Transcript Title here

LOCKSS and OpenLOCKSS
Adam Rusbridge and William J Nixon
UKSG Breakout Session
April 2008
Session Outline
• LOCKSS
• UK LOCKSS Pilot Programme
–
–
–
–
–
Stakeholders
OpenLOCKSS
Reflections
Lessons Learned
Next Steps
What is LOCKSS
• Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe
– http://www.lockss.org
• Unique, peer-to-peer archiving model
– tool to ensure libraries remain memory
organisations, custodians of digital content
– preservation no longer a side-effect of
distribution
• economically stable model that benefits both
libraries and publishers
– helps libraries fulfil collection development role
– does not interfere with publisher sales
The LOCKSS System
•
Large number of independent and persistent collections of
content relevant to library goals
– library collections overlap sufficiently to provide replication
higher than for centralised system
– Publisher uploads manifest page
• containing the LOCKSS permission statement
• list of volumes an institution is authorised to collect in
their LOCKSS box
– LOCKSS collects the material direct from publisher
• Plugin defines ‘rules’ identifying content corresponding to
journal volumes
• Collected and preserved in local LOCKSS box
•
Long term survival of data requires regular audit of infrequently
accessed bitstreams
– continuous 'round robin' polling audit algorithm used to verify
content
The LOCKSS System
•
In event of data loss, retrieval from publisher is first attempted
– Otherwise, retrieval from trusted peer with whom you have
previously polled.
•
LOCKSS box designed to integrate into institutional proxy
network
– Requests for content always forwarded to publisher
• Publisher can identify content usage
– Only served if publisher fails to respond
• content no longer available
• publisher unavailable
LOCKSS Box
• A library's LOCKSS box
– Does not require significant system
administration
– Numerous features dedicated to ensuring
platform security
• reboot to restore
– Twice yearly upgrade process is straightforward
and fast
Background to the Pilot
•
JISC E-journal Archiving Study in 2003 highlighted
emerging developments (i.e. LOCKSS, JSTOR Electronic
Archiving Initiative - predecessor of Portico, UK legal
deposit and OCLC Digital Archive).
•
JISC NESLi2 Model Licence archive clauses (from 2006)
provided a measure of assurance for libraries. Concerns
about enforcement mechanisms.
•
•
British Library E-journal Digital Archive
CLIR (Council on Library and Information Resources)
report: E-Journal Archiving Metes and Bounds: A Survey
of the Landscape.
– JISC-funded Review and Analysis, by Maggie Jones
UK LOCKSS Pilot Programme
• Distributed LOCKSS environment requires
– investment by libraries
– centralised coordination and support
• Two-year pilot launched in February 2006
– jointly funded by JISC / CURL
• Stakeholders
–
–
–
–
Libraries
Publishers
Central Bodies and Negotiation Agencies
Digital Curation Centre (DCC) LOCKSS
Technical Support Service
LOCKSS Pilot Objectives
•
Raise awareness of the LOCKSS initiative.
•
Seed a self-sustaining base of LOCKSS users in the UK
– provide libraries with the practical help to get started
– develop the skills needed to run their LOCKSS nodes
•
Study the LOCKSS technology in an operational environment
•
Investigate the challenges associated with collective preservation
of a major proportion of the e-journals in common use in the JISC
community.
•
Build a centre of expertise outside the US, feeding the lessons
learned back for the benefit of the international LOCKSS
community.
•
Allow the JISC community to make informed assessments
regarding the most appropriate future use of LOCKSS
UK Libraries
•
University of Birmingham
•
University of Newcastle Upon Tyne
•
Cambridge University Library
•
Oxford University
•
Cardiff University
•
University of Sheffield
•
De Montfort University
•
University of St Andrews
•
University of Durham
•
University of Surrey
•
University of East London
•
UCL Library Services
•
University of Edinburgh
•
University of Wolverhampton
•
University of Exeter
•
University of York
•
University of Glasgow
•
University of Hertfordshire
•
Associate Members:
•
University of Hull
•
University of Bristol
•
Kings' College London
•
University of Huddersfield
•
University of Liverpool
•
University of Leicester
•
Loughborough University
•
London School of Economics and Political Science
•
University of Manchester
•
University of Sussex
•
Middlesex University
•
University of Warwick
Libraries and LOCKSS
•
Benefits of Participation
– Libraries are important memory organizations; ensure their
relevance.
