premis/tools_for_premis.php (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 6. See www.oclc.org/research/activities/past/rlg/trustedrep/repositories.pdf (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 7. See www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics-assessing-and-certifying-0

94

8. See www.niso.org/publications/isq/2010/v22no2/ (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 9. See www.nla.gov.au/digital-preservation-directions-statement-2008-to-2012 (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 10. See http://pandora.nla.gov.au/ (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011).

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

11. See http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pandas.html (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 12. See www.natlib.govt.nz/about-us/current-initiatives/ndha (accessed February 18, 2012). 13. See http://archives.govt.nz/advice/government-digital-archive-programme/digitalcontinuity-action-plan/html-version (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 14. See www.dcc.ac.uk/ (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 15. See www.digitalpreservationeurope.eu/ (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 16. See www.langzeitarchivierung.de/eng/ (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 17. See www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/tools-and-applications/nestor (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 18. See http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/information_society/index_en.htm (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 19. See www.scape-project.eu/ (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 20. See www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber ¼ 24683 (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 21. See http://lockss.stanford.edu/lockss/Home (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 22. See www.clockss.org/clockss/Home (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 23. See http://archivematica.org/wiki/index.php?title ¼ Main_Page (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 24. See www.portico.org/digital-preservation/ (accessed February 18, 2012, 2011). 25. See http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/libr_pubs/23/ (accessed February 18, 2012). 26. See www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/PRONOM/Default.aspx (accessed February 18, 2012). 27. See http://lib.colostate.edu/repository/csu-digital-repository-preservation-format-supportpolicy (accessed February 18, 2012). 28. www.dlib.org/dlib/may08/lavoie/05lavoie.html (accessed February 18, 2012). 29. CSU Core Data Dictionary (version 1.1), available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10217/3147 (accessed February 18, 2012). 30. See http://digital.library.colostate.edu/ (accessed February 18, 2012). 31. See www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/RosettaOverview (accessed February 24, 2012). 32. See www.digitalpreservation.gov/ (accessed February 22, 2012).

Downloaded by Universitas Gadjah Mada At 08:54 14 February 2015 (PT)

References Becker, C. and Rauber, A. (2011), “Decision criteria in digital preservation: what to measure and how”, available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.21527/full (accessed 24 February 2012). Hitchcock, D. and Tarrant, S. (2010), Toward Smart Storage for Repository Preservation Services, available at: www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/156 (accessed 24 February 2012). Iglesias, E. and Meesangnil, W. (2010), “Using Amazon S3 in Digital Preservation in a mid sized academic library: a case study of CCSU ERIS digital archive system”, available at: http:// journal.code4lib.org/articles/4468 (accessed 24 February 2012). Kirchhoff, A. (2009), Expanding the Preservation Network: Lessons from Portico, available at: http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth¼0&type¼summary&url¼/journals/library_trends/ v057/57.3.kirchhoff.html (accessed 24 February 2012). Li, Y. and Banach, M. (2011), “Institutional Repositories and Digital Preservation: Assessing Current Practices at Research Libraries”, available at: http://dlib.org/dlib/may11/yuanli/ 05yuanli.html (accessed 24 February 2012). Lunde, D. and Smith, A. (2009), “Disaster and security: Colorado State style”, Library & Archival Security, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 99-114. Salo, D. (2008), Innkeeper at the Roach Motel, available at: http://minds.wisconsin.edu/handle/ 1793/22088 (accessed 24 February 2012). About the authors Beth Oehlerts is currently the Metadata Management Librarian at Colorado State University Libraries. She is responsible for coordinating the Colorado State University Libraries’ digital projects, managing the Libraries’ digital image creation activities, and creating metadata for the Libraries’ digital collections. She holds a Master of Science in Library Studies from Clark Atlanta University in Atlanta, Georgia. Beth Oehlerts is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Shu Liu is currently the Digital Content Librarian at Colorado State University Libraries. She is primarily responsible for metadata development and managing the CSU Institutional Repository content in collaboration with other Colorado academic institutions. She holds a Master of Library and Information Studies from The University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Digital preservation strategies 95