1. Using the LIFE Costing Model Case studies from DK
Anders Bo Nielsen, The Danish National Archives
Ulla Bøgvad Kejser, The Royal Library, Denmark

2. 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)‏

3. 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

4. Preservation Planning Ingest Administration Access Administration
LIFE Costing Model - DK
Production
Acquisition
Ingest
Archival Storage
Preservation Planning
Access
Audit
Selection
Ingest Administration
Storage Administration
Access Administration
Submission Agreement
Quality Assurance
Storage Provision
Preservation Watch
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
Check-in
Replication
Provide Data
Lifecycle system management Planning, certification)
General administation and facilities; economic adjustments (overhead)

5. 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: in app documents, produced/recieved by 10 persons for about 6 months
Transforming using a purchased TIFF-printer driver and an in- house developed system to control the transformation
Quality control using automatic system control for some controls and samples for other controls

6. The generic preservation model (GPM)‏
Cost = t * TEW + (t / ULE + PON) * (CRS + UME + PPA + QA)‏
Small amount of objects

7. Results of using the GPM

8. 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 KB- DK’s digital repository
Output on film and preserved in KB’s traditional storage facility
Preservation copy of decaying nitrate negative (ca. 1950)

9. 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
Production (Film output)
180,201
Acquisition
1,889
Ingest
2,283
1,194
Archival Storage
35,910
326
Preservation Planning
922
Total
175,890
318,496

10. Operating costs (€)

11. Accumulated costs (€) over 5 years

12. 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)‏

13. 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
Ulla Bøgvad Kejser, The Royal Library