Collaborative digitization programs: a multifaceted approach to sustainability

Abstract

Purpose -To provide an introduction to the eight articles in the issue that deal with collaborative digitization programs. Design/methodology/approach -This introduction summarizes the articles within the context of sustainability.Findings -In addition to business planning, efforts to build collaborative networks, empower content providers, and engage end-users are central to developing sustainable programs. Originality/value -Readers gain a quick overview of some of the key issues that digitization programs face.

Collaborative networks of memory institutions in digitisation initiatives

“…Research on these types of collaboration is usually based on case studies and surveys of archives, libraries and museums (Gibson et al, 2007;Yarrow et al, 2008;ec.europa.eu, 2008), opinions and experience of memory institutions practitioners (Zorich et al, 2008), agreements and other resources documenting collaboration practices (Kaufman and Ubois, 2007). There is also a body of publications that aim to elaborate on the experience of digitisation initiatives and summarise advantages and pitfalls of specific collaboration cases (Middleton, 2005;Trzeciak et al, 2006;Bailey-Hainer and Urban, 2004). There is a tendency for qualitative exploration of benefits, risks and perspectives of partnership practices drawing on the practical experience to be common in current collaboration research.…”

“…Based on the common functions of memory institutions and the need to re-invent traditional heritage services, this type of collaboration is mostly considered as a transformational practice for the benefit of the user (Carr, 2006;Zorich et al, 2008), although the practical usefulness of sharing resources is also recognised (Gibson et al, 2007). Usually researchers report such benefits of memory institution collaboration as the development of new and unique services, sharing costs, expertise of partners, facilities and technological infrastructures, better opportunities to get funding (Gibson et al, 2007;Bishoff, 2004;Trzeciak et al, 2006;Middleton, 2005;Zorich et al, 2008).…”

Communities, Innovation, and Critical Mass: Understanding the Impact of Digitization on Scholarship in the Humanities Through the Case of Tibetan and Himalayan Studies

“…One of the first significant contributions to be made by this work is in its reframing of the traditional notions of success and sustainability in regard to digitization projects. Most literature deals with these themes separately; projects are discussed as being successful or not successful (Bailer-Hainer & Urban, 2004) and models are proposed for the overall sustainability of digitization projects (Middleton, 2005;Guthrie, Griffiths, & Maron, 2008). Much of the existing literature covering both of these topics is instructive in nature (Lampert & Vaughan, 2009;Hughes, 2004;OCLC, n.d.).…”

Revising digital library content in response to user requests

“…Several publications have considered the issues involved in designing and creating digital libraries (Andrews and Law, 2004;D-Lib Magazine;JoDI). Some writers have also discussed the issues involved in sustainable management of a digital library (Hamilton, 2004;Middleton, 2005;Smith, 2003). This article considers one particular aspect of digital library management that has hitherto received little attention: how to respond to requests by library users to add, remove, update or annotate material.…”