• LOCKSS supports library's mission
• Libraries have most at stake: key for them to be part of the
solution
– Community Participation
– Control of Assets
• Long term investment in collections
– Control of Infrastructure
•
Low cost solution
– Minimise maintenance costs by using open source software
– Reduce system administration costs through automation
– Minimise user education costs by integrating with standard
library technologies
Glasgow’s Motivations
• Online provision of current and older volume of
journals continues to expand
• Plans for the reallocation of printed journals are
ongoing
• Academic Staff have raised questions about
permanent online access
• Preservation tools and solutions needed:
– If we are to discharge our responsibilities to support
research and teaching
– To demonstrate our commitment to preservation and,
critically, perpetual access
• LOCKSS and Portico – E-Journal Insurance
Publishers and LOCKSS
• Benefits of Participation
– LOCKSS preserves original article look and feel,
keeping publisher branding intact
– No fee to participate
– LOCKSS ensures uninterrupted access to content
even when the publisher's site is down
– International adoption - growing community
– Helps introduce publisher titles to new markets
– Shared responsibility for curation
– Keeps their customers – libraries - happy
UK Publishers
• Outcomes of UK Pilot Activity:
– Signed and available to archive:
• Royal Society of Chemistry
• Annual Reviews
– Signed and available soon:
•
•
•
•
Taylor and Francis
Cambridge University Press
British Psychological Society
Royal Society
Content in the UK LOCKSS Programme
• Content key to the UK Pilot
– Critical issue: how to bring more content into
LOCKSS?
– What is the most appropriate content type to
focus on?
• Large Commercial Publishers
– Correlation between budget expenditure and
awareness
• High library demand for these publishers
– However
• Publisher's business model and economic stability
means these assets are exposed to low risk
– CLOCKSS
Content in the UK LOCKSS Programme
• Small, Medium and Closed Publishers
– Range of publishers and their status means they
are potentially more exposed
– Build upon the NESLi2-SMP work
• Adherence to Post-termination and archiving
clauses (8.4-8.10) a requirement for participation
• Ideally, integrate archival agreements into
NESLi2-SMP negotiations
– Logical step to push forward with LOCKSS
compliance
• Open Access Publishers
– The most fragile and ephemeral
– Numerous
Central Bodies and Negotiation Agents
• JISC are in a strong position to coordinate activity
• Content Complete Ltd have undertaken negotiation
work for NESLi2 content
– Integrate LOCKSS negotiations into Content Complete
Ltd workflow as standard
• What about non-NESLi2 content
– negotiations led by LOCKSS Technical Support
Service?
– How can central identification of titles occur?
• JISC Journals Working Group
• JISC Library Advisory Working Group
Community Development
• It is the shared responsibility of libraries to
take appropriate measures to safeguard
digital content
• Appropriate and thorough Collection
Development Mechanisms required
– Title Identification: Discussion between Subject
Specialists
– Build into existing organisational structures
• e.g. CURL
• Local Consortia
• For advocacy, identification and negotiations
OpenLOCKSS
• Funded by JISC
• Ran from March to August 2007
• Project Staff
–
–
–
–
•
•
•
•
Tony Kidd (Project Director)
Laura Galloway
William J Nixon
Adam Rusbridge
Built on the Oct 06 Open Access Survey
Contacted 28 Publishers (32 Titles)
Received 19 Positive responses
First plug-ins now available
Deliverables
• Agree with 12-15 journals on participation
in LOCKSS
• Ensure the availability of publisher
manifest pages for participating journals
• Write appropriate plug-ins
• Agree hosting among LOCKSS Pilot
Project participants
• Write publicity and information material
about LOCKSS for Open Access journal
publishers
• Deliver the Project final report to JISC by
mid-August 2007
Background to OpenLOCKSS
• OpenLOCKSS took its lead from the US
LOCKSS Humanities Project
• Opportunity to engage with UK Open
Access Publishers
• 2006 OA Survey
–
–
–
–
–
