The following paper is a modified version of my paper given at the 2006 Association of Canadian Archivists Annual Conference in St. John’s.

This session, Preservation and the Digital Divide, will discuss some of the opportunities as well as considerable challenges faced by archives with the advent of the digital age. Most archives in Canada are currently struggling to provide basic preservation care for their analog records let alone for the upcoming tidal wave of born digital records and digital records created as part of a digital preservation strategy.

As a preservation consultant I have had the opportunity over the last seven years of working with over 100 archives, museums and art galleries from across Western Canada – all of which have archival records. During this time I have also had the privilege of being a member of the Canadian Council of Archives Preservation Committee and have had the opportunity to review preservation grants from across Canada as part of the adjudication process. While undertaking these activities it has become apparent that many archives are ill prepared to take advantage of the opportunities that digital preservation/ migration can offer.

In 2003, the Canadian Council of Archives Preservation Committee contracted Cynthia Ball to review 95 Global Preservation Assessments completed between 1999 – 2004.[1] The purpose of the Ball report was to develop a picture of the current state of preservation in Canada during this period. It is not a rosy picture. 

The Ball Report identified that of the 95 archives that had had a global preservation assessment in that five-year period:
* 60% no environmental control – which equates to no relative humidity control
* 67% no preservation policy – 100% no digital preservation policy
* 76% no written emergency plan
* 97% no cold storage 

It is interesting to note that at the same time the Ball report was being compiled the Heritage Health Index (the first comprehensive survey ever conducted of the condition and preservation needs of all American collections held in the public institutions) was undertaken.[2] Additionally, in the United Kingdom, the National Preservation Office in February 2006 published “Knowing the Need – A Report on the emerging picture of preservation needs in libraries and archives in the UK”. What is intriguing to note when you read these survey reports is that only the Heritage Health Index includes digital records in their data sets.

The Heritage Health Index Summary
* 26% no environmental control
* 80% no emergency plan
* 68% budgeted less than $3000 year for preservation – which is also similar to Canadian archives

The UK National Preservation Office report focuses almost exclusively on analog records and notes “ the great majority of reformatting has been by microfilming, and this remains an economical and reliable long-term form of surrogate. Digitisation has significant access benefits but a greater cost in both creation and maintenance of the digital object”.[3] The report’s summary of preservation needs does not identify any key issues relating to digital preservation. 

I should note here that the Global Preservation Assessments reviewed in the Ball Report are almost exclusively completed by using either the full or an abridged version of the Conservation Assessment Guide for Archives by Jane Dalley and published by the Canadian Council of Archives in 1995. At the time this assessment tool was complied digital records were not a significant part of an archival collection. To address this shift in records the work plan of the CCA Preservation committee for the upcoming year includes updating the Conservation Assessment Guide to include both born digital and migrated digital record sections. 

So when we take the American and UK surveys into account we can confidently state that Canadian archives are not alone in the challenges they face. We are, however, truly are at a cross roads in terms of how we collect, preserve and make archival records accessible – AND in how we choose to reallocate fiscal and staff resources to improve the preservation of our archival heritage.

Archives that do not have specialist media archivists or access to conservators are facing considerable challenges in the preservation of “at risk media”. “At risk” or modern media includes:
* Magnetic media (audio and videotape)
* Colour photographic media (not in cold storage)
* Cellulose nitrate and cellulose acetate (still and motion picture)

The vast majority of these records are housed in environments that are less than ideal and suffer from what can be generously termed “benign neglect”. 

It is with “at risk’ media that the opportunities of digital reformatting and the creation of preservation master copies can be realized. If the current strategy of benign neglect continues these records will be lost. A digital preservation strategy is not without peril and cannot be entered into without considerable forethought and, in many cases, a hefty investment. 

Steven Puglia in his 1999 RLG Diginews article “The Costs of Digital Imaging Projects” identified the following production figure breakdown:

* 1/3 the cost is digital conversion (32%)
* 1/3 the cost is in metadata creation (includes cataloguing, description and indexing (29%)
* 1/3 the cost in other activities, such as administration and quality control (39%)[4]

These ratios are daunting. Suppose a province wanted to approach the preservation of ‘at risk’ modern media strategically and, for example, identified early ¾” Umatic tape as the preservation media of choice for a particular grant cycle. Let’s suppose that that province allocated $50,000 of their grant allocation to this province-wide preservation project. In Vancouver, the cost of migration for a one-hour ¾” Umatic tape to an MPEG2 digital file is between $200 - $400 per tape depending on the condition of the tape and how much time it takes to prepare the tape for a safe transfer. So, if we average the costs at $300 per tape ONLY 165 – 170 tapes could be transferred for the $50,000. If the total NADP grant program (approximately $1.2 million) was devoted to a nation-wide preservation project the archival community could only transfer 4000 one-hour Umatic tapes!

