JISC

The Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), together with the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) commissioned a team of authors based at Cornell University to suvery the e-journal preservation landsape and assess leading e-journal archiving initiatives. The final report, e-Journal Archiving Metes and Bounds: A Survey of the Landscape, was published in Spetember 2006, which provides a very timely overview of the status quo regarding e-journal archiving with some practical proposals for future progress. While obviously US in emphasis, the issues and potential solutions are sufficiently global in nature to make this report resonate with research institutions anywhere in the world as they try to grapple with the complexities of licensing access to e-journals, as opposed to owning a physical copy.

To fully understand the findings of the survey and its impact for the UK education sector, JISC comissioned a review and analysis of the CLIR report with the following objectives:

• Reviews and analyses the CLIR survey
• Relates these findings to the needs of the UK education sector
• Pays particular attention to NESLI2 and the JISC/CURL LOCKSS Pilot programme
• Includes a set of high-level principles for e-journal archiving services designed to assist in assessing third party services
• Includes a set of high-level principles for a national approach to e-journal archiving
• Revisits the recommendations of the 2003 JISC e-Journal Archiving consultancy report and relates these to the current e-journals archiving landscape.

The high-level principles mentioned above will be presented as a discussion paper and discussed at an e-Journal Archiving and Preservation workshop on 27 March 2007, jointly organised by JISC, the British Library and the Digital Preservation Coalition. These principles are also listed below on this page.

Executive summary

Despite major concerns about e-journals archiving and the high risk that e-journals may be lost, the trend towards e-only access for scholarly e-journals is continuing. The convenience and currency of online access has made this an attractive option for many scholarly users and libraries and publishers have responded to this demand, unable to wait for assured archiving and preservation solutions. As this trend is proceeding, finding resolutions to the archiving and preservation of scholarly e-journals has assumed even greater urgency and significant efforts have been made in exploring viable options for e-journal archiving which can provide greater assurance of continued access into the future.

Although both legal deposit legislation and institutional repositories are important developments, neither of them can reasonably be expected to provide practical solutions for libraries licensing access to e-journals. In the UK, the archiving clauses in the NESLI licence have provided a measure of security for libraries but in the absence of trusted repositories charged with managing e-journals, these have provided largely theoretical assurance.

There is a pressing requirement for trusted repositories focussed on archiving and preserving e-journals, which are independent of publishers, and which offer services which can safeguard content while sharing costs between libraries and publishers equitably. While the concerns of libraries are much the same as they were when the JISC consultancy on e-journals archiving reported in 2003, there are now a clearer set of options emerging. Over the past few years, a number of promising initiatives have been developed which provide much better prospects for continued access to licensed e-journal content and which offer cost-effective services for libraries and publishers. Twelve of these trusted repositories have been profiled in a recent CLIR survey. Many of them, including Portico, Pub Med Central, CLOCKSS, and LOCKSS are already familiar in the UK.

Despite a rapidly changing landscape, there is nevertheless a powerful momentum, as evidenced in the rapid take-up of two of the services, LOCKSS and Portico. It is also now possible to articulate a set of principles for archiving services, based on practical reality, which can guide decision-making. The CLIR survey provides a valuable catalyst which the forthcoming BL/DPC/JISC E-Journal Archiving and Preservation workshop (27th March 2007) and other mechanisms have the opportunity to take a significant step forward in this crucial area.

Full report by Maggie Jones

Review and Analysis of the CLIR Report E-Journal Archiving Metes and Bounds: A Survey of the Landscape (PDF)

Principles for e-journal Archiving Services

The following high level principles have been subdivided into two sections. Those related to e-journal archiving services are intended to be principles which might be used by libraries to help them select and assess appropriate archiving services. The second set of principles relate to a national approach to e-journal archiving. In this case, the principles are intended to provide a broad framework for a national approach to e-journal archiving in the UK. Both sets of principles have been derived primarily from the CLIR Survey, the Urgent action statement, and input from JISC colleagues. Both sets of principles are intended for discussion at a forthcoming Workshop organized by JISC, the British Library and the Digital Preservation Coalition and scheduled for 27 March 2007.

Principles for e-journal archiving services

• Each service needs to have an explicit commitment to digital archiving for scholarly peer-reviewed journals.
• Each service must maintain formal relationships with publishers that include the right to ingest and manage a significant number of journal titles over time.
• W ork addressing long-term accessibility must be under way.
  [This relates to management of technology obsolescence and might include, for example, tests of different archiving options, technology watch, preparing, testing and reviewing disaster plans etc. It should include anything related to the 'Preservation Planning' function of the OAIS model.]
• The service must be run by an independent not-for-profit organisation.
• The work must be of current or potential benefit to academic libraries that have a preservation mandate.
• The service must be eligible for either formal or informal certification according to broadly accepted standards of best practice in archiving and preservation.
• There should be publicly accessible policies and procedural documents.
  [These documents should clarify potential areas of confusion or concern, some examples might include what formats are accepted; whether all parts of a journal are ingested; what security arrangements are in place etc.]
• There must be a clear statement of access conditions, including a statement clarifying post-ca

Principles for a national approach to e-journal archiving

• Preservation of electronic journals should be viewed as a necessary and legitimate investment.
  [There needs to be a distinction between costs of online access and costs which contribute towards a community wide confidence that the e-journals will be managed in such a way that they will remain accessible long-term.]
• A diversity of solutions needs to be supported.
• A diversity of services needs to be supported.
  [Libraries and their client base will have different requirements and these will need to be catered for. In addition, it is highly improbable that a single service could achieve universal coverage. Services are already evolving which respond to expressed needs within various communities and this diversity needs to be encouraged and supported, provided the services meet a defined level of standards and best practice.]

• A collaborative approach is essential.
  [This includes active and constructive collaboration between the following:

• Libraries to libraries, to refine needs and expectations.
• Publishers and libraries, to increase and promote communication on rights and expectations.
• Libraries to archiving services, to provide support for bona fide services.
• Archiving services to libraries, to help consolidate and develop services based on libraries' needs.
• Publishers and archiving services, to develop trusted digital repositories that respect legitimate business interests while ensuring long-term preservation of content.
• Archiving services to archiving services, to promote and develop a coordinated global system for scholarly e-journal archiving.]
  
  Note: National institutions charged with a mandate to preserve heritage in all its forms, including digital, will play a key role in any national digital preservation strategy and will therefore need to be included in initial and ongoing strategic discussions.
  
• A collective response is essential.
  [It is neither efficient nor effective for individual libraries to negotiate with individual publishers regarding archiving of e-journal content.]