Titles compiled from DOAJ
Each Pilot Participant was asked to vote
Could also suggest titles
Votes were used to identify titles approached
Survey was complementary to CCL’s
Key Activities
• Working with Journal Publishers
–
–
–
–
–
Selecting and contacting the journals
Following up with journal publishers
Liaising with publishers/answering their queries
Selecting Additional “Reserve” titles
Negotiating for agreement
• LOCKSS Development
– Implementing manifest pages
– Writing plug-ins
Working with Publishers
• Selecting initial titles from the OA Survey
– 13 Selected [3 Declined, 4 Yes]
• Development of Publicity Materials
• Website and PDF Material
• Contact and Follow-up
– E-mail and Telephone
• Negotiating for Agreement
– Technical and Legal Queries
• Additional “Reserve” Titles
– 2 Reserve Lists [19 Additional Titles]
– Much faster and more positive response
Initial Titles
Title
Votes
Participation
Population Trends
14
Declined
Health Statistics Quarterly
13
Declined
Ariadne
9
Yes (Provisional)
Journal of Information, Law & Technology
8
No
Reviews in History
8
Yes (Provisional)
Web Journal of Current Legal Issues
8
Yes (Provisional)
Chemistry Education: Research and Practice
6
Yes, Manifest Page sent
International Journal of Communications Law &
Policy
6
Considering request
Law, Social Justice & Global Development
6
No
Peace, Conflict & Development
6
No
D-Lib Magazine
5
Declined
Popular Musicology Online
5
No
Renaissance Forum
5
No
1st Group of Reserve Titles
Title
Votes
Participation
Discourse Analysis Online
4
No
Forced Migration Review
4
Yes, Manifest Page sent
Information Research
4
Yes, Manifest Page added
Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism
Education
4
Yes (Provisional)
Journal of Language & Linguistics
4
Yes, Manifest Page sent
Journal of Language & Learning
4
Yes, Manifest Page sent
Journal of Language & Literature
4
Yes, Manifest Page sent
Museum & Society
4
Yes, Manifest Page added
Psycoloquy
4
Yes, Manifest Page sent
Journal of eLiteracy (JeLit)
3
Yes, Plugin available
RLG DigiNews
3
Yes, Plugin completed
2nd Group of Reserve Titles
Title
Votes
Participation
Epherema: Theory & Politics in Organization
3
Yes, Manifest Page sent
Genomics, Society and Policy
3
Yes, Manifest Page sent
International Journal for Mathematics Teaching &
Learning
3
No
The Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies
3
No
Journal of Molecular & Genetic Medicine
3
Yes, Manifest Page sent
Journal of RNAi and Gene Silencing
2
Yes, Manifest Page sent
Scope
3
No
The Surgeon
3
No
Additional Titles from Libertas Academica
• Analytical Chemistry
Insights
• Bioinformatics and
Biology Insights
• Biomarker Insights
• Cancer Informatics
• Clinical Medicine:
Arthritis and
Musculoskeletal
Disorders
• Clinical Medicine:
Cardiology
• Clinical Medicine:
Oncology
• Clinical Medicine:
Respiratory and
Pulmonary Medicine
• Drug Target Insights
• Evolutionary
Bioinformatics
• Integrative Medicine
Insights
• Gene Regulation and
Systems Biology
• Perspectives in
Medicinal Chemistry
• Translational
Oncogenomics
Key Risks
• Publisher Risks
– Lack of response or agreement with OA
publishers
• Participant Risks
– Insufficient participants to host the journals
• Development Risks
– Plug-in development time
Lessons Learned
• Publisher Negotiations
– Can be time consuming
– Needs persistence
– Provide key information about costs,
technology and legal issues
• Legal queries
– Content re-use
– Attribution and copyright
• Plug-in challenges
– Diversity of platforms
– Valuable learning and development
opportunities
Current Status
• Now released:
– Journal for eLiterature
– Museum and Society
– Psycoloquy
• Coming Soon
–
–
–
–
–
Journal of Language and Linguistics
Journal of Language and Learning
Ephemera
Information Research
Libertas Academica Titles
Ongoing Work
• Follow-up with Publishers
– Ongoing correspondence and Manifest pages
• Ongoing Release of Plug-ins
– Work with the DCC and Pilot Participants
• Maintenance of Website
– Updates on OpenLOCKSS Progress
• Dissemination Activities
– UKSG in April 2008
– Journal article
Conclusions and Outcomes
• The agreement of 19 Open Access titles
to be included in the LOCKSS system.
