Print Backfiles in the Age of JSTOR Presented

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 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 (19992003) – http: //www. jstor. org/about/bvs 2003. html – All survey results reveal that libraries are thinking and acting on remotely storing and deaccessioning paper volumes for JSTOR titles – In the 2003 survey, respondents for the first time specifically raised the idea of collaborative retention programs for these

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.

JSTOR Paper Repositories at a Glance Agreements on: Harvard UC Access Dark Dim Ownership JSTOR UC Completeness JSTOR primary UC primary Monitor/Report Harvard UC Cost Shared Current Scope First 353 titles Validation ü ü

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 Mc. Kinzie, 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 noncentralized 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 Librarian 48. 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