Using the LIFE Costing ModelCase studies from DK

Anders Bo Nielsen, The Danish National Archives

Ulla Bøgvad Kejser, The Royal Library, Denmark

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)

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

LIFE Costing Model - DK

Production Acquisition Ingest Archival Storage

Preservation Planning

Access

Audit Selection Ingest Administration

Storage Administration

Preservation Planning

Access Administration

Selection 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

Quality Assurance

Check-in Replication

Metadata Provide Data

Lifecycle system management Planning, certification)

General administation and facilities; economic adjustments (overhead)

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: 7.555 in app. 1.500 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

The generic preservation model (GPM)

Generic LIFE preservation std Danish Office Case unitTEW 1 3man weeks per year for each formatULE BLE + 0.1 * t BLE + 0.1 * t years of life expectancyBLE 8 8yearsPON 40% 100% share of transformation in preservationPTA STA*(1-t/20)+ETA*(t/20) 30% proportion of tool availabilitySTA 50% 30% starting proportion of tool availabilityETA 90% 90% ending proportion of tool availabilityFCX 0,2 0,8complexity – transforming from or toTDC 24 3man monthsCRS (1-PTA)*TDC*FCX+PTA*COA(1-PTA)*TDC*FCX+PTA*COA £COA 1.500 3.000 £UME 4 1man weeks per formatPPA PON*(SCM+n*HVM) PON*(SCM+n*HVM) £SCM 340 1.000 £HVM 0.05 0.01£QAA n*BCT*FCX n*BCT*FCX£BCT 0.17 0.20£

n 8474 7.555 objects (pages in this case)

Cost = t * TEW + (t / ULE + PON) * (CRS + UME + PPA + QA)

Results of using the GPM

TWC PTC PMC PAC PQAC Total PC PFt t*TEW PF*CRS PF*UME PF*PPA PF*QAA t/ULE+PON

UK – Web Archiving Case Study

1 625 3,423 654 160 151 5,013 0.525 3.125 5,633 1,235 302 285 10,580 0.99

10 6.250 7,027 1,889 462 435 16,063 1.5120 12.500 6,120 3,000 733 691 23,045 2.40

DK – Office Archiving Case Study

1 2,625 7,435 983 1,208 1,358 13,609 1.125 13,125 9,482 1,390 1,708 1,920 27,625 1.59

10 26,250 10,893 1,847 2,271 2,552 43,813 2.1120 52,500 10,620 2,625 3,227 3,626 72,598 3.00

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)

Costs in € for 20,000 preservation copies (13TB) year 1

LIFE Costing Model20,000 copies (13TB)

TIFF Uncompressed

105 mm film

Production (Digitisation) 134,886 134,886

Production (Film output) 0 180,201

Acquisition 1,889 1,889

Ingest 2,283 1,194

Archival Storage 35,910 326

Preservation Planning 922 0

Total 175,890 318,496

Operating costs (€)

0

5.000

10.000

15.000

20.000

25.000

30.000

35.000

40.000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

105mm film

TIFF UNC

Accumulated costs (€) over 5 years

0

50.000

100.000

150.000

200.000

250.000

300.000

350.000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

105mm (2 images/fiche)

TIFF Uncompressed

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)

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 abn@ra.sa.dk

– Ulla Bøgvad Kejser, The Royal Library ubk@kb.dk