2 July 2010Chris Rusbridge Consulting1 Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation...
-
Upload
mason-ogrady -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of 2 July 2010Chris Rusbridge Consulting1 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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 2
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!
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 3
In around 20 minutes…
• Lots of background• 5 Sustainability conditions• 5 Challenges• 3 Imperatives• Some economics…• 4 Domain areas• Action agenda…
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 4
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 5
We Depend on Digital InformationWe Depend on Digital Information
E-GovernmentE-Business
Digital Entertainment Communication and
Information
Research and Education
•Berman/Lavoie
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 6
• 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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 7
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 8
Those who pay, those who provide,
and those who benefit are not necessarily the same!
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 9
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 10
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 11
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 12
Context to Context to FindingsFindings
Interim Report: Problem Space, Experience
Economic Framework4 Common Scenarios
Final Report: General Findings &
Recommendations
•Berman/Lavoie
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 13
BRTF Final BRTF Final Report:Report:
Sustainable Sustainable Economics for a Economics for a
Digital PlanetDigital Planet
http://brtf.sdsc.edu/biblio/BRTF_Final_Report.pdf
•Berman/Lavoie
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 14
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 15
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 16
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 17
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 18
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 19
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 20
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 21
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 22
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 23
Economics: choice variables
• Who owns?• Who benefits?• Who selects?• Who preserves?• Who pays?
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 24
4 Domain areas4 Domain areas
Commercially-Owned Cultural
Content
Collectively-Produced Web
Content
Research DataScholarly Discourse
•Berman/Lavoie
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 25
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 26
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 27
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 28
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 29
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 30
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
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 31
Action agenda for…
• National and International agencies• Funders and sponsors of data creation• Stakeholder organisations• Individuals
• … and action agendas by content domain
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 32
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!
2 July 2010 Chris Rusbridge Consulting 33
Report Launch
• US Symposium, Washington 1 April 2010• UK Symposium, London 6 May 2010