JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 1 Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions Safeguarding post cancellation access to e-journals Liam Earney JISC Collections

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 2 Why undertake a study? LOCKSS CLOCKSS Portico Recent developments – Model Licence, PECAN Introduction

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 3 Libraries have in the past assumed preservation responsibility for material they collect, while publishers have supplied the material they need. These well understood divisions of labour do not work in the digital environment and especially so when dealing with licensed e-journals. From the JISC Briefing Paper on e-Journals Archiving and Preservation, 2007 Why undertake a study?

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 4 Provisions in NESLi2 Model Licence Clause 8.4 – embodying the principal of post cancellation access –After termination of this Agreement […] the Publisher will provide […] the Licensee […] with access to and use of the full text of the Licensed Material which was published and paid for within the Subscription Period, –either by i)continuing online access on the Publisher's interface ii)a central archiving facility operated on behalf of the UK HE/FE community or other archival facility iii)supplying the Licensee with archival copies

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 5 LOCKSS ( Overview –LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe) Founded by Stanford University Libraries in 1998 with support from the National Science Foundation, the Mellon Foundation, the Soros Foundation, and the Library of Congress. –LOCKSS enables participating libraries to collect, store, preserve and provide access to journal or e-book content to which they have subscribed or purchased (assuming permission has been granted by publishers), together with other content such Open Access materials, websites and blogs.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 6 LOCKSS ( How does it work? –LOCKSS provides libraries with open-source software to enable them to install a LOCKSS Box that performs the following functions: –It collects content from target web sites using a web crawler similar to those used by search engines. –It compares the content it has collected with the same content collected by other LOCKSS Boxes, and repairing any differences. –It acts as a web proxy or cache, providing browsers in the library's community with access to the publisher's content or the preserved content as appropriate. It can also serve content by Metadata (Open URLs) via resolvers. –It provides a web-based administrative interface that allows library staff to target new journals for preservation, monitor the state of the journals being preserved, and control access to the preserved journals.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 7 LOCKSS ( When is access triggered? –Access to paid for content is triggered whenever (and for whatever reason) the material cannot be viewed on the publisher’s (or intermediary’s) servers. –Post-cancellation access is supported. How many libraries and publishers are participating? –As at September 2009, approximately 400 publishers have committed more than 2,700 titles to the LOCKSS system, and there are 200 member libraries

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 8 LOCKSS ( Weighing up the benefits –LOCKSS allows libraries to collect and exert control over the material they license, as they do when purchasing print journals. –Libraries are assured of post-cancellation access (with publisher permission), and they also have access to the archive whenever there is a problem with communication with a publisher’s server, even if very short term. –Publisher participation in LOCKSS, and the number of titles available, is increasing fast. A significant number of smaller, and therefore probably more vulnerable, publishers are also making their content available. However some large STM publishers are not participating in LOCKSS due to concerns about the security of licensed content when it is distributed so widely. Also not all titles from a particular publisher, nor all issues of a particular title, are necessarily included in the LOCKSS collection. –The highly distributed nature of the approach aims to ensure that there is sufficient replication to safeguard content despite any potential disasters which might befall individual LOCKSS institutions. –LOCKSS requires relatively modest investment in staff and equipment, but libraries do need to monitor the local server and ensure that it is running correctly.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 9 CLOCKSS ( Overview and governance –Launched in 2006, CLOCKSS (Controlled LOCKSS) is a not-for-profit collaboration between libraries and publishers. It is a dark archive based on the LOCKSS software in which a limited number of libraries take on an archival role on behalf of a broader community. –The archive is managed by, and for, its stakeholders. Publishers and librarians have equal say in deciding procedures, priorities, and when to trigger content. How does it work? –CLOCKSS ingests and saves either source or presentation files, as supplied by publishers. 12 research institutions worldwide (including the University of Edinburgh) are assuming responsibility of archiving, and each hosts two servers which create a network of dark repositories.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 10 CLOCKSS ( When is access triggered? –Content no longer available from any publisher is made freely available under a creative commons licence. –So far access to 3 discontinued journals has been “triggered” and is freely available to all at CLOCKSS’ host sites – see –Post-cancellation access is not supported. How many libraries and publishers are participating? –According to the CLOCKSS website, 14 publishers have deposited, or plan to deposit, their e-journal content into the CLOCKSS Archive. 12 libraries are acting as hosts for CLOCKSS boxes, and there are 20 supporting libraries.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 11 CLOCKSS ( What is the business model? –Currently supported by libraries and publishers through annual fees, CLOCKSS aims to raise an endowment to reduce costs for participants in the longer term. What are the costs? –Fees for libraries are based on the size of the materials budget and range from US$450 to US$15,000 per annum. –Fees for publishers vary according to revenue and range from US$1,000 to US$25,000 per annum plus $.25/article for ingesting front files (capped at US$75,000).