Before a digital preservation project can be initiated, such as the province-wide Umatic project I just mentioned - numerous issues arise. For example, in many archives videotapes are acquired as part of a larger fond but they are never appraised as the archives did not have appropriate play back equipment at the time of acquisition. This becomes a Catch-22 as an archive is not going to invest $200-$400 for a tape migration unless they are sure that it will be a useful expenditure. In an attempt to assist archives in BC the AABC Preservation Service has developed a registry of institutions with a range of play back equipment that could be used by association members for appraisal or reappraisal if needed. The AABC Preservation Tool Kit is being redeveloped to focus on “at risk” media with a new page going up shortly on Videotape Preservation: Format Identification and Condition Assessment. Because again, if the tapes have not been appraised or the tape format has not been identified during acquisition how will the archivist know what type of payback equipment will be needed for appraisal? 

To this point I have focused a few challenges – and it has been a bit depressing – but there are success stories! Kim Lawson at the Union of BC Indian Chiefs Resource Centre in Vancouver has developed an in-house program for the migration of videotapes and audiotapes to digital format. 

The City of Vancouver Archives has identified cellulose acetate still and motion picture film as a high preservation priority. To that end, the City of Vancouver Archives has installed a walk-in cold storage vault for the cellulose acetates. A scanning project was also undertaken to provide access to the cellulose acetate negatives in cold storage. Sue Bigelow, Conservator, at the City of Vancouver Archives, has written a case study of the cold storage project and it can be downloaded from the Canadian Council of Archives website.[5] This project is an exceptional example of improving researcher access, improving preservation by reducing handling and dramatically increasing life expectancy through cold storage.

Some archives that I have visited are quite candid in that they hope/plan to preserve their analog photographic images by the creation of digital preservation copies. I should note that none of these archives have a digital preservation policy nor do they appear to have a coherent digital preservation strategy nor funds, I suspect, for the ongoing maintenance of this digital asset. To those archives I draw their attention to the IPI Preservation Calculator[6].

Note that at average room storage conditions there will be noticeable loss in less than 50 years. If the digital project is not undertaken to current best practice and if these archives are not able to maintain the digital preservation copies then both may be lost. For still images NARA’s Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Archival Materials for Electronic Access: Creation of Production Master Files – Raster Images – is considered by most to be best practice.[7]

What can we do to bridge the digital divide between have and have not archives? As a community, if we identify ‘at risk’ media as a high priority we must redirect resources toward:

* Identify education needs and the development of workshops or other training opportunities in areas such as – media/format identification and digital project management
* Develop acquisition questionnaires for modern media and/ or link to other groups such as the Variable Media Group 
* Develop web resources focusing on migration best practice and include case studies where possible
* Encourage ‘cooperative grant applications’ for ‘at risk’ media so that a lower cost per tape/records transfer could be negotiated

And once this utopian or dystopian world of digital preservation masters is created we have to have a way of storing vast amounts of digital information. To deal effectively with these vast quantities of digital data the Canadian archival community should explore the idea of a regional system of trusted digital repositories – or “digital deep freezes”. This approach will be of particular value to archives that cannot make the ongoing investment in the maintenance of a digital asset. 

So as a conservator am I pessimistic about the digital onslaught – not at all! I have great hope for the future – we are still in the very early days of this digital world and that the potential for increased researcher access and preservation has never been greater.

1 Ball, Cynthia. 2004. The Ball Report. Internal CCA Report.

2 Heritage Health Index. www.heritagepreservation.org/hhi/index.html

3 Walker, Alison and Julia Foster. 2006. Knowing the Need. National Preservation Office, British Library. www.bl.uk/services/npo/publicationsnpo.html accessed 26 June 2006.

4 Puglia, Steven. 1999. The Costs of digital Imaging Projects, RLG Diginews, Volume 3, No. 5, October 15, 1999. accessed 26 June 2006. www.rlg.org/legacy/preserv/diginews/diginews3-5.html#feature 

5 Bigelow, Sue. 2003. Cold Storage of Photographs at the City of Vancouver Archives. Ottawa: Canadian Council of Archives. www.cdncouncilarchives.ca

6 Image Permanence Institute Preservation Calculator. www.imagepermanenceinstitute.org/shtml_sub/dl_prescalc.shtml

7 Puglia, Steven. Et al. 2004. Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Archival Materials for Electronic Access: Creation of Production Master Files – Raster Images. www.archives.gov/research/arc/techguide-raster-june2004.pdf

Back to Table of Contents

© 2006 Archives Association of British Columbia