toward distributed infrastructures for digital preservation: the roles of collaboration and trust

a centre of expertise in data curation and preservation

International Digital Curation Conference | Washington, DC, 11-13 Dec 2007

Toward distributed infrastructures for digital preservation: the roles of

collaboration and trust

Michael DayDCC Research Team

UKOLN, University of BathBath BA2 7AY, United Kingdom

[email protected]



2

Presentation outline

• Thinking about infrastructure requirements for the present and future

• Not primarily about technologies, but about the need for inter-organisational collaboration

• Main foci:– Collaboration, specifically research collaboration

models and their potential influence on data curation practices

– The role of of trust in collaborative networks



3

The need for deep infrastructure

• Recognised as far back as 1996 by the Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information:– Digital preservation involves the "grander

problem of organizing ourselves over time and as a society ... [to manoeuvre] effectively in a digital landscape" (p. 7)

– Also identified the need for infrastructures that could support distributed networks of digital repositories (and other services)



4

Intra-organisational collaboration

• Intra-organisational collaboration is increasingly important in many different contexts, e.g.:– Commerce (public-private partnerships,

outsourcing, strategic alliances, etc.)– Institutional repository networks– Scientific research and development

• Research collaboration is a well-established phenomenon that has been studied by sociologists of science (and others)

• Collaboration has an influence on data sharing and curation



5

Research collaboration (1)

• The nature of collaboration differs markedly between academic disciplines

• Collaboration exists on a continuum that includes:– Informal social networks

• Helps to define disciplinary norms and interpretational paradigms

– Formalised, semi-permanent organisations• Traditionally most common in "big-science" domains,

e.g. high energy physics, space science• The growth of e-science has emphasised the

collaborative nature of research



6


• A study of the physical sciences (Chompalov, et al., 2002) broadly identified four different organisational models:– Bureaucratic - formalised and hierarchical

structures with clear lines of authority– Leaderless - formalised structures, but

collegiate– Non-specialised - Broadly hierarchical, but with

unspecialised division of labour– Participatory - fundamentally egalitarian



7


• Chompalov, et al. found that collaboration models may have an influence on knowledge production and data sharing– Suggestion that non-specialised collaborations

were most representative of domains where data collection needs to be standardised across several collecting sites

– Relationships between collaboration type and data acquisition and sharing practices were quite complex



8


• It is unclear what all this might mean for data curation:– Collaborative data curation facilities might

emerge first in sub-disciplines that have a more participatory collaboration pattern or otherwise have a strong emphasis on data sharing

– Need for more systematic research into this across all research domains

• The Digital Curation Centre's SCARP studies will provide detailed accounts of selected domains



9

Collaboration for data curation (1)

• Currently focused at the disciplinary or sub-disciplinary level

• Embedded within particular research communities• Takes advantage of the specialised knowledge

available within particular "designated communities"

• Common standards emerge where there is a need for data sharing

• The existence of common standards make data centres and repositories viable



10

Collaboration for data curation (2)

• The nature of the traditional research enterprise (and its funding structures) means that there was little demand for collaboration on data curation across disciplinary borders

• The fundamentally collaborative nature of e-research should make us challenge this:– A need to pool resources and expertise– A need for supporting infrastructures

• Infrastructure requirements are often overlooked and are likely to be problematic



11

Collaboration for preservation

• Growing interest in the socio-economic and cultural processes that underpin digital preservation– Strategic alliances

• National initiatives, e.g. DPC, NDIIPP, nestor• European Alliance for Permanent Access

– Co-operative ventures• Many different models for national networks• International co-operation can be focused through

organisations like IFLA or CDNL• International co-operation on specific challenges through

initiatives like the International Internet Preservation Consortium (IIPC)



12

Collaboration for repositories (1)

• Institutional repositories:– Development of IRs has helped to focus

attention on the importance of collaboration– Interoperability (currently based on OAI-PMH)

means that IRs rarely work in isolation– IRs work in a 'service-oriented' context

• Services that enhance metadata, improve subject access (terminology services), that support citation linking and research assessment

• Services that provide long-term preservation (e.g. the DARE programme in the Netherlands)



13

Collaboration for repositories (2)

• SHERPA DP:– Proposed disaggregated model for a shared

preservation environment– Developed framework based on OAIS reference

model• PRESERV:

– IR interaction with multiple third-party services• Bit-level preservation, preservation planning, object

characterisation and validation (e.g., using registry tools like PRONOM-DROID)



14

The role of trust in collaborations

• Trust is a concept explored extensively in management science– Defined in terms of the confidence that parties

have in the actions, intentions and goodwill of others, within a given context

– Understood in terms of vulnerability:• "The willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the

actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party" (Mayer, et al., 1995, p. 712)



15

Trust and control

• Trust in inter-organisational networks

– Parties accept a level of vulnerability, in exchange for certain benefits, e.g. in sharing risk or knowledge

– Inter-organisational trust is developmental• Successful partnerships have higher levels of trust

• High-levels of trust can have risks (e.g. Enron)

– Trust is contrasted with 'control,' i.e. the processes used to monitor and enforce actions

• "Trust is good, control is better" (adapted from Lenin)

• Trust and control can work together (a duality)



16

Trustworthy repositories (1)

• The main current focus is on the development of criteria for the evaluation of repositories and other preservation services– A requirement articulated by the Task Force on

Archiving of Digital Information (1996)– Current initiatives include:

• Trusted Repositories Audit & Certification (TRAC) framework

• Digital Curation Centre and Digital Preservation Europe's DRAMBORA toolkit takes an approach to self-assessment based on risk assessment

• Proposed ISO standard



17

Trustworthy repositories (2)

• Audit and certification frameworks– Are examples of control mechanisms– Focus not just on technical suitability, but on

organisational and financial viability and sustainability

– Two main approaches• External audit (ISO model)• Self-assessment

– Enables the development of shared organisational cultures that are focused on solving problems in an incremental way



18

Conclusions

• Trust is an important factor in collaborative networks, e.g.:– Strategic alliances, research projects and shared

infrastructures• Established cultural heritage organisations can build

on their existing competences (and legal mandates)• Scientific data archives gain trust by their close

integration into disciplines• Collaboration and trust are important topics that will

repay further investigation



19

References cited

• Chompalov, I., et al. (2002). "The organisation of scientific collaboration." Research Policy, 31: 749-767.

• Mayer, R.C., et al. (1995). "An integrative model of organisational trust." Academy of Management Review, 20: 709-734.

toward distributed infrastructures for digital preservation: the roles of collaboration and trust

Technology

research collaboration

nature of collaboration

collaboration type

roles of collaboration

data sharing need

data centres

systematic research

data acquisition