Individual and Collective Approaches to Managing JSTOR Print Backfiles

1
Individual and Collective Approaches to Managing
JSTOR Print Backfiles
Presented by John Kiplinger JSTOR Director of
Production Rebecca Kemp Serials Supervisor, UNC
Wilmington
26th Annual Charleston Conference Unintended
Consequences Friday, November 10, 2006 The
Francis Marion Inn Charleston, South Carolina
2
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

3
The Impact of Digital Archives on Legacy Print
Serials Collections A Look at the JSTOR Paper
Repository Experience

• John Kiplinger
• JSTOR Director of Production

4
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

5
Why Should JSTOR Save Paper?

• Three Elements of JSTORs Digitized Print
  Archiving Strategy
• Maintenance of the digital files
• Preservation of original source (print)
• JSTORs initial disposition of paper volumes
• JSTORs evolving policy
• Third-party stewardship of both digital and paper
  archival versions

6
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, librarys mission, rarity)

7
Why Should JSTOR Save Paper?

• JSTORs 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?

8
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

9
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)

10
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.

11
JSTOR Paper Repositories at a Glance
12
Current Status?

• Both libraries are on track for compiling the
  requisite back runs during the first half of 2007
• Rejections of volumes for inclusion in the
  repository because of damaged/missing pages are
  being experienced. While the rigorous validation
  processes have therefore been justified, this has
  also resulted in extra work for the validating
  institution, not all of which was anticipated
• Collaborative approaches to problem resolution
  (e.g., locating replacement pages, finding rare
  issues) are being used
• Repository validation processes are turning up
  some issues not previously known to JSTOR, so the
  digital archive is being improved as well!
• First use by JSTOR of repository materials from
  the Harvard Depository

13
Whats 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
• Negotiation of agreements for next round of
  titles
• Work with other interested libraries,
  institutions and organizations on setting up
  their own repositories

14
Libraries Responses to the JSTOR Digital
Archive Individual and Collective Decisions

• Rebecca Kemp
• Serials Supervisor
• University of North Carolina Wilmington

15
What should we do with our JSTOR print volumes?

• Many messages posted on SERIALST and other
  listservs regarding decisions to de-accession
• Brief recap of discussion thread, gathered 2005
• 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

16
Many libraries have decided to discard their
print volumes

• 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.)

17
Cooperative Endeavors

• Centralized consortial depositories
• Distributed print depository networks
• Note not exhaustive list of projects

18
Centralized Depositories

• Characteristics
• Consortium builds / already jointly owns storage
  facility
• Consortium surveys members for holdings
• Members make agreement to send holdings to
  storage facility
• Stored journals can serve either as dark or light
  archive

19
Centralized Depositories

• Established
• 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)

20
Centralized Depositories

• In the works
• Northwest Ohio Regional Book Depository
• Northeastern Ohio Cooperative Regional Library
  Depository
• North Carolina Triangle Libraries

21
Distributed Depositories

• Characteristics
• Consortium members surveyed for holdings
• Each institution in consortium agrees to hold
  and not to withdraw- particular journal runs
• These runs become archival copies either for
  dark storage or for circulation

22
Distributed Depositories

• Advantages over the cooperatively owned
  depository
• Can be established with potentially less work,
  money than the cooperatively owned storage unit
• All you need is good organization, communication,
  holdings spreadsheets, and ideally a legal
  agreement
• (See Schottlaender, Brian, You say you want an
  evolution... The emerging UC libraries shared
  collection, Library Collections, Acquisitions,
  Technical Services 28 (2004) 13-24.)

23
Distributed Depositories

• Established
• CRL / JSTOR Distributed Print Archive Project
• Swedish University Libraries
• Western North Carolina Libraries Network
• In the works
• Utah Academic Library Consortium
• Orbis Cascade Alliance (Washington/Oregon)

24
Why arent all libraries engaging in cooperative
print-sharing endeavors?

• Last years program participants
• Institutional status (as per ARL statistics...)
• Accreditation standards?
• My personal speculations
• Desire to have complete autonomy regarding how we
  deal with our resources
• Print access not perceived as a priority

25
Establishing an international registry of
print-sharing projects

• Role for OCLC? Other library group?
• OCLC registry currently under development
  (displayed in WorldCat)
• OCLC / DLF Registry of Digital Masters

26
Establishing an international registry of
print-sharing projects

• Could there be a field that would indicate which
  libraries / consortia agree to hold title in
  print, somewhat like the number of libraries that
  hold each title?

27
Thank you!
Presenter Contact Information
Rebecca Kemp, Serials Supervisor UNC Wilmington
Randall Library 601 S. College Rd. Wilmington, NC
28403 kempr_at_uncw.edu
John Kiplinger JSTOR Director of Production 301
E. Liberty, Suite 310 Ann Arbor, MI
48104-2262 jkip_at_jstor.org