ERPANET Case Study: Project Gutenberg | Page 2

unconnected. With these case studies
ERPANET will broaden the scope and understanding of digital
preservation through research and discussion. The case studies will be
published to improve the approaches and solutions being developed
and to reduce the redundancy of effort. The interviews are identifying

current practice not only in-depth within specific sectors, but also
cross-sectorally: what can the publishing sector learn from the
aeronautical sector? Eventually we aim to use this comparative data to
produce intra-sectoral overviews. This cross-sectoral fertilisation is a
main focus of ERPANET as laid out in its Digital Preservation Charter
(3). It is of primary importance that disparate groups are given a
mechanism through which to come together as best practices for digital
preservation are established in each sector.
Aims The principal aims of the study are to: * build a picture of
methods and match against context to produce best practices; *
accumulate and make accessible information about practices; * identify
issues for further research; * enable cross-sectoral practice comparisons;
* enable the development of assessment tools; * create material for
training seminars and workshops; and, * develop contacts.
Potential sectors have been selected to represent a wide scope of
information production and digital preservation activity. Each sector
may present a unique perspective on digital preservation.
Organisational and sectoral requirements, awareness of digital
preservation, resources available, and the nature of the digital object
created place unique and specific demands on organisations. Each of
the case studies is being balanced to ensure a range of institutional
types, sizes, and locations.
The main areas of investigation included: * perception and awareness
of risk associated with information loss; * understanding how digital
preservation affects the organisation; * identifying what actions have
been taken to prevent data loss; * the process of monitoring actions;
and, * mechanisms for determining future requirements.
Within each section, the questions were designed to bring
organisational perceptions and practices into focus. Questions were
aimed at understanding impressions held on digital preservation and the
impact that it has had on the respective organisation, exploring the
awareness in the sector of the issues and the importance that it was
accorded, and how it affected organisational thinking. The participants
were asked to describe, what in their views, were the main problems

associated with digital preservation and what value information
actually had in the sector. Through this the reasons for preserving
information as well as the risks associated with not preserving it
became clear.
The core of the questionnaire focused on the actions taken at corporate
level and sectoral levels in order to uncover policies, strategies, and
standards currently employed to tackle digital preservation concerns,
including selection, preservation techniques, storage, access, and costs.
Questions allowed participants to explore the future commitment from
their organisation and sector to digital preservation activities, and
where possible to relate their existing or planned activities to those
being conducted in other organisations with which they might be
familiar.
Ten organisations in each sector, and three people within each
organisation are targeted for each study. In reality this proved to be
problematic. Even when organisations are identified and interviews
timetabled, targets often withdrew just before we began the interview
process. Some withdrew after seeing the data collection instrument, due
in part to the time/effort involved, and others (we suspect) dropped out
because they realised that the expertise was not available within their
organisation to answer the questions. The perception of risks that might
arise through contributing to these studies worried some organisations,
particularly those from sectors where competitive advantage is
imperative, or liability and litigation issues especially worrying.
Non-disclosure agreements that stipulated that we would neither name
an organisation nor disclose any information that would enable readers
to identify them were used to reduce risks associated with contributing
to this study. In some cases the risk was still deemed too great and
organisations withdrew.
Chapter 3
: Method of Working Initial desk-based sectoral analysis provides
ERPANET researchers with essential background knowledge. They
then conduct the primary research by interview. In developing the

interview instrument, the project directors and editors reviewed other
projects that had used interviews to accumulate evidence on issues
related to digital preservation. Among these the methodologies used in
the Pittsburgh Project and InterPARES I for target selection and data
collection were given special attention. The Pittsburgh approach was
considered too narrow a focus and provided insufficient breadth to
enable full sectoral comparisons. On the other hand, the InterPARES I
data collection methodology proved much too detailed and lengthy,
which we felt might become an obstacle at the point of interpretation of
the data. Moreover, it focused closely on recordkeeping systems within
organisations.
The ERPANET interview instrument takes account of the strengths and
weaknesses from both, developing a more focussed questionnaire
designed to target a range of strategic points in the organisations under
examination. The