• LOCKSS is an ideal low-cost mechanism
for ensuring preservation, particularly for
Open Access titles
• There are many Open Access publishers
who are very interested, very keen in
some cases to have their content
preserved by LOCKSS
• Our experience would indicate that there
would be many more who would be willing
to join the LOCKSS system
Pilot Programme Achievements
•
•
•
•
Provided participants with the skills needed to implement
and run LOCKSS
Improvements in system documentation and streamlined
processes
– easier for new institutions to join and participate
Designed and implemented a robust support management
mechanism which enables librarians to contribute to the
ongoing direction of the LOCKSS approach
– receive critical feedback to understand user
experiences, identify ideas, and implement system
improvements
Provided affordable, local support to UK HE/FE institutions
using LOCKSS
– low administration and management overheads
commended by many participants
Pilot Programme Achievements
•
•
•
Established a UK-wide centre of expertise in digital journal
archiving
– ensuring that UK priorities are identified and
addressed at the national level.
Implemented a programme of training events and
workshops
– forum to share their experiences and debate common
issues
Successfully introduced and raised awareness about the
key issues associated with long-term digital journal
preservation
– emphasis on:
• financial and accessibility benefits of building local
collections
• identifying the risks associated with the licensing
constraints of current access models.
Pilot Programme Achievements
•
•
JISC's negotiation agent, Content Complete Ltd, has
improved communications with publishers to make them
aware of the needs of the LOCKSS library community
– continuing to add more UK content of interest into
LOCKSS.
The OpenLOCKSS initiative has successfully improved
the model for the identification, negotiation, and
participation of open access content
– a model undertaken by libraries, for libraries.
Assessment and Evaluation
• LOCKSS Pilot Programme Evaluation
– JISC evaluation of the LOCKSS Pilot
Programme, led by Evidence Base (University of
Birmingham)
• Electronic Journal Comparison Study
– Comparative study between electronic journal
archiving services, led by Tee Em Consulting
Continuation
• JISC has funded the pilot phase of
LOCKSS in the UK until July 2008
– Extension funding from April to July 2008 while
evaluation studies are ongoing
– Provides libraries with clear guidance on
decision making
• Sustainability requires institutional
contribution through membership fees to a
UK LOCKSS alliance
– during first year, begin transfer away from full
JISC/CURL funding
Why Join the Programme?
•
Access newly released premium LOCKSS content
•
Reader access to content when you need it
•
Dedicated UK support and guidance for libraries and
publishers
•
Access to detailed documentation
•
Influence LOCKSS development activity to meet your
needs
•
Participate in cutting-edge international preservation
initiatives
•
Improved communication channels with publishers. Over
300 publishers have currently signed on to LOCKSS and
more are joining every month
•
Influence strategic coordination to identify and appraise
titles of interest, both for commercial and open access use
Cost of Participation
• Current draft figures:
JISC Band
Annual Fee – first year
A
£5,429
B
£3,850
C
£2,369
D
£1,727
E-F
£1,086
Running Costs of the LOCKSS Programme
• Low Institutional Cost
– Minimum System Administration
– Non-time consuming Collection Development
• Support and development costs covered by annual
fee
• Negotiation Cost
– embed within JISC negotiation agents
– community-based working groups
LOCKSS Lessons Learned
•
Identifying value in preservation system is difficult
– Investment does not result in immediate access benefits
•
Ongoing central coordination is necessary
– Build expertise in support of community
– New territory: librarians need support and advice
– Understanding user needs a continuous process
•
•
Content diversity can be challenging
Innovation depends on experimentation
– Software is never perfect
• Most ideal solution available to ensure library
stewardship
– User needs are constantly changing
– Diversity of solutions: a good thing
The UK Pilot as a Model Initiative
• The UK LOCKSS Programme has
promoted a model whereby
– title identification and negotiation skills is
undertaken in the UK
• ensuring UK priorities are highlighted and
addressed
– assets are retained in the UK
• at an appropriate organisational level
• Several countries in Europe and Asia are
looking to the UK Programme Model
– similar national initiatives to launch
"...let us save what remains: not by vaults and locks which
fence them from the public eye and use in consigning them to
the waste of time, but by such a multiplication of copies, as
shall place them beyond the reach of accident”
- Thomas Jefferson
Adam Rusbridge ([email protected])
William J Nixon ([email protected])
http://www.dcc.ac.uk/lockss
http://www.lib.gla.ac.uk/research/openlockss