Skip to main content

Participatory archive: towards decentralised curation, radical user orientation, and broader contextualisation of records management

Abstract

User perspective and user studies have received noticeably little practical attention in archives and archival science. The purpose of this article is to address the issues of communication and user participation in archival contexts. Two action research projects-based digital archives are discussed. The insights gained during the research and development work are used to formulate a new approach to a participatory archive. In spite of the historical nature of the archives discussed, the suggested ways of interacting with an archive are not specific to historical records. The fundamental characteristics of the proposed approach are decentralised curation, radical user orientation, and contextualisation of both records and the entire archival process.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Adams M (2007) Analyzing archives and finding facts: use and users of digital data records. Arch Sci 7(1):21–36. doi:10.1007/s10502-007-9056-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altheide DL (1996) Qualitative media analysis. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson IG (2004a) Are you being served? Historians and the search for primary sources. Archivaria 58:81–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson C (2004b) The long tail. Wired Mag 12(10):170–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson C (2006) The long tail: why the future of business is selling less or more. Hyperion, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson IG (2008) Necessary but not sufficient: modelling online archive development in the UK. D-Lib Mag 14(1/2). doi:10.1045/january2008-anderson

  • ArchivesNext (2007) An archivists 2.0 manifesto? ArchivesNext Blog 2007/08/20

  • Badgley K, Meunier C (2005) Macroappraisal, the next frontier: an approach for appraising large and complex government institutions. Arch Sci 5(2):261–283. doi:10.1007/s10502-005-9016-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey S (2007) Taking the road less travelled by: the future of the archive and records management profession in the digital age. J Soc Arch 28(2):117–124. doi:10.1080/00379810701607777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball P (2004) Critical mass: how one thing leads to another. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodker K, Kensing F, Simonsen J (2004) Participatory it design: designing for business and workplace realities. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth B (1998) Understanding the information needs of visitors to museums. Mus Manage Curatorship 17(2):139–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Branschofsky M, Glavash K (2003) Mit’s Dspace: a good fit for etd’s. In: Schirmbacher P (ed) Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on electronic theses and dissertations ETD2003 (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 20.05.2003–24.05.2003), Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin. Retrieved from www.dspace.org/implement/community-workflow.pp

  • Bruebach N (2003) Archival science in Germany—traditions, developments and perspectives. Arch Sci 3(4):379–399. doi:10.1007/s10502-004-3420-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckland M (1992) Redesigning library services: a manifesto. American Library Association, Chicago. http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Literature/Library/Redesigning/pdf.html

  • CALIMERA Project (2005) Calimera guidelines: digital preservation. CALIMERA Project. Retrieved from http://www.calimera.org/Lists/Guidelines

  • Casey ME, Savastinuk LC (2006) Library 2.0. Libr J. http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6365200.html

  • Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) CC (2002) Reference model for an open archival information system (OAIS). Blue Book, Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS), Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook T (2001) Archival science and postmodernism: new formulations for old concepts. Arch Sci 1(1):3–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook T, Schwartz JM (2002) Archives, records, and power: from (postmodern) theory to (archival) performance. Arch Sci 2(3):171–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox RJ (1998) Access in the digital information age and the archival mission: the United States. J Soc Arch 19(1):25–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford W (2006) Library 2.0 and ‘library 2.0’. Cites Insights 6(2):1–32. http://citesandinsights.info/civ6i2.pdf

  • Crofts N, Doerr M, Gill T, Stead S, Stiff M (eds) (2007) Definition of the CIDOC conceptual reference model. ICOM/CIDOC Documentation Standards Group, continued by the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group. Retrieved from http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/docs/cidoc_crm_version_4.2.2.pdf

  • Cunningham A (2007) Digital curation/digital archiving: a view from the National Archives of Australia. In: DigCCurr 2007 international symposium on digital curation, Chapel Hill, pp 18–20

  • Dingsøyr T, Røyrvik E (2003) An empirical study of an informal knowledge repository in a medium-sized software consulting company. In: ICSE, ‘03: Proceedings of the 25th international conference on software engineering, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, pp 84–92

  • DRIVER Project (2007) DRIVER digital repository infrastructure vision for European research. Available at http://www.driver-repository.eu

  • The Dublin Core Initiative (2003) Information and documentation—the Dublin Core metadata element set ISO 15836:2003(E). Technical report, ISO, http://dublincore.org/documents/2006/12/18/dces/

  • Duff W (2002) Understanding the information-seeking behaviour of archival researchers in a digital age. In: Proceedings of the DLM-forum

  • Duff W, Fox A (2006) You’re a guide rather than an expert: archival reference from an archivist’s point of view. J Soc Arch 27(2):129–153. doi:10.1080/00379810601075943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duff W, Johnson C (2002) Accidentally found on purpose: information-seeking behavior of historians in archives. Libr Q 72(4):472–496

    Google Scholar 

  • Duff W, Craig B, Cherry J (2004) Finding and using archival resources: a cross-Canada survey of historians studying Canadian history. Archivaria 58:51–80

    Google Scholar 

  • EAD Working Group (2002) Encoded archival description tag library version 2002—EAD technical document no 2. Encoded Archival Description Working Group of the society of American archivists and the network development and MARC standards office of the library of congress, Chicago and Washington, DC, http://www.loc.gov/ead/tglib/index.html. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/ead/tglib/index.html

  • Eales AB, Kvasnicka RM (eds) (2001) Guide to genealogical research in the national archives, 3rd edn. National Archives and Records Administration, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebersbach A, Glaser M (2004) Towards emancipatory use of a medium: the wiki. Int J Inf Ethics 2(11):1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredriksson B (2003) Postmodernistic archival science—rethinking the methodology of a science. Arch Sci 3(2):177–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilliland-Swetland A (1998) An exploration of K-12 user needs for digital primary source materials. Am Arch 61(1):136–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilliland-Swetland A, Kafai Y, Landis W (1999) Integrating primary sources into the elementary school classroom: a case study of teachers perspectives. Archivaria 48:89–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood DJ, Levin M (2000) Reconstructing the relationships between universities and society through action research. In: Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 85–106

  • Hagen F (2007) Research roadmap. Technical report, DigitalPreservationEurope (DPE). Retrieved from http://www.digitalpreservationeurope.eu/publications/dpe_research_roadmap.pdf

  • Heikkinen R (2004) Kajaanin linna. Västiki vuosisatojen virrassa. Kainuun museo ja Lönnrot-instituutti, Jyväskylä

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill A (2004) Serving the invisible researcher: meeting the needs of online users. J Soc Arch 25(2):139–148. doi:10.1080/0037981042000271466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollingshead A, Fulk J, Monge P (2002) Fostering intranet knowledge sharing: an integration of transactive memory and public goods approaches. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Huvila I (2006) The ecology of information work—a case study of bridging archaeological work and virtual reality based knowledge organization. Diss. Åbo Akademi University. Åbo Akademi University Press, Åbo

  • Ithaka Harbors (2007) Portico electronic archiving service. Ithaka Harbors. Available at http://www.portico.org

  • Kemmis S, McTaggart R (2000) Participatory action research. In: Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 567–605

  • Kensing F, Blomberg J (1998) Participatory design: issues and concerns. Comput Support Coop Work 7(3):167–185. doi:10.1023/A:1008689307411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ketelaar E (1992) Archives of the people, by the people, for the people. S Afr Arch J 34:5–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Kivistö T (2007) Saaren kartanon arkiston arkistoluettelo. Koneen Säätiö and Muuritutkimus, Mietoinen. Retrieved from http://saarenkartano.muuritutkimus.fi/index.php/Saari:Schema

  • Koneen Säätiö (2007) Koneen Säätiö. Retrieved from http://www.koneensaatio.fi

  • Kostiainen E, Valtonen MR, Vakkari P (2003) Information seeking in pre-trial investigation with particular reference to records management. Arch Sci 3(2):157–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotelnikov M, Polonsky A, Kiesel M, Völkel M, Haller H, Sogrin M, Lannerö P, Davis B (2007) Interactive semantic wikis. Deliverable D1.1, NEPOMUK Consortium, Kaiserslautern. Retrieved from http://nepomuk.semanticdesktop.org/xwiki/bin/download/Main1/D1_NEPOMUK_Interactive_Semantic_Wikis.pdf

  • Krötzsch M et al (2005) Semantic Mediawiki. Retrieved from http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki

  • Lankes RD, Silverstein J, Nicholson S (2007a) Participatory networks: the library as conversation. Technical report, Information Institute of Syracuse, Syracuse University’s School of Information Studies, Syracuse, produced for the American Library Associations, Office for Information Technology Policy

  • Lankes RD, Silverstein JL, Nicholson S, Marshall T (2007b) Participatory networks: the library as conversation. Inf Res 12(4). http://InformationR.net/ir/12-4/colis05.html. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/12-4/colis05.html

  • Lehtonen H (2004) Kajaanin linna 400 vuotta – kirjoituksia ja tutkimuksia linnan vaiheista. SKAS (3):47–50

  • Luyt B, Aaron TCH, Thian LH, Hong CK (2008) Improving Wikipedia’s accuracy: is edit age a solution? J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 59(2):318–330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20755

    Google Scholar 

  • Lybeck J (2003) Archival education in Scandinavia. Arch Sci 3(2):97–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mark G (2002) Extreme collaboration. Commun ACM 45(6):89–93. doi:10.1145/508448.508453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuinness D, Zeng H, da Silva P, Ding L, Narayanan D, Bhaowal M (2006) Investigations into trust for collaborative information repositories: a Wikipedia case study. In: Proceedings of the workshop on models of trust for the web. WWW 2006 conference

  • McKemmish S, Gilliland-Swetland A, Ketelaar E (2005) Communities of memory: pluralising archival research and education agendas. Arch Manuscr 33:146–174

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer A (2001) Accountability in an information age: opportunities and risks for records management. Arch Sci 1(4):361–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer AJ (2003) Trust this document! ICTS, authentic records and accountability. Arch Sci 3(3):275–290. doi:10.1007/s10502-004-1287-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menne-Haritz A (2001) Access—the reformulation of an archival paradigm. Arch Sci 1(1):57–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1011508016557

    Google Scholar 

  • Menne-Haritz A (2003) An archival system with old traditions in a time of change. Arch Sci 3(4):321–327. doi:10.1007/s10502-005-2406-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moline J, Otto S (2004) User study: informational needs of remote national archives and records administration customers. NIST special publication 500-221. DIANE Publishing, Darby

  • Mulrenin A (ed) (2002) The DigiCULT report: technological landscapes for tomorrow’s cultural economy. European Commission, Directorate-General for the Information Society, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • OCLC CRL (2007) Trustworthy repositories audit & certification: criteria and checklist, 1st edn. OCLC/CRL, Chicago/Dublin

    Google Scholar 

  • Ontoprise, Institute AIFB, German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (2007) Halo. Retrieved from http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Halo_Extension

  • Peddibhotla NB, Subramani MR (2007) Contributing to public document repositories: a critical mass theory perspective. Organ Stud 28(3):327–346. doi:10.1177/0170840607076002, http://oss.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/3/327, http://oss.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/28/3/327.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Pick G (2001) National survey of visitors to British archives February 2001. PSQG, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Raymond M (2008) My friend flickr: a match made in photo heaven. Library of congress blog (2008/01/16). Library of Congress, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribeiro F (2001) Archival science and changes in the paradigm. Arch Sci 1(3):295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler D, Namioka A (1993) Participatory design: principles and practices. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Semantic Mediawiki (2007) Special:Types. Semantic Mediawiki. Retrieved from http://semantic-mediawiki.org/index.php/Special:Types

  • Sexton A, Turner C, Yeo G, Hockey S (2004a) Understanding users: a prerequisite for developing new technologies. J Soc Arch 25(1):33–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sexton A, Yeo G, Turner C, Hockey S (2004b) User feedback: testing the LEADERS demonstrator application. J Soc Arch 25(2):189–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shankar K (2004) Recordkeeping in the production of scientific knowledge: an ethnographic study. Arch Sci 4(3):367–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shilton K, Srinivasan R (2008) Participatory appraisal and arrangement for multicultural archival collections. Archivaria 63:87–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiegel A, Evans M, Gram W, Diamond J (2006) Museum visitors’ understanding of evolution. Mus Soc Issues 1(1):69–86. http://lcoastpress.metapress.com/content/118052385m813521

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman L (1993) Foreword. In: Participatory design: principles and practices. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp vii–ix

  • Sundqvist A (2007) The use of records—a literature review. Arch Soc Stud 1(1):623–653

    Google Scholar 

  • Surowiecki J (2004) The wisdom of crowds. Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Tazzoli R, Castagna P, Campanini S (2004) Towards a semantic wiki wiki web. In: Proceedings of the international semantic web conference (ISWC)

  • Thomassen T (2001) A first introduction to archival science. Arch Sci 1(4):373–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tibbo HR (2002) Primarily history: historians and the search for primary source materials. JCDL 02: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on digital libraries. ACM, New York, pp 1–10

  • Toms E, Duff W (2002) I spent 1/2 hours sifting through one large box….: diaries as information behavior of the archives user: lessons learned. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 53(14):1232–1238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wareham E (2002) From explorers to evangelists: archivists, recordkeeping, and remembering in the pacific islands. Arch Sci 2(3):187–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins K (2006) Public services quality group of the national council on archives survey of visitors to UK archives 2006. IPF Market Research, Croydon

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger D (2007) Everything is miscellaneous. Times Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakel E (2000) Thinking inside and outside the boxes: archival reference services at the turn of the century. Archivaria 49:140–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakel E (2002) Listening to users. Arch Issues 26(2):111–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakel E (2005) Archives in the era of accessibility. Revista Lligall 23:117–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakel E, Bost L (1994) Understanding administrative use and users in university archives. Am Arch 57(4):596–615

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakel E, Torres D (2003) AI: archival intelligence and user expertise: users and archival research. Am Arch 66(1):51–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakel E, Shaw S, Reynolds P (2007) Creating the next generation of archival finding aids. D-Lib Mag 13(5/6)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Terhi Kivistö and Dr. Kari Uotila for cooperation and two anonymous reviewers for their invaluable comments on the earlier version of this paper. The study was financed by the Kone Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Isto Huvila.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huvila, I. Participatory archive: towards decentralised curation, radical user orientation, and broader contextualisation of records management. Arch Sci 8, 15–36 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-008-9071-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-008-9071-0

Keywords

  • Digital archives
  • Participatory archives
  • User studies
  • User orientation
  • Wikis