Transcript Using the LIFE costing model: case studies from DK

Using the LIFE Costing Model
Case studies from DK
Anders Bo Nielsen, The Danish National Archives
Ulla Bøgvad Kejser, The Royal Library, Denmark
LIFE Costing Model - Denmark
• LIFE - DK Project
– Aim
- Estimate and compare lifecycle costs of preservation of digital
materials held by Danish cultural heritage institutions
– Partners
- The National Archives
- The Royal Library
- The State and University Library
– Timeline
- October 2008 – December 2009
– Funding
- The Danish Ministry of Culture (£75.000)
Evaluation of the LIFE Costing Model
•
Pros – already there
– Usable for estimating the lifecycle costs of digital (and analogue) materials
– The elements/subelements provide a comprehensive checklist of costs
– Independent of preservation strategy (transformation or emulation)
– Tested on real data sets
•
Required improvements
– Consistency of model
- Use OAIS terminology to ease understanding, cooperation and widespread use
- Breakdown in more generic functional entities to avoid bias towards library materials
– Metadata assigned to the functions they relate to (not a stage in itself)
– Include all costs in one model (lifecycle and non lifecycle)
- Allow for full economic costs to be modelled, including costs of system development
– More test on real data needed
LIFE Costing Model - DK
Production
Acquisition
Ingest
Archival
Storage
Preservation
Planning
Access
Audit
Selection
Ingest
Administration
Storage
Administration
Preservation
Planning
Selection
Submission
Agreement
Quality
Assurance
Storage
Provision
Preservation
Watch
Access
Administration
Access Provision
IPR
IPR and
licencing
Metadata
Receive Data
Preservation
Action
Access Control
Retrieval and
reshelving
Ordering and
invoicing
Transfer
Refreshment
Re-ingest
User Support
Capture
Submission
Error Checking
Quality
Assurance
Check-in
Replication
Metadata
Provide Data
Lifecycle system management Planning, certification)
General administation and facilities; economic adjustments (overhead)
Case study 1: Costs of transformation (format migration)
• Set up
– Transforming from MS Word (creation format) to TIFF 6.0
(preservation format)
– Amount of pages: 7.555 in app. 1.500 documents,
produced/recieved by 10 persons for about 6 months
– Transforming using a purchased TIFF-printer driver and an inhouse developed system to control the transformation
– Quality control using automatic system control for some controls
and samples for other controls
The generic preservation model (GPM)
Cost = t * TEW + (t / ULE + PON) * (CRS + UME + PPA + QA)
Generic LIFE preservation std
Danish Office Case
unit
TEW
1
3 man w eeks per year for each format
ULE
BLE + 0.1 * t
BLE + 0.1 * t years of life expectancy
BLE
8
8 years
PON
40%
100% share of transformation in preservation
PTA
STA*(1-t/20)+ETA*(t/20)
30% proportion of tool availability
STA
50%
30% starting proportion of tool availability
ETA
90%
90% ending proportion of tool availability
FCX
0,2
0,8 complexity – transforming from or to
TDC
24
3 man months
CRS (1-PTA)*TDC*FCX+PTA*COA(1-PTA)*TDC*FCX+PTA*COA £
COA
1.500
3.000 £
UME
4
1 man w eeks per format
PPA
PON*(SCM+n*HVM)
PON*(SCM+n*HVM) £
SCM
340
1.000 £
HVM
0.05
0.01 £
QAA
n*BCT*FCX
n*BCT*FCX £
BCT
0.17
0.20 £
n
8474
7.555 objects (pages in this case)
Results of using the GPM
t
TWC
PTC
PMC
PAC
PQAC
t*TEW PF*CRS PF*UME PF*PPA PF*QAA
Total PC
PF
t/ULE+PON
UK – Web Archiving Case Study
1
5
10
20
625
3.125
6.250
12.500
3,423
5,633
7,027
6,120
654
1,235
1,889
3,000
160
302
462
733
151
285
435
691
5,013
10,580
16,063
23,045
0.52
0.99
1.51
2.40
1,208
1,708
2,271
3,227
1,358
1,920
2,552
3,626
13,609
27,625
43,813
72,598
1.12
1.59
2.11
3.00
DK – Office Archiving Case Study
1
5
10
20
2,625
13,125
26,250
52,500
7,435
9,482
10,893
10,620
983
1,390
1,847
2,625
Case study 2: Costs of digital versus film preservation
• Set up
– Preservation copying of
degrading historic nitrate and
acetate negatives
• Preservation strategies
– Preservation as master files in KBDK’s digital repository
– Output on film and preserved in
KB’s traditional storage facility
Preservation copy of decaying
nitrate negative (ca. 1950)
Costs in € for 20,000 preservation copies (13TB) year 1
LIFE Costing Model
20,000 copies (13TB)
TIFF
Uncompressed
105 mm film
Production (Digitisation)
134,886
134,886
Production (Film output)
0
180,201
Acquisition
1,889
1,889
Ingest
2,283
1,194
35,910
326
922
0
175,890
318,496
Archival Storage
Preservation Planning
Total
Operating costs (€)
40.000
35.000
105mm film
30.000
TIFF UNC
25.000
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Accumulated costs (€) over 5 years
350.000
300.000
250.000
200.000
150.000
100.000
105mm (2 images/fiche)
TIFF Uncompressed
50.000
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Concluding remarks
•
•
•
•
Promising model
Need to include full economic cost
Need consistency with OAIS
Quality assessment
– Map LIFE Costing Model to certification/audit initiatives
- Catalogue of Criteria for Trusted Digital Repositories (Nestor)
- Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist
(TRAC)
- Digital Repository Audit Method Based on Risk Assessment (DRAMBORA)
Acknowledgements
• LIFE2 project team
• Colleagues at the Danish National Archives, State and
University Library and the Royal Library
• Contact information
– Anders Bo Nielsen, The National Archives [email protected]
– Ulla Bøgvad Kejser, The Royal Library [email protected]