392G - Management of
Preservation Programs
Spring 2008
Class 4
*Preservation Policy (wrap-up)
*Selection Models
Example Preservation Policies
and Plans
University of Colorado at Boulder
NEH/ARL Preservation Planning Program Final
Report. August 1990.
Columbia University
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/services/preservation/policies.html
Selection for Preservation
From Banks/Pilette (ch. 12, Selection for Preservation. Carolyn Harris)

Difficulty of determining what collection items
will be needed in the future. Scholarship
responds to intellectual discourse and
disciplinary trends over time. Materials little
used today may be used in innovative ways
by future scholars. What to do?!
Assumptions




No one institution can afford to preservation
everything in its collection.
Priorities must be set among collections, based on
the quality of the collections and the vulnerability of
materials to loss.
Not every item needs to be preserved.
Ultimately, the decision to preserve must be made
on an item-by-item basis. Each item deteriorates at
an individual rate depending on its physical
composition and use.



The large scale of preservation issues usually requires
that priorities for preservation action be based on
considering entire collections. (Do we agree? What do
we mean by entire collections?)
Collections as a whole are made of individual items, thus
policies and procedures for treating the individual items
will be based on the physical condition of the item rather
than on the quality of the work. (Do we agree?)
The preservation decision should link to collection
development policy.
Identification for Preservation
Most often a by-product of other library processes. This
approach often identifies materials that are currently
used.
Ways to Identify:







Condition and Use
Condition and Library Processing
Condition at Shelf
Collection and Condition
Scholarly Review
Vulnerability to Loss or Deterioration
Value or Uniqueness
Decision-Making:
“Reselection”



Defining “reselection”
Many institutions’ policies dictate that treatment for
items that can be done quickly and relatively
inexpensively without consultation with collection
development.
Overarching collection development policies,
created in consultation with preservation staff, can in
many cases obviate the need for direct consultation
with bibliographers.


For brittle materials and those with artifactual
value, a “reselection” decision must be made,
which involves decision-making by collection
development. The same applies for deaccession and collection transfer decisions.
Reselection involves selectors,
bibliographers, subject specialists or
curators--those responsible for the
development and maintenance of the
collection.
Re-selection Information




What is the relation of the item to the collection?
Do other accessible copies exist through
cooperative arrangements, in the geographic area,
or through ILL?
Has the item has been preserved elsewhere (e.g.
microfilm)?
Are replacements (reprint, facsimile, microform)
available commercially?
The information gathering process can require
extensive bibliographic inquiry.
Item-level Preservation
Options






Based on the information gathered, there are
various preservation options:
Treat (repair, treatment, commercial rebind)
Reformat
Replace
Send back to stacks (“planned deterioriation”)
with or without protective enclosure
De-accession/relocate
Some combination of the above
Collection Level Decision
Making

“Great Collections” - Maintain the integrity of
the broader intellectual value of whole subject
areas regardless of use patterns. Collections
may be significant because they meet local
academic or community research priorities or
because they meet national and international
needs.






Research Libraries Group Conspectus
(review handouts)
Past, Current, or Projected Future Use of
Collection
History of Provenance of Collection
Publications or Bibliographies Based on
Collection
Quality and Extent of Bibliographic Control
Available Funding






Media of the Materials in the Collection
Cooperative Responsibilities of the Institution
Faculty Review of Collections
Condition and Vulnerability of the Materials in
the Collection
Materials Preserved Elsewhere
Subject of Collection
Collection-level Preservation
Strategies

Clean Sweep/Vacuum Cleaner Approach,
e.g. microfilming

Condition at Shelf (use all item-level
preservation options)

Sholarly Review (defining most important
titles for preservation)
Institutional or Federal (or
other) Responsibility?

Atkinson and Child articles
Preservation Assessment
From Karen Brown article:

General Assessments (understanding all
factors that affect collection health)

Collection Condition Survey (statistical study)

Item-level Survey (predict item-level
treatment costs, collection priorities,
mechanisms of deterioration)