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 12 CLOCKSS ( Weighing up the benefits –CLOCKSS provides a community approach, with a small number of distributed libraries assuming responsibility for long-term archiving, working in partnership with publishers. –Currently only 14 publishers are participating/planning to participate in CLOCKSS. However the list does include some major STM publishers who are not participating in LOCKSS due to concerns about security of licensed content. –It is a relatively low-cost option, particularly as archiving is outsourced. However long term costs and sustainability are not clear, particularly as: –Post-cancellation access is not supported. –Content not available via any participating publisher is made free to all – not just to member libraries. –It is unclear what motivations (other than public good) CLOCKSS “archive nodes” have for continuing to participate in the programme in the long term.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 13 Portico ( Overview and governance –Launched in 2005 with support from JSTOR, Ithaka, The Library of Congress, and The Mellon Foundation, Portico is a not-for-profit digital preservation service which provides a permanent archive of electronic journals, books, and other scholarly content. How does it work? –Source files supplied by publishers are "normalized" to a standard archival format. While the “look and feel” of the original is lost, the files can be reliably managed and migrated over the long term as technology changes and file formats become obsolete.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 14 Portico ( When is access triggered? –Access to the archive is triggered when content is no longer available from any other source – for example, if the publisher goes out of business, the title is no longer offered, back issues are no longer available or catastrophic failure. –Publishers can also opt to have Portico handle post-cancellation access claims. According to the Portico website, publishers have designated Portico as a delivery platform for more than 80% of titles included in the archive. How many libraries and publishers are participating? –As at September 2009, approximately 82 publishers have committed 16,887 e-journal and e-book titles to the Portico system and there are 494 participating libraries, including 11 in the UK.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 15 Portico ( What is the business model? Fees from publishers and institutions are the primary sources of funding for Portico, but it also receives funding from charitable foundations and government agencies. Fees for publishers vary according to revenue and range from US$250 to US$75,000 per annum.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 16 Portico ( Weighing up the benefits –Portico removes the onus of managing the content from the library and provides assurance of long-term preservation. However, like CLOCKSS, it requires a cultural shift for libraries in terms of their traditional custodial role. –It can provide post cancellation access providing the publisher has nominated them as a potential mechanism for this. –Publisher participation has grown at an impressive rate and some major STM publishers have joined. However, the current focus seems to be on the larger publishers and some believe that the title and publisher coverage could become rather US-centric once major international publishers have been covered. –Source files supplied by publishers are "normalized" to a standard archival format. While the “look and feel” of the original is lost, the files can be reliably managed and migrated over the long term as technology changes and file formats become obsolete. –It (arguably) provides an equitable business model, with publishers contributing to costs as well as libraries. But some see the dependence on publishers for revenue as a weakness, and the annual fees for many UK libraries may be higher than other options.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 17 Updating Provisions in NESLi2 Model Licence Based on the study JISC Collections updated its model licence – moving the principle to practice to archive the Material in the [insert names of services] archiving services with an indication of the date that archiving commences. The URL that provides details of trigger events that allow access to the archive is at [insert URL]; Recognition of a variety of post-cancellation services and trigger events

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 18 Pilot for Ensuring Continuity of Access via NESLi2 (PECAN) The aim of this project is to investigate how post-cancellation access for NESLi2 deals can be achieved by reaching agreements with publishers that libraries can access in a ‘private LOCKSS network’. To fully examine the complexities of defining what might constitute institutional entitlement to post-cancellation access, and to scope a network-accessible registry. To examine and propose potential governance arrangements for administering and monitoring post-cancellation access To examine and propose a candidate technical infrastructure that would provide appropriate controlled access to licensed material in a robust and secure manner. To consult with publishers and other stakeholders to establish whether the proposed measures could form part of the NESLi2 licensing deal.

Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions JISC Collections 01/11/2015 | ICOLC Paris 2009 | Slide 19 The full report is available from: Terry Morrow, Neil Beagrie, Maggie Jones, Julia Chruszcz A Comparative Study of e-Journal Archiving Solutions