SPEC Kit 337: Print Retention Decision Making · 149
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
WEST: Collections Model
WEST Planning Meeting June 7-‐8, 2010 Page 4
COLLECTIONS MODEL
Selection Criteria, Title Categories and Archive Types
The Selection and Validation Working Group endorsed the use of selection criteria that identify
categories of journal titles with similar characteristics each category is recommended for specific
treatment to secure a print backfile(s). A Title Category is an expression of risk for the particular kind of
print journal. The combination of format availability, digital preservation services, print overlap,
presence of existing shared print archives and other factors form part of the risk profile for each
category of titles.
The selection criteria used to define title categories for WEST are informed by
• Risk management principles. If an uncoordinated approach to deselection continues, what is the
likelihood of loss of access within WEST, loss of content within WEST or a stewardship failure?
Each category of titles has a different combined risk level for these three factors.
• Organizational modeling and cost estimates developed by CDL Shared Print and UC Libraries to
determine the most efficient, cost effective approaches to compiling backfiles2.
• Experimentation with issue-‐level validation and calibration of effort conducted by CDL Shared
Print and the IEEE Print operations team at UC Berkeley, UC Davis and the Northern Regional
Library Facility. Includes draft standards for issue-‐level of validation developed in consultation
with JSTOR and UC Berkeley’s preservation officer.
• Ithaka S+R’s optimal copies research3, which provides guidance about how many copies need to
be assembled at a high or low-‐level of validation across the network of libraries to ensure that a
complete copy exists over a certain preservation horizon.
• Ithaka S+R’s recommendations for what to withdraw4, which provides guidance about the
conditions under which print backfiles can be responsibly withdrawn.
• Initial analysis of overlap in print journal titles held by WEST storage facilities and a subset of
WEST libraries.
Additional research may be conducted in the future to
• better understand the network effects of one region’s retention commitments on the retention
choices of other regional efforts
• refine the optimal copies framework in the absence of a page validated archive5. In particular, to
better understand relationship between the units of publication to be verified, the physical
2 UC Libraries have experimented with issue-‐level validation in the IEEE and CoreSTOR Shared Print Projects. Both
models assume that the final archive would reside at a storage facility, but use a different organizational model for
validation. Costs per volume and productivity rates were studied for each model to estimate the human resources
needed at each storage facility to support a scaled backfile consolidation service.
3 Yano, Candace, et. al. Optimizing the Number of Copies for Print Preservation of Research Journals. University of California, Berkeley, October,
2008.
4 Schonfeld, Roger and Ross Housewright. What to Withdraw: Print Collections Management in the Wake of
Digitization. Ithaka S+R, September 29, 2009.
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
WEST: Collections Model
WEST Planning Meeting June 7-‐8, 2010 Page 4
COLLECTIONS MODEL
Selection Criteria, Title Categories and Archive Types
The Selection and Validation Working Group endorsed the use of selection criteria that identify
categories of journal titles with similar characteristics each category is recommended for specific
treatment to secure a print backfile(s). A Title Category is an expression of risk for the particular kind of
print journal. The combination of format availability, digital preservation services, print overlap,
presence of existing shared print archives and other factors form part of the risk profile for each
category of titles.
The selection criteria used to define title categories for WEST are informed by
• Risk management principles. If an uncoordinated approach to deselection continues, what is the
likelihood of loss of access within WEST, loss of content within WEST or a stewardship failure?
Each category of titles has a different combined risk level for these three factors.
• Organizational modeling and cost estimates developed by CDL Shared Print and UC Libraries to
determine the most efficient, cost effective approaches to compiling backfiles2.
• Experimentation with issue-‐level validation and calibration of effort conducted by CDL Shared
Print and the IEEE Print operations team at UC Berkeley, UC Davis and the Northern Regional
Library Facility. Includes draft standards for issue-‐level of validation developed in consultation
with JSTOR and UC Berkeley’s preservation officer.
• Ithaka S+R’s optimal copies research3, which provides guidance about how many copies need to
be assembled at a high or low-‐level of validation across the network of libraries to ensure that a
complete copy exists over a certain preservation horizon.
• Ithaka S+R’s recommendations for what to withdraw4, which provides guidance about the
conditions under which print backfiles can be responsibly withdrawn.
• Initial analysis of overlap in print journal titles held by WEST storage facilities and a subset of
WEST libraries.
Additional research may be conducted in the future to
• better understand the network effects of one region’s retention commitments on the retention
choices of other regional efforts
• refine the optimal copies framework in the absence of a page validated archive5. In particular, to
better understand relationship between the units of publication to be verified, the physical
2 UC Libraries have experimented with issue-‐level validation in the IEEE and CoreSTOR Shared Print Projects. Both
models assume that the final archive would reside at a storage facility, but use a different organizational model for
validation. Costs per volume and productivity rates were studied for each model to estimate the human resources
needed at each storage facility to support a scaled backfile consolidation service.
3 Yano, Candace, et. al. Optimizing the Number of Copies for Print Preservation of Research Journals. University of California, Berkeley, October,
2008.
4 Schonfeld, Roger and Ross Housewright. What to Withdraw: Print Collections Management in the Wake of
Digitization. Ithaka S+R, September 29, 2009.
