Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation

2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 1

Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and

AccessSummary of activity and recommendations

Chris Rusbridge


Many thanks to Brian Lavoie and Fran Berman for co-chairing the Task Force, and

also for allowing me to plunder many of their slides!


In around 20 minutes…

• Lots of background• 5 Sustainability conditions• 5 Challenges• 3 Imperatives• Some economics…• 4 Domain areas• Action agenda…


We greatly appreciate the funding, time, We greatly appreciate the funding, time,

and support from our sponsors. and support from our sponsors.

Cohen Acoustical

AK ConsultingAK Consulting

•Berman/Lavoie


• Digital Access and Preservation is a technical, management, policy, regulatory, social, and economic problem

• Key issues to resolve:

– What should we preserve?

– Who is responsible for digital information?

– Who pays for digital information and its supporting cyberinfrastructure?

Access to Information Tomorrow Requires Access to Information Tomorrow Requires Preservation Preservation TodayToday

•Berman/Lavoie


How do we currently support access to How do we currently support access to digital information?digital information?

Donations, etc.

Subscriptions

Government grants Advertisements

Pay per service

•Berman/Lavoie


Those who pay, those who provide,

and those who benefit are not necessarily the same!


Focus on the Longer-term: Focus on the Longer-term: The Blue Ribbon Task Force on The Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and AccessSustainable Digital Preservation and Access

BRTF Charge:

1. Conduct a comprehensive analysis of sustainable digital preservation

2. Identify and evaluate best practices

3. Make specific recommendations for action

4. Articulate next steps for further work

brtf.sdsc.edu

•Berman/Lavoie


Who’s Involved: BRTF-SDPA ParticipantsWho’s Involved: BRTF-SDPA ParticipantsBlue Ribbon Task Force:• Fran Berman, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute [co-Chair]

• Brian Lavoie, OCLC [co-Chair]• Paul Ayris, University College London

• Sayeed Choudhury, Johns Hopkins University

• Elizabeth Cohen, AMPAS/Stanford

• Paul Courant, University of Michigan

• Lee Dirks, Microsoft

• Amy Friedlander, CLIR

• Vijay Gurbaxani, UC Irvine

• Anita Jones, University of Virginia

• Ann Kerr, Consultant

• Cliff Lynch, CNI

• Dan Rubinfeld, UC Berkeley

• Chris Rusbridge, DCC

• Roger Schonfeld, Ithaka

• Abby Smith Rumsey, Consultant• Anne Van Camp, Smithsonian

Liaisons

• NSF: Chris Greer, Lucy Nowell, Sylvia Spengler, Phil Bogden

• Mellon Foundation: Don Waters• Library of Congress: Laura

Campbell, Martha Anderson• NARA: Robert Chadduck

Staff and Students

• Task Force Administration: Susan Rathbun

• Communications: Jan Zverina, Ben Tolo

• Graduate Student Interns: Lori Eakin, Liz Bedford

•Berman/Lavoie


BRTF DeliverablesBRTF DeliverablesDecember 2008: Interim Report• Foci:

– Understand current practices

– Synthesize major themes

– Identify systemic challenges

February 2010: Final Report• Foci:

– Structural analysis of 4

common scenarios

– Recommendations and Actions

– Next steps

•Berman/Lavoie

Economic Framework4 Common Scenarios

http://brtf.sdsc.edu/biblio/BRTF_Final_Report.pdf


Key FindingKey Finding

“… sustainable economics for digital preservation is not just about finding more funds. It is about building an economic activity firmly rooted in a compelling value proposition, clear incentives to act, and well-defined preservation roles and responsibilities.”

•Berman/Lavoie


5 Challenges• Long-term preservation activities funded by short-term resource

allocations

• Challenges in valuing (and monetizing) the benefits of digital preservation, to attract funding and investment

• Little coordination of preservation activity across diffuse stakeholder communities

• Misaligned incentives between those who are in a position to preserve, and those who benefit

• Lack of clear responsibility for digital preservation, and a prevailing assumption it is someone else’s problem

•Lavoie


Technical

Social Economic

Frame digital preservation as a sustainable economic activity

• Sustainable: ongoing resource allocation over long periods of time

• Economic activity: deliberate allocation of resources


5 Sustainability conditions

• Recognition of benefits by decision-makers• Incentives for decision makers to preserve in public

interest• Selection process for long-term value• Mechanisms to secure resources

– ongoing– efficient

• Appropriate organisation and governance


Benefits & Incentives

• Clearly articulate benefits of digital preservation activity– Benefits should emphasize outcomes

– Articulate benefits cultivate sense of value, “willingness to pay”

• Clearly articulate incentives for decision-makers to act– Identify and leverage institutional “self-interest”: e.g., business

opportunity; mission-driven; policy compliance

– Orchestrate incentives over complete digital lifecycle

•Lavoie


Selection & Allocation of Resources• Selection: can’t “preserve everything for all time”

– Prioritization: allocate resources where they generate most value

– Circumscribed set of materials; realistic preservation goals

– Align expectations and capacity

• Support ongoing, efficient allocation of resources– Coordinate resource transfer from those who are willing to

pay to those who are willing to preserve (pricing, donations, grants/taxes)

– Efficiency: productive use of resources; leverage economies of scale, economies of scope

•Lavoie


Organization & Governance• Preservation activities can be managed through a

variety of organizational forms: – Organization with no private interest in preservation (e.g.,

third party service)

– Organization with private interest in preservation; preserves on behalf of itself and other organizations (e.g., research library)

– Organizations with mandate to preserve, conferred by public policy, to fulfill stated public interest (e.g., national archive)

• Governance: strategy, responsibility, accountability– Organization/governance trust

•Lavoie


3 Imperatives

• Articulate compelling value proposition– the case for preservation is the case for use

• Provide clear incentives to preserve in the public interest

• Define roles & responsibilities– ensure flow of resources– throughout digital lifecycle


Economics: core attributes

• Digital Preservation represents a derived demand• Digital materials are depreciable durable assets• Non-rival in consumption

– free-rider potential

• Process is temporally dynamic & path-dependent– today's commitments are not for all time– today's actions can remove options for all time


Economics: choice variables

• Who owns?• Who benefits?• Who selects?• Who preserves?• Who pays?


4 Domain areas4 Domain areas

Commercially-Owned Cultural

Content

Collectively-Produced Web

Content

Research DataScholarly Discourse

•Berman/Lavoie


Scholarly DiscourseScholarly DiscourseSustainability

Challenges ActionsConsensus about value,(less so for emergingforms)

Incentives oftenmisaligned

Roles & responsibilitiesrooted in print era

Selection criteria foremerging forms

Diffuse right to preserve to those willing to act in the public interest

Align responsibilities withdigital environment

•Berman/Lavoie


Research DataResearch DataSustainability

Challenges Actions

Vast amounts of data;Variable future value

Incentives diminish as decision-making becomesmore “granular”

Fragmented decision-making/preservation

Establish priorities indata selection

Leading role for funders inmandating preservation

Coordination and scalecan leverage value andreduce costs

•Berman/Lavoie


Commercially-Owned Cultural ContentCommercially-Owned Cultural ContentSustainability

Challenges Actions

Variable/diffuse demand;“digital cultural heritage”uncertain

Private & public incentivesto preserve oftencompeting

Lack of “hand-off”mechanisms

Define digital culturalheritage to aid selection

Establish public rightto preserve that protectsprivate interests; enhance private incentives

Public-private partnershipsto ensure lifecycle curation

•Berman/Lavoie


Collectively-Produced Web ContentCollectively-Produced Web ContentSustainability

Challenges Actions

Future demand not clearlyarticulated

Incentives to preserve areweak

Ownership diffused; noclear preservation actor among currentstakeholders

Gather stakeholders underleadership of stewardshipOrganizations

Use public policy tostrengthen incentives

Contributors and hostingservices should lowerbarriers to 3rd-party archives

•Berman/Lavoie


Some General Principles Some General Principles • Dynamics: Preservation is a series of decisions• Benefits: Value of preservation based on use• Selection: Scarce resources = prioritization• Incentives: Strengthen, align, create• Organization/Governance: Responsibilities must be

clear; “handoffs” secure• Resources: reflect community norms, flexible in face of

disruptions, leverage economies of scale & scope

•Berman/Lavoie


Agenda for further action

• Organizational action– Develop public-private partnerships (cf LoC-Twitter)– Seek economies of scale and scope– Create and secure chains of stewardship over time

• Technical action– Build capacity and lower costs

• Public policy action– Address copyright barriers, clarify rights

• Education and public outreach action


Action agenda for…

• National and International agencies• Funders and sponsors of data creation• Stakeholder organisations• Individuals

• … and action agendas by content domain


In conclusion…

• As a participant, this was a challenging but intensely interesting and valuable process

• Broken new ground in the economic analysis of digital preservation

• Laid foundations for valuable further work!

[email protected]


Report Launch

• US Symposium, Washington 1 April 2010• UK Symposium, London 6 May 2010

Technology